MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

8950 Martin Luther King Jr. Street N. #202 St. Petersburg, Florida 33702-2211 Tel: (727) 563-9070 Fax: (727) 563-0207 Email: [email protected]

President: Andrew A. Rosenberg, Ph.D.

Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Announcement Comment Draft Report

August 13, 2020

Conformity Assessment Body MRAG Americas, Inc. (CAB) Richard Banks (TL/P3), Kevin McLoughlin (P1) and Mihaela Zaharia Assessment team (P2)

Fishery client Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association

Assessment Type Second Reassessment

1 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Document Control Record Document Draft Submitted By Date Reviewed By Date ACDR RB/KM/MZ 28 July RB 31 July

2 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

1 Contents

1 Contents ...... 3 2 Glossary ...... 6 3 Executive summary ...... 9 3.1 Changes since previous assessment ...... 10 3.1.1 Principle 1 ...... 10 3.1.2 Principle 2 ...... 10 3.1.3 Principle 3 ...... 11 4 Report details ...... 11 4.1 Authorship and peer review details ...... 11 4.1.1 Assessors ...... 11 4.1.2 Peer Reviewer ...... 12 4.2 Version details ...... 12 5 Unit(s) of Assessment and Certification and results overview ...... 12 5.1 Unit(s) of Assessment and Unit(s) of Certification ...... 12 5.1.1 Unit(s) of Assessment ...... 12 5.1.2 Unit(s) of Certification ...... 13 5.2 Assessment results overview ...... 14 5.2.1 Determination, formal conclusion and agreement ...... 14 5.2.2 Principle level scores...... 14 5.2.3 Summary of conditions ...... 15 5.2.4 Recommendations ...... 15 6 Traceability and eligibility ...... 15 6.1 Eligibility date ...... 15 6.2 Traceability within the fishery ...... 15 6.3 Eligibility to enter further chains of custody ...... 17 6.4 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practicably Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to enter further chains of custody ...... 17 7 Scoring ...... 18 7.1 Summary of Performance Indicator level scores ...... 18 7.2 Principle 1 ...... 20 7.2.1 Principle 1 background ...... 20 7.2.2 Catch profiles ...... 20 7.2.3 Stock status (P 1.1.1) ...... 24 7.2.4 Harvest strategy (P 1.2.1) ...... 27 7.2.5 Harvest tools (P 1.2.2) ...... 35 7.2.6 Application of the Harvest Strategy ...... 37 3 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

7.2.7 Revision of the Harvest Strategy...... 37 7.2.8 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data ...... 37 7.2.9 Principle 1 Performance Indicator scores and rationales ...... 39 ...... 39 ...... 42 ...... 43 ...... 46 ...... 49 ...... 52 7.3 Principle 2 ...... 55 7.3.1 Principle 2 background ...... 55 7.3.2 Primary Species Outcome (PI 2.1.1) ...... 61 7.3.3 Primary Species Management (PI 2.1.2) ...... 66 7.3.4 Primary Species Information (PI 2.1.3) ...... 72 7.3.5 Secondary Species Outcome (PI 2.2.1) ...... 73 7.3.6 Secondary Species Management (PI 2.1.2)...... 73 7.3.7 Secondary Species Information (PI 2.1.2) ...... 74 7.3.8 Endangered, Threatened, Protected Species (ETPs) Outcome (PI 2.3.1) ...... 74 7.3.9 ETPs Management (PI 2.3.2) ...... 79 7.3.10 ETPs Information (PI 2.3.2) ...... 81 7.3.11 Habitat Outcome (PI 2.4.1) ...... 82 7.3.12 Habitat Management (PI 2.4.2)...... 93 7.3.13 Habitat Information (PI 2.4.3) ...... 94 7.3.14 Ecosystem Outcome (PI2.5.1) ...... 95 7.3.15 Ecosystem Management (PI 2.5.2) ...... 97 7.3.16 Ecosystem Information (PI2.5.3) ...... 98 7.3.17 Principle 2 Performance Indicator scores and rationales ...... 101 ...... 101 ...... 105 ...... 110 ...... 113 ...... 115 ...... 119 ...... 122 ...... 126 ...... 131 ...... 134 ...... 138

4 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

...... 141 ...... 144 ...... 147 ...... 151 7.4 Principle 3: Management ...... 154 7.4.1 Legal and customary framework (PI 3.1) ...... 154 7.4.2 Roles and responsibilities / Consultation (P 3.1.2) ...... 157 7.4.3 Long-term Objectives (PI 3.1.3) ...... 163 7.4.4 Fisheries Specific Objectives (PI 3.2.1) ...... 165 7.4.5 Decision making processes (PI 3.2.2) ...... 175 7.4.6 Compliance and enforcement (PI 3.2.3) ...... 176 7.4.7 Performance Review (P3.2.4) ...... 181 7.4.8 Principle 3 Performance Indicator scores and rationales ...... 182 ...... 182 ...... 185 ...... 188 ...... 190 ...... 193 ...... 197 ...... 200 8 References ...... 202 9 Appendices ...... 209 9.1 Assessment information ...... 209 9.1.1 Previous assessments ...... 209 9.2 Evaluation processes and techniques ...... 209 9.2.1 Site visits ...... 209 9.2.2 Stakeholder participation ...... 209 9.2.3 Evaluation techniques ...... 209 9.3 Peer Review reports ...... 211 9.4 Stakeholder input ...... 212 9.5 Conditions – delete if not applicable ...... 213 9.6 Client Action Plan ...... 213 9.7 Surveillance ...... 214 9.8 Harmonised fishery assessments – delete if not applicable ...... 215 9.9 Objection Procedure – delete if not applicable ...... 217

5 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

2 Glossary

AFMA Australian Fisheries LRP Limit Reference Point Management Authority AFZ Australian Fishery Zone MAC Management Advisory Committee BAP Bycatch Action Plan MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance

BCF Blue Crab Fishery MEY Maximum Economic Yield BMSY Biomass at Maximum MPA Marine Protected Area Sustainable Yield BRD Bycatch Reduction MSC Marine Stewardship Devices Council BSC Blue Swimmer Crab MSF Marine Scalefish Fishery

CAB Conformity Assessment MSY Maximum Sustainable Body Yield CCSA Conservation Council for NPWCA National Parks and South Australia Wildlife Conservation Act 1972 CI Confidence Interval NSG North Spencer Gulf

CITES Convention on NTA Native Title Act International Trade in Endangered Species CMS Convention on the OCS Offshore Constitutional Conservation of Migratory Settlement Species of Wild Animals CL Carapace Length PFCP Prawn Fishery Compliance Plan CoA Commonwealth of PI Performance Indicator Australia CoC Chain of Custody PIRSA Department of Primary Industries and Resources, South Australia CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort PSA Productivity- Susceptibility Analysis

CRC Cooperative Research PSC Prosecution Steering Centre Committee CW Carapace Width RBF Risk Based Framework

DAWE Department of Agriculture, SA South Australia Water and the Environment DEWNR Department of SAFE Sustainability Environment, Water Assessment for Fishing

6 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

and Natural Resources Effects (South Australia) DoE Department of SARDI South Australian Environment Research and Development Institute DPC Daily Patrol Contact SARFAC South Australian Recreational Fishing Advisory Council EBFM Ecosystem Based Fisheries SARSMPA South Australia’s Management Representative System of Marine Protected Areas

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone SAS Stock Assessment Survey

EPBC Act Environment Protection SG Spencer Gulf and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ERA Environmental Risk SGPF Spencer Gulf Prawn Assessment Fishery ERAEF Ecological Risk SGWCPFA Spencer Gulf and West Assessment for Effects of Coast Prawn Fishing Fishermen’s Association ESD Ecologically Sustainable SLA Service Level Agreement Development ETP Endangered, Threatened SRR Stock-Recruitment and Protected Relationship FIS Fishery Independent TAC Total Allowable Catch Surveys FMSY Fishing Mortality Rate at TACC Total Allowable Maximum Sustainable Commercial Catch Yield FPV Fishery patrol vessel TEP Threatened, Endangered and Protected

FRDC Fisheries Research and TRP Target Reference Point Development Corporation FSG Fisheries Services Group TSSS Threatened Species Schedule Subcommittee (South Australia) GIS Geographical Information UoA Unit of Systems Assessment

GVP Gross Value of Production UoC Unit of Certification GSV Gulf Saint Vincent VMS Vessel Monitoring System HS Harvest Strategy WF Wildcatch Fisheries (SA)

7 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

ILUA Indigenous land-use WKP Western king prawn agreements

IUCN International Union for WWF World Wildlife Fund for Conservation of Nature Nature

8 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

3 Executive summary This report is the Announcement Consultation Draft Report (ACDR) which provides details of the MSC reduced reassessment process for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. The process began with publication of the ACDR on 13 August 2020, and thereafter an offsite visit held in September 2020. The ACDR represents a review of information presented by the client and PIRSA in the Client Document Checklist and other information requested from PIRSA, SARDI and SGWCPA. This report does not include final scoring outcomes, but provides an initial indication of where scores are likely to be (<60, 60-79, >80). Other stakeholders have the opportunity to review ACDR and are encouraged to review the scoring worksheets and report text. A Stakeholder Input Form may be used by any stakeholder to highlight any issues where the report findings are not considered to be accurate. As this fishery is currently certified, its products are expected to remain continuously eligible to enter further chains of custody as MSC, assuming a successful recertification concluding ahead of the expiration of the currently valid certificate. Client strengths The Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery was first MSC certified in 2011 with seven conditions. These conditions were all met by the third surveillance audit. The fishery was reassessed in 2015/2016, when it was again certified and no conditions were set. The fishery is supported well by Department of Primary Industries and Resources, South Australia which is the management authority and provides scientific and management support. Extensive historical research on the fishery is available. Western king prawn (Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus) is the target species. The stock is in a healthy state with the stock fluctuating around a level consistent with MSY, and a well-developed harvest strategy which is responsive to the state of the stock has been implemented. Surveillance audits since certification have shown that the fishery has met the requirements of the harvest strategy. The SGPF is managed according to an EBFM framework, and its harvest strategy includes objectives consistent with the MSC standard for each component of the ecosystem (target species, primary species (part of retained), secondary species, ETP species, habitat and ecosystem overall), and not only for target species. For each objective there are set performance indicators which are assessed annually by PIRSA. The only ‘main” primary species is blue swimmer crab (BSC). The SGPF is not allowed to retain BSC and all catch is promptly discarded, the fishery using a very efficient sorting system. Research has shown that BSC have high post-capture survival, probably higher than 90%, although the catch of BSC is considerable and the species is assessed as ‘main’ precautionarily. According to the latest gulf-wide bycatch survey, the SGPF does not impact on ‘main’ secondary species, none being >5% of the catch. The only ETP group that regularly interacts with the SGPF, syngnathids, are not listed as endangered or threatened under the EPBC Act or any other national or international legislation. A benthic habitat map was produced for the entire Spencer Gulf, using surrogate date (sediments and biota) for the unmapped areas of the gulf. A semi quantitative risk analysis for the main broadscale habitat (commonly encountered as identified by PIRSA) was completed and the extent of the trawl footprint with each habitat was estimated. The risks Spencer Gulf ecosystem are assessed in stakeholder ERA workshops. The consultation process is inclusive, and facilitates direct consultation of the main eNGO, along with PIRSA and SARDI in the Association meetings. The co-management arrangements allow for fishing strategies to change based on real-time information. Triggers for change could include ecosystem indicators (e.g. high abundance of non-target species, ETP species or habitat forming species). Fishers demonstrate a high degree of compliance with the management system.

9 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Other governance performance indicators score highly with strong legal structures, well defined roles and responsibilities, and clear short and long-term objectives. Fishery specific management performance indicators are likely to score highly with well a defined and measurable harvest strategy and a bycatch action plan, an effective decision-making process and a strong compliance system.

Client weaknesses

The main weakness of the SGPF is that recent quantitative information on the catch of non-target species is not available. The assessment was based on information from two gulf-wide bycatch surveys (2007 and 2013) that provided some quantitative information and classify primary and secondary species as ‘main’ or ‘minor’. Fishers are not required to record and report discarded catch, with the exception of ETP interactions which are reported through the Wildlife Interactions Logbook. While the information from the bycatch surveys is still relevant, based on the similarities in catch composition from the two gulf-wide surveys and historical data on bycatch, the MSC standard requires “taking into account the variability of the catch composition over the last five years or fishing seasons and recognizing that some species might be ‘main’ some years but not in others” (MSC, 2018b, p57). This weakness is likely to be addressed through the introduction of an Ecological Monitoring Program implemented starting with 2019/20 (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019).

4 Principle-level Scores This is the Client Draft Report (ACDR) for a full MSC assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery being undertaken by MRAG Americas. The site visit for this assessment will take place remotely in September 2020 This ACDR contains initial findings of this assessment, suggesting the fishery is a good candidate for MSC certification. The following Principle-level scores have been achieved:

Western Principle-level scores King Prawn Principle 1 – Target species

Principle 2 – Ecosystem

Principle 3 – Management

4.1 Changes since previous assessment To be drafted at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage To be completed at Public Certification Report stage

4.1.1 Principle 1 There have been no changes since the previous certification which impact on the ability of the SGPF to meet at least SG80 Principle 1 requirements. The western king prawn stock continues to be assessed as sustainable and the harvest strategy and harvest control rules have operated as laid out in the Management Plan. As discussed in the report, there are changes to the harvest strategy in the draft revised Management Plan (PIRSA, 2019a) which is expected to be formally adopted in October 2020. These revisions include changes to the structure of the fishery surveys which were implemented in the 2019/2020 fishing season.

4.1.2 Principle 2 The main changes in the SGPF since the previous reassessment include a revision to the Ecological Risk Assessment using the Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (ERAEF) framework and BRD trials to reduce the catch of blue swimmer crab. No increases in risk to P2 components were found at ERAEF, some changes in Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) scores were due to different attributes values

10 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020 chosen. Jones et al compiled all the available information on habitat for an assessment of cumulative impacts on Spencer Gulf habitats, benthic and pelagic. For the unmapped areas, habitat types were inferred based on sediment and biota surrogates and the first full habitat map for Spencer Gulf was produced. This was used for the a semi-quantitative assessment of habitats, Consequence Spatial Analysis (CSA, Level 2 ERAEF). 4.1.3 Principle 3 The principal changes to the previous reassessment are that all Fishery Regulations relating to the fishery have been updated to 2017. The fishery also is adopting a revised Management Plan which will be in place before the assessment process is complete. All other issues are broadly the same as the previous reassessment.

5 Report details 5.1 Authorship and peer review details To be drafted at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Peer reviewer information to be completed at Public Comment Draft Report stage

5.1.1 Assessors Richard Banks (Lead assessor and P3) has considerable MSC experience having served as the Lead Assessor on several Australian Full Assessments, including the first assessment of the Exmouth Gulf Prawn Managed Fishery. Mr. Banks is an MSC qualified ND ISO 1901 team leader and qualified in the MSC risk-based framework (RBF). Richard has also designed several fishery improvement plans in South East Asia and the Pacific, and has acted as external reviewer to a number of MSC assessments on behalf of WWF. Richard is also co-author of the blueprint for sustainable tropical shrimp trawl fisheries, prepared for WWF. He has over 30- years’ experience in fisheries management, research and consultancy covering all regions of the World. Richard currently works as an advisor to PNA and Pacific Island countries as an offshore tuna advisor. He is an economist and fisheries management and policy programming specialist having worked on similar issues for international agencies including FAO, World Bank, ADB, MFAT, DFAT and the European Union in more than 70 countries. Richard has also worked with a number of Australian Commonwealth and State Fisheries. Richard holds a Bachelor’s degree in Fisheries Economics and a Masters in Agricultural Economics from the University of Portsmouth, and Imperial College, London, respectively. Kevin McLoughlin (P1) has over 30 years’ experience in fisheries science and currently works as a fisheries consultant. As a Senior Fisheries Scientist with the Bureau of Rural Sciences, he engaged in a wide range of international and domestic fisheries issues with close links to Government policy. Responsibilities included production of BRS Fishery Status Reports—these have had a major influence on the direction of Australia’s fisheries management and policy. Mr McLoughlin represented BRS on many committees and groups such as Australian Fishery Management Authority fishery assessment groups (including for the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery, the Northern Prawn Fishery, the Bass Strait Scallop Fishery, and the Western Tuna and Billfish Fishery), DAFF’s Shark Implementation Group for implementation of the National Plan of Action for Sharks, and others. He represented Australia on scientific issues at the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission and was Chair of the IOTC Working Party on Ecosystems and Bycatch. Mr McLoughlin has worked predominantly on Principle 1 aspects of MSC assessments but has also undertaken Principle 2 and 3 work, as well as peer review and surveillance audits for several fisheries. He has passed MSC training and has no conflict of interest in relation to this fishery. His MSC work includes being a team member for the assessment of the Fiji albacore longline fishery, the New Zealand Albacore Fishery, the New Zealand Skipjack Fishery, the Parties to the Nauru Agreement Western and Central Pacific Skipjack and Yellowfin unassociated purse seine fishery, the Tri Marine Western and Central Pacific Skipjack and Yellowfin Tuna Fishery, Australia’s Northern Prawn Fishery and Australia’s blue grenadier fishery. Ms. Mihaela Zaharia (P2) has over 20 years experience in marine biology and ecosystem sciences. Her relevant experience includes involvement as a marine science researcher for the National Institute for Marine Research and Development, Romania and for Poseidon Aquatic Resources Management Consultants Ltd. Mihaela was the P2 Assessor for a number of Australian Commonwealth fishery and South Australian fishery assessments. These include the Spencer Gulf Prawn, Northern Prawn, Shark Bay and Exmouth Prawn trawl fisheries. Mihaela has also participated as a team member in a number of pre-assessments on clam, tuna, blue swimming crab and tropical prawn assessments and Fisheries Improvement Plans and prepared Risk Based 11 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Framework templates for the MSC. In addition to her employment history, Mihaela has also contributed several publications on fishery biology and science. Mihaela holds a B.Sc (Marine Biology) M.Sc. in Ecosystem Sciences, -"OVIDIUS" Univ. Constanta, 1991-97 and a B Bus (Economics) and B Psych (with Hons), James Cook University 2012-2016. A discussion between team members regarding conflict of interest and biases was held and none were identified.

5.1.2 Peer Reviewer

5.2 Version details To be drafted at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage The report shall include a statement on the versions of the fisheries program documents used for this assessment.

Table 1– Fisheries program documents versions

Document Version number

MSC Fisheries Certification Process Version 2.1

MSC Fisheries Standard Version 2.01

MSC General Certification Requirements Version 2.4.1

MSC Reporting Template Version 2.01

6 Unit(s) of Assessment and Certification and results overview 6.1 Unit(s) of Assessment and Unit(s) of Certification 6.1.1 Unit(s) of Assessment To be drafted at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage The report shall include a statement of the CABs determination that the fishery is within scope of the MSC Fisheries Standard. For geographical area, the CAB should include stock region, common name of the body of water (e.g. North Sea), FAO statistical area(s), and any local fisheries management area(s) (e.g. ICES divisions VI, VII and VIIIabc).

The report shall include any changes to the Unit(s) of Assessment since the previous assessment (e.g. through a scope extension).

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.4

MRAG Americas has confirmed that this fishery is within scope for MSC Fisheries certification through the following determinations (FCP v2.1:7.4): 7.4.2.1 The following taxa are not target species under Principle 1:

12 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

a. Amphibians b. Reptiles c. Birds d. Mammals 7.4.2.2 The fishery does not use poisons or explosives. 7.4.3 The fishery is not conducted under a controversial unilateral exemption to an international agreement. 7.4.4 No member of the client group has been successfully persecuted for a forced or child labour violation in the last 2 years. 7.4.5. The fishery has a mechanism for resolving disputes, and disputes do not overwhelm the fishery.

In addition, this fishery is not enhanced, nor is it based on introduced species, according to the criteria laid out in sections 7.4.6 and 7.4.7.

Table 2 – Unit(s) of Assessment (UoA)

UoA 1 Description

Western king prawns (Melicertus latisulcatus) Species

Stock Spencer Gulf

All South Australian waters of Spencer Gulf that are north of the geodesic line joining Cape Catastrophe (Latitude 34º 59’ 07.15” S, Longitude 136º 00’ Geographical area 11.06” E), Eyre Peninsula and Cape Spencer (Latitude 35º 17’ 59.60” S, Longitude 136º 52’ 50.121” E), Yorke Peninsula Harvest method / Bottom twin prawn trawl gear Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Client group (SGWCPFA)

Other eligible fishers None

6.1.2 Unit(s) of Certification To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage To be completed at Public Certification Report stage The report shall include a justification for any changes to the proposed Unit(s) of Certification (UoC).

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.5

Although the final UoCs are not yet confirmed, the proposed UoCs are as described in the previously published Public Certification Report for this fishery and given in the table below.

13 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Table 3– Unit(s) of Certification (UoC)

UoC X Description

Western king prawns (Melicertus latisulcatus) Species

Stock Spencer Gulf

All South Australian waters of Spencer Gulf that are north of the geodesic line joining Cape Catastrophe (Latitude 34º 59’ 07.15” S, Longitude 136º 00’ Geographical area 11.06” E), Eyre Peninsula and Cape Spencer (Latitude 35º 17’ 59.60” S, Longitude 136º 52’ 50.121” E), Yorke Peninsula Harvest method / Bottom twin prawn trawl gear Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Client group (SGWCPA)

Other eligible fishers None

6.2 Assessment results overview 6.2.1 Determination, formal conclusion and agreement To be drafted at Final Draft Report To be completed at Public Certification Report The report shall include a formal statement as to the certification determination recommendation reached by the assessment team on whether the fishery should be certified.

The report shall include a formal statement as to the certification action taken by the CAB’s official decision-makers in response to the Determination recommendation.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.21

6.2.2 Principle level scores To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report The report shall include scores for each of the three MSC principles in the table below.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.17

Western Principle-level scores King Prawn Principle 1 – Target species

Principle 2 – Ecosystem

Principle 3 – Management

14 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

6.2.3 Summary of conditions To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report The report shall include a table summarising conditions raised in this assessment. Details of the conditions shall be provided in the appendices. If no conditions are required, the report shall include a statement confirming this.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.18

Table 4– Summary of conditions

Performance Related to Condition Condition Indicator previous number (PI) condition?

Yes / No / NA

Yes / No / NA

Yes / No / NA

6.2.4 Recommendations To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage If the CAB or assessment team wishes to include any recommendations to the client or notes for future assessments, these may be included in this section.

7 Traceability and eligibility 7.1 Eligibility date The report shall include the eligibility date and the justification for selecting this date, including consideration of whether the traceability and segregation systems in the fishery are appropriately implemented.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.8

7.2 Traceability within the fishery All licence holders and members of the SGWCPFA are members of the client group, and eligible to sell fish as MSC certified. Fishing does not occur beyond the SGPMF fishing area. Restricted area fishing and monitoring through Co- management provides assurance that the vessels do not fish out of area. There are no other fisheries that overlap and land western king prawns in the fishing area. The prawn catch is unloaded into a seawater hopper as it comes on board. Western king prawns represent the only prawn catch. After sorting from the hopper, they enter a grader, which separates the prawns by grade size. They are then sorted by hand to ensure quality control of grading, and subsequently boxed (into 5 and 10 kg boxes) and subsequently snap frozen, on board, ready-for-distribution. On landing the boxes are palletized and sent to cold storage for distribution. 15 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Catch information is recorded on logbooks after each haul, and submitted on landing to the PIRSA. The information available specifically contains reference to the vessel, species caught (estimated catch (kg), round weight, time and date of haul, and location). The vessel are also required to submit an unload sheet. The labels will have a space to designate the certified prawn species. These data are also cross-checked from cold store receiving records. The boxes contain catch date (for most vessels) and wholesaler name or company brand. The fishery retains two other species, Balmain bugs and southern calamari, neither of which can be confused with the certified product. There is no realistic opportunity for non-certified product to mix with the certified prawns, so the risk to traceability is low onboard the fishing vessels. Therefore, the fishing vessels do not require CoC. The majority of the product is unloaded at the Port Lincoln, Wallaroo, Cowell and Port Pirie with some product being unloaded at times in Adelaide. There is minimal risk of contamination with other western king prawn product as the major ports are not shared with the other two western king prawn fisheries in South Australia. The risk is low in Adelaide due to the small amount of product unloaded. It is difficult to generalise the transfer of ownership within the fleet. There are a portion of the fleet where the ownership of the product is transferred on unloading. In this case the product is stacked into pallets, loaded onto freezer trucks for transport and delivered to the wholesaler’s freezers. For another portion of the fleet, the ownership transfers when the product reaches the wholesaler freezers. The unloaded product is palletized and transported by freezer trucks to the wholesaler’s storage freezers. There is a small proportion of licence holders that sells directly into retail and restaurant trade. In this case, the licence holder will store the product in their storage space and distribute from that point. It is unlikely that uncertified product will be mixed with the western king prawns and the businesses are not involved with wholesaling other prawn product. The risk of a compromised CoC is low for cold storage facilities. All cold stores in South Australia are PIRSA or AQIAS export approved facilities and the prawn travels under export chain of custody with transfer certificates. In any of the cases the wholesalers, retailers and restaurants must have CoC to use the MSC logo. The product is delivered in a number of ways:

• Ownership of the product changes at the wharf. Product from fishing vessels is delivered by truck to • The product is shipped by truck or container to these cold storage facilities in Australia. Ownership the changes at these supply chain cold stores (Swine cold store Stevron cold store and SRT cold store). The risk of a compromised CoC is low for cold storage facilities. Information from the new transport or cold storage is added to the previous information, so that a complete record travels with each shipment, allowing tracking back to the fishery. The boxes of frozen product remain sealed, and no transformation of product occurs. Therefore, cold storage facilities would not require CoC. Receivers of the products are primarily wholesalers, but also include restaurants and supermarkets. Change of ownership occurs upon sale to wholesalers, retailers and restaurants. All wholesalers, retailers and restaurants must have CoC to use the MSC logo.

• Some owners also sell portions of the catch directly through their own retail outlets in Port Lincoln and Adelaide. The retail outlets or restaurants or similar entities would need CoC.

CoC starts after the first point of sale from any members of the client group, or at offload at the wharf and then, to cold store distributors or secondary processing or sale to the general public, whichever comes first. That is, each buyer and each repacker, each processor, and each seller of prawns to the public must have CoC. The ports of landing are restricted to Port Lincoln, Adelaide, Cowell, Whyalla, Port Pirie and Wallaroo. The fishery uses cold storage facilities only in Port Lincoln and Adelaide All SG prawn trawlers fishing from Port Lincoln, Adelaide, Port Pirie and Wallaroo are members of the SGWCPFA, and will be eligible to be covered by the MSC fisheries certificate. Under these requirements, no risk accrues from other fishers participating in the certification.

Table 5– Traceability within the fishery

16 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Factor Description

Will the fishery use gears that are not part of the Unit of Certification (UoC)?

No If Yes, please describe:

- If this may occur on the same trip, on the same vessels, or during the same season; - How any risks are mitigated. Will vessels in the UoC also fish outside the UoC geographic area? No. If Yes, please describe: - If this may occur on the same trip; - How any risks are mitigated. Do the fishery client members ever handle certified and non-certified products during any of the activities Yes. There is no risk of mixing the species at sea where covered by the fishery certificate? This refers to both at- processed. All product is stored in cartons with clear sea activities and on-land activities. identification of the product.

- Transport There is a risk of mixing product at storage and processing Storage - levels where product could be sourced from non certified Processing - fisheries, e.g. Gulf of St Vincent. However, this falls outside Landing - the scope of the fishery certificate and is covered by Chain Auction - of Custody.

If Yes, please describe how any risks are mitigated. Does transhipment occur within the fishery?

If Yes, please describe: - If transhipment takes place at-sea, in port, or No. both; - If the transhipment vessel may handle product from outside the UoC; - How any risks are mitigated. Are there any other risks of mixing or substitution between certified and non-certified fish? Nil.

If Yes, please describe how any risks are mitigated.

7.3 Eligibility to enter further chains of custody Prawns caught from the certified fishery by vessels in the client group are eligible to enter the chain of custody.

7.4 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practicably Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to enter further chains of custody There are no IPI species.

17 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

8 Scoring 8.1 Summary of Performance Indicator level scores To be drafted from Announcement Comment Draft Report The report shall include a completed copy of the Fishery Assessment Scoring Worksheet.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.17

UoA 1 Principle Component Performance Indicator (PI) Western king prawn

1.1.1 Stock Status ≥80 Outcome 1.1.2 Stock Rebuilding ≥80

1.2.1 Harvest Strategy ≥80 One 1.2.2 Harvest Control rules & tools ≥80 Management 1.2.3 Information/Monitoring ≥80

1.2.4 Assessment of stock status ≥80

Overall Principle One ≥80

2.1.1 Outcome ≥80

Primary Species 2.1.2 Management ≥80

2.1.3 Information ≥80

2.2.1 Outcome ≥80 Secondary 2.2.2 Management ≥80 species 2.2.3 Information ≥80

Two 2.3.1 Outcome ≥80

ETP species 2.3.2 Management ≥80

2.3.3 Information ≥80

2.4.1 Outcome ≥80

Habitats 2.4.2 Management ≥80

2.4.3 Information ≥80

Ecosystem 2.5.1 Outcome ≥80

18 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

2.5.2 Management ≥80

2.5.3 Information ≥80

Overall Principle Two ≥80

3.1.1 Legal Customary framework ≥80

Governance and Consultation roles and 3.1.2 ≥80 policy responsibilities

3.1.3 Long term objectives ≥80

Three 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives ≥80

3.2.2 Decision making processes Fisheries specific ≥80 Management 3.2.3 Compliance and Enforcement ≥80 system Monitoring and management 3.2.4 ≥80 performance

Overall Principle Three ≥80

19 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

8.2 Principle 1 8.2.1 Principle 1 background The report shall include a summary of the fishery based on the topics below, referencing electronic or other documents used:

- An outline of the fishery resources including life histories as appropriate. - An outline of status of stocks as indicated by stock assessments, including a description of the assessment methods, standards, and stock indicators, biological limits, etc. - Information on the seasonal operation of the fishery. - A brief history of fishing and management.

Any information used as supporting rationale should be provided in the scoring tables.

The report shall indicate whether the target species is key Low-Trophic Level (LTL). If there are multiple Principle 1 species, the report shall indicate which are key LTL.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Annex PA, Fisheries Standard v2.01

Background information on the fishery provided below is summarised from the previous MSC assessment of the fishery, subsequent surveillance audits and SARDI stock assessment reports (Banks et al., 2016; McLoughlin et al., 2019; Noell and Hooper, 2019).

8.2.2 Catch profiles The report shall include any relevant catch profiles showing Unit of Assessment (UoA) catch over time.

The fishing year for the SGPF is defined as the 12-month period from 1 October through to 30 September the following year. However, fishing generally only occurs in the months of November and December, and from March to June between the last and first quarter of the moon. Historical catch and effort data for the fishery are shown in Figure 1. Catches from the fishery increased rapidly from 1968, reaching approximately 2500 t in 1981/82. Effort peaked during 1978/79 at around 45,000 trawl hours and subsequently declined steadily. Effort has been relatively stable for approximately the past 10 years.

20 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 1. Reported catch (t), fishing effort (hrs/1000) and catch-per-unit-effort (kg/hr) for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery

The fishery is not managed via total allowable catches. The client group takes all commercial catches within pre-set periods. Since 1973/74, the catch has ranged from 1048 t to 2512 t. The catch for 2017/18 was 2197 t and for 2018/19 was 2121 t. In 2017/18, 53 nights were fished at a catch per unit effort of 112.8 kg/h. In 2018/19, 53 nights were fished at a catch per unit effort of 109.7 kg/h.

Table 6. Summary of key performance and fleet metrics Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Status Sustainable Sustainable Sustainable Total catch 2038 t 2197 t 2121 t Total effort 19,885 hrs 19,472 hrs 19,341 hrs Commercial CPUE 102.5 kg/h 112.8 kg/h 109.7 kg/h No. licences/vessels 39 39 39 53 (fleet) 53 (fleet) 53 (fleet) Nights fished 2055 (vessel nights) 2060 (vessel nights) 2055 (vessel nights)

Stock biology and structure The western king prawn (Penaeus latisulcatus) is distributed throughout the Indo-West Pacific region with populations in South Australia (Spencer Gulf, Gulf of St Vincent and the West Coast) being the most southerly and in the lowest temperature range. The western king prawn is benthic, preferring sandy substrates (rather than seagrass or other vegetated areas). Juveniles and adults display strong diel behavioural pattern of daytime burial and nocturnal activity. Strong lunar and seasonal differences are also seen. These behavioural changes affect catchability, and hence fishing practice. Species’ distribution is affected by salinity as well as substrate, preferring higher salinity areas. Important nursery areas are characterized as being hypersaline. Adults become more active, mature, mate and spawn in deep water (> 10 m) between October and April, with the main spawning period between October and January, peaking in January. Females may spawn on multiple occasions during one season. During the peak spawning period, females tend to be more prevalent in the catch, due to increased feeding activity associated with ovary development. At other times the sex ratio of the catch approaches equality. 21 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Larger female prawns are proportionally more fecund than smaller prawns. The proportion of female prawns with fertilized eggs increases with size. The combination of the short spawning season, increased catchability of females, disproportionate fecundity levels and varying fertilization success, means that the harvest of prawns, particularly larger size classes of females, during the peak gravid (October) and spawning (November) periods, has substantial implications on recruitment to the fishery and thus sustainable management. A critical period is between November and February, with fishing limited to short periods in November and December and then closed until March. In the Spencer Gulf, spatial and temporal differences in juvenile prawn abundances are evident. Even so, inter-annual patterns are generally consistent across sites. Growth of the western king prawn in Spencer Gulf is highly seasonal and increases with increasing temperature. The highest growth period is immediately after the spawning period is completed, as prawns reduce the energy spent on reproduction. Female prawns grow faster and attain a larger size than males. Prawns increase their size incrementally through a series of moults. The shedding of hard body parts during moulting means that it is difficult to reliably determine the age of individuals. Tag-recapture studies of western king prawn in Spencer Gulf indicate strong seasonal growth, with maximum growth rates for both sexes in early March, with little or no growth from July to mid-October for males and from late August to September for females. Stock structure in South Australia is uncertain. Significant genetic differences have been found in haplotype frequency between South Australian and western Australian samples (Carrick, 2003). However, electrophoretic studies of gene and genotype frequencies among South Australian populations found no evidence of genetic isolation, suggesting a homogeneous stock. Spencer Gulf western king prawn are treated as a separate stock for management purposes. Western king prawn are not a low trophic level species in the MSC context.

Information and monitoring Logbook data The reporting of commercial catch and effort began in 1968. Licence holders are required to complete a daily catch and effort logbook and submit returns at the end of each month. A monthly unloading logbook is also completed to enable validation and adjustment of daily catch estimates.

The South Australian Western King Prawn Daily Fishing Logbook Form contains detailed information on each tow, including start and finish time, depth, latitude and longitude and catch of prawns. Details of the size grades are given daily, as are total daily catches of byproduct species. The level and accuracy of reporting is sufficient to provide a range of indicators to guide management decision making, seasonally and adaptively. There is a high degree of certainty as to the reported information as processing (cooking, size grading, freezing and packaging) all take place onboard, leading to detailed and accurate weight and size category recording which can also be verified against unloading information (South Australian Western King Prawn Fishing Unloading Form). There is no discarding of target species due to the real time management system ensuring the fleet moves if average sizes are too low. All removals are accounted.

Stock assessment surveys Surveys aimed at understanding the distribution and abundance of prawns in the Spencer Gulf were first undertaken in 1981. The current survey design was adopted in November 2004 to ensure consistent spatial and temporal replication of survey sites to improve the robustness of relative biomass estimation (see Survey approach update 2020 below and 7.2.7 Revision of the Harvest Strategy). Stock assessment surveys are carried out three times each fishing year: November, February and April, using industry vessels, skipper and crews, with independent observers placed on each vessel to collect data on prawn size and catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) (Noell and Hooper, 2019). The survey data serves two important purposes: (i) determine the mean survey CPUE of ‘adult’ and ‘newly recruited’ prawns (consisting of industry grades with fewer and more than 20 prawns per pound, respectively) in surveys as measures of targeted and recruitment biomass, and (ii) inform the development of fishing strategies according to the harvest strategy (see 7.2.4 Harvest Strategy). In addition, data from the November survey provides information on egg production, and data from the February survey provides information on recruitment (Noell and Hooper, 2019). A total of 205 fixed locations are used for the stock assessment surveys (SAS) (Figure 2). These 205 locations provide a comprehensive coverage of the Gulf for determining areas to be opened for fishing. A subset of these locations (180 in the November survey, 182 in the February survey and 159 in the April survey) have been consistently used since 2004/05 to determine the nature of the fishing strategy following each survey and to provide information on the stock status at the end of the year.

22 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 2. The 206 stock assessment survey shot locations. Source Noell and Hooper, 2017. Survey approach update 2020 Modifications to the stock assessment surveys proposed by the Research Subcommittee of the SGWCPFA because it was considered that they would improve the relevance of the information obtained to subsequent fishing. These proposed modifications, involving potential change in the number and timing of the surveys and/or composition of the locations surveyed were evaluated by SARDI in 2018 (SARDI, 2018a). The modifications ranged from shifting or splitting the February survey across to March, to the April survey being discontinued. SARDI (2018a) findings suggested that there was merit in considering the proposed modifications. As a result, a new stock assessment survey design has been developed which has reduced the number of survey shots in two of the annual three surveys (April and November), and moved the February survey to March. These changes in the number of shots for each survey have been applied taking into account historic data sets, information priorities and logistics. This approach has been adopted in the draft updated Management Plan for the fishery (PIRSA, 2019a) (see also 7.2.7 Revision of the Harvest Strategy). Although the revised Management Plan had not yet been adopted, the modified survey approach was adopted for the 2019/20 season.

Assessment approach MSC Principle 1 scoring typically uses a stock assessment to draw inferences about stock status or surrogates for status- related reference points, for example, formal quantitative procedures to draw statistical inferences about stock abundance or exploitation rate relative to BMSY or FMSY. For Spencer Gulf western king prawn there is considerable information on biology and fishing but the “stock assessment” process has not historically attempted to make any specific inferences about status. Primarily, it is a process whereby agreed indicators (based on the stock assessment surveys, catch rates and length distributions) are presented so that pre-agreed management actions can be triggered and 23 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

guided. The suite of reference points is complex, including a wide range of in-season and annual measures which are used to guide annual harvest strategy setting and in-season, adaptive management. The 2014 Management Plan (PIRSA, 2014a) incorporates determination of stock status based on the weighted mean catch rate for adult prawns from all 3 stock assessment surveys. Information below is summarised from Noell and Hooper (2019).

Survey data The three annual stock assessment surveys generally require 16 or 18 vessel-nights using several commercial trawlers over two consecutive nights around the new moon. Each survey typically involves 30-minute trawl shots along a pre- determined trawl path at 205 locations. The distance trawled at each location depends on trawl speed (3-5 knots), which is influenced by vessel power, tide and weather conditions. Data collected at each location includes total catch, catch of ‘20+’ grade prawns (i.e. more than 20 prawns per pound; these are generally referred to as ‘recruits’), number of nets used, and number of prawns in a 7-kg sample (referred to in the industry as a ‘bucket count’ used as a rapid measure of prawn size). Length-frequency sampling is also undertaken. As survey results are calculated within a few hours of the surveys, there is limited time to verify the accuracy of electronic logbook data provided by skippers. However, the latest assessment report provides information on quality assurance processes undertaken followed to validate the surveys data some months after their completion (Noell and Hooper 2019). Unvalidated and validated results are presented in Noell and Hooper (2019) and compared to determine whether there would have been implications to the fishing strategy which was applied.

Egg production An egg production model has been used since 2004/05 to estimate annual egg production of western king prawn in Spencer Gulf. Model calculations are based on data collected from the November surveys. The approach is described in Noell and Hooper (2019). The output is interpreted as the potential number of fertilised eggs per hour that females could have contributed to egg production throughout the spawning period.

Recruitment A recruitment index has been calculated for most February surveys since 1982. The index is calculated as the square root of the number of recruits per nautical mile trawled from 39 survey shot locations in the north of the Gulf.

Catch, effort and CPUE Estimated catch from the catch and effort logbooks is adjusted using validated catches reported in monthly unloading logbooks. Commercial CPUE is calculated by dividing the adjusted catch by effort and is express in kg/hr (unlike the survey CPUE which is usually given as lb/min due to the use of marketing grades).

CPUE values derived from stock assessment surveys are assumed to be proportional to prawn abundance. Development of the fishing strategy to be implemented, and monitoring and adjustment in real time largely precludes the use of standardised catches for incorporation in the SGPF harvest strategy. However, standardisation is undertaken for use in fishery modelling and as a means of monitoring that harvest strategy decisions are consistent with the use of observed CPUE as an index of abundance. The methodology for standardisation is described in Noell and Hooper (2019).

Stock status and evidence of sustainability 8.2.3 Stock status (P 1.1.1) Noell and Hooper (2019) provides an assessment with information from the 2016/17 and 2017/18 fishing years. Stock assessment reports are produced biennially, with Noell and Hooper (2019) becoming available in August 2019. Mean catch rates for adult and newly recruited prawns from November, February and April stock assessment surveys were variable through 2016/17 and 2017/18, but mostly remained above their respective lower reference points. As per the harvest strategy, this resulted in the what are termed “standard” fishing strategies immediately after the surveys through both years. An exception to this was that an “increasing” strategy was adopted following the February 2017 survey, for which the mean catch rate of adults exceeded the upper reference point (Noell and Hooper, 2019). Estimates of egg production from November surveys in 2016 (673 million eggs per trawl hour) and 2017 (551 million eggs per trawl hour) remained above the reference point (500 million eggs per trawl hour). A newly developed recruitment index based on ‘20+’ grade prawns (considered more reliable than the previous length-based measure of

24 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

recruitment) was estimated at 4.79 lb/min during February 2017 and 7.88 lb/min in February 2018 (Noell and Hooper, 2019). Both recruitment estimates were above the reference point (2.38 lb/min), with the latter being the highest recorded. The weighted mean catch rate of adult prawns from all three stock assessment surveys is used to define an end-of-year stock status classification, based on historic reference values. The limit and trigger reference points based on the weighted means are 1.75 lb/min and 2.50 lb/min, respectively. The weighted mean survey catch rates of adult prawns for 2016/17 and 2017/18 were 3.93 lb/min (95% CI ±0.16) and 3.83 lb/min (95% CI ±0.17), respectively. Under the harvest strategy, western king prawn taken in the SGPF continues to be classified as a “sustainable stock” (Figure 3). The 2019 stock assessment indicated that the fishery continued to operate within the parameters of the harvest strategy.

Figure 3. Mean catch rate of adult prawns (larger than 20+ size grade) for a) November, b) February and c) April stock assessment surveys, and determination of stock status based on d) a weighted mean of the survey results. Stock status categories: green = sustainable stock; yellow = transitional stock; red = overfished stock (SARDI, 2018b).

25 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 4. Mean catch rate of adult prawns (larger than 20+ size grade) for a) November, b) February and c) April stock assessment surveys, and determination of stock status based on d) a weighted mean of the survey results. Stock status categories: green = sustainable stock; yellow = transitional stock; red = overfished stock (SARDI, 2019). In the years when a full stock assessment is not undertaken, SARDI provides advice on stock status based on the application of the harvest strategy. Compared to the unvalidated mean catch rates for adult and newly recruited prawns, which were calculated immediately after the survey, validated values were generally within 5% of unvalidated values. Validated means catch rates for adults and recruits were greater than their respective lower reference point, which meant that a standard fishing strategy, at a minimum, would be adopted following each survey. The validated catch rate for adult prawns in the February 2019 survey was also above the upper reference point, which translated into an increasing fishing strategy until the April 2019 survey. The weighted mean survey catch rates of adult prawns for 2018/19 was 4.19 lb/min, above the trigger reference point (2.50 lb/min) that delineates a sustainable stock from one that is transitional (Figure 4).

The mean survey CPUErecruits from 34 locations during February surveys (the recruitment index) has remained above its reference point (2.38 lb/min) since 2004/05 (Noell and Hooper, 2019). The recruitment index in February 2017 (4.79 ± 0.42 lb/min) was double the reference point and increased to its highest recorded value in February 2018 (7.88 ± 0.98 lb/min) (Figure 5).

26 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 5. Recruitment index ( 1 SE) from 34 shot locations in upper Spencer Gulf during February surveys (2004/05 to 2017/18). The dotted line represents the reference point. Source Noell and Hooper, 2019. In July 2020, SARDI provided further advice of the stock status based on the 2019/20 survey data (SARDI, 2020). The surveys in 2019/20 were completed under the revised survey design of the updated harvest strategy in the draft Management Plan (PIRSA, 2019a). This revised survey design involved shifting the February survey to March and changing the number and location of survey shots in all three surveys (October/November, February/March and April). As a result, SARDI applied correction factors to back-calculate the mean catch rate of adult prawns from the three surveys—the performance indicator for determining stock status—so that they related to reference points in the current Management Plan (SARDI, 2020). The weighted mean survey catch rates of adult prawns for 2019/20 was 4.14 lb/min, again above the trigger reference point (2.50 lb/min) that delineates a sustainable stock from one that is transitional (Figure 7).

Figure 6. Weighted catch rate to determine stock status for the SGPF. Dashed line indicates the 2019/20 status was determined following back-calculation of catch rates under the revised survey design so that they relate to reference points in the current Management Plan. Stock status categories: green = sustainable stock; yellow = transitional stock; red = overfished stock (SARDI, 2020).

The fishery continues to operate within the parameters of the harvest strategy. The maintenance of catches and catch rates over the history of the fishery, as well as ongoing healthy levels of recruitment and egg production, is consistent conceptually with BMSY or better, and well above a level at which reproductive capacity might be impaired. 8.2.4 Harvest strategy (P 1.2.1) The SGPF harvest strategy is described in detail in the Management Plan (PIRSA, 2014a). The objectives of the Management Plan in relation to sustainability of the target species are to maintain relative spawning stock biomass of western king prawn and future biomass above sustainable levels based predominantly on information collected from the fishery. The harvest strategy is designed to ensure that the fleet targets areas of high catch rate of appropriately sized prawns, ensuring biological sustainability but at the same time promoting economic efficiency. The annual decision-making framework is based on the status of the stock determined from the primary biological indicator relative to the limit and trigger reference points for that indicator. Fishing strategies are refined on the basis of secondary biological indicators. Primary The harvest strategy defines trigger, target and limit primary reference points based on stock assessment survey adult catch rates selected in consideration of the performance of the commercial fishery over time. Total commercial catches ranging from 1500 to 2500 t have been sustained since 1973, with one exception (Figure 1). Commercial catch rates over this period have had two distinct periods of stability – around 50 kg/hr (1.9 lb/min) between 1968 and 1996-97, and 108 kg/hr (4.0 lb/min) from 1997-98. Catch rates more than doubled between these periods. 27 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Although factors that could have led to this catch rate increase (apart from stock abundance) are considered, including catch efficiency of the fleet and improved targeting of the stock, it is generally considered that the fishery has maintained stocks at or above sustainable levels over its history. The range of SAS average adult catch rates from 2004/05 to 2014/15 was between 3.34 and 4.5 lb/min. Given the maintenance of the stock at sustainable levels over this period, the lower level (3.5 lb/min) is taken to be indicative of catch rates being at, or above, that at BMSY (Table 4). A catch rate at 50% of this level, 1.75 lb/min, is set as the limit reference point. Setting a reference point at half of BMSY has been used in other fisheries for setting limit reference points (DAFF 2007). A trigger reference point of 2.5 lb/min takes into account the additional within-season management arrangements that have kept the fishery within sustainable levels over many years. Table 7. Reference points for primary biological performance indicator (Table 6 of Management Plan) Reference point Adult catch rate Target 95.5 kg/hr (3.5 lb/min) Trigger (TRP) 68.2 kg/hr (2.5 lb/min) Limit (LRP) 47.7 kg/hr (1.75 lb/min)

Secondary When fishing strategies proceed on the basis of the primary reference points, secondary indicators are used to refine fishing strategies based on juvenile stock biomass (represented by recruit catch rate) and/or adult biomass (represented by adult catch rate). There are several secondary reference points. Reference points for the adult and recruit catch rates from individual SAS shown in Table 5 reflect the lower, and (for adults) an upper acceptable level based on the 10 years of SAS data. The lower reference points (aLRP and rLRP) are set midway between the lowest and second-lowest recorded SAS level. Table 8. Reference points for current adult and juvenile abundance from adult and recruit catch rates from individual SASs in the current season (Table 7 of Management Plan) Adult catch rate Recruit catch rate SAS aLRP aURP rLRP November 2.46 lb/min (84.5 kg/hr) 3.81 lb/min (122.7 kg/hr) 0.76 lb/min (10.9 kg/hr)

February 2.54 lb/min (70.9 kg/hr) 3.68 lb/min (111.8 kg/hr) 1.44 lb/min (49.1 kg/hr)

April 3.75 lb/min (120 kg/hr) 6.48 lb/min (180.0 kg/hr) 1.63 lb/min (40.9 kg/hr)

Reference points for average recruit catch rates for the three SASs from the previous fishing season are based on the range of historical records of this indicator using SAS values for the eight years from 2004. The reference points are considered to represent low, medium and high levels of juvenile biomass (Table 6). Table 9. Reference points for recent recruit prawn abundance from weighted annual average recruit catch rates from the previous season's SAS (Table 8 of Management Plan) Reference point Recruit catch rate High ≥ 2.4 lb/min (≥ 65.5 kg/hr) Medium ≥ 1.2 < 2.4 lb/min (≥ 32.7 < 65.5kg/hr) Low < 1.2 lb/min (< 32.7 kg/hr)

The harvest strategy involves a complex hierarchy of decision-making, which guides management and performance measurement – an estimation of the stock status at the annual level and then, given this status, a within-season level. The upper annual level provides 3 stock status categories (overfished, transitional, sustainable), and the within-season level results in 5 fishing strategies (No fishing, transitional, conservative, standard, increasing). The strategy is

28 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

implemented via a combination of input (effort) controls (i.e. fishing nights and spatial management) and output (catch) controls (i.e. fleet catch limits). Fishing strategies are developed prior to the commencement of commercial fishing during each harvest period (usually November, December, March, April, May and June). The development phase involves the determination of suitable areas of the Gulf to open to fishing based on data obtained from either fishery-independent, “stock assessment surveys” or industry-driven, spot surveys. Survey results are used throughout the fishing season to inform within-season decision-making. The surveys include fishery independent as well as spot surveys. In general, survey results inform the setting of fishing strategy levels, setting minimum per vessel nightly catch rate, or maximum allowable nights fishing (for a transitional fishery) and maximum allowable catch (pre-Christmas), as well as identifying fishing areas that meet target prawn size. Spot surveys are used to identify fishing areas that meet target prawn size in the months when SASs are not conducted. The nature of the strategy to be employed is determined from the index of future and current biomass. In turn, the nature of the strategy and the period of harvest determine the output control rule for the following period. The fishing strategy is then developed by industry using the output control rule and fishery independent or spot survey data (dependent upon the harvest period). Once established, the fishing strategy is managed on a daily or even hourly basis during the fishing run by the “Committee At Sea”, a group of skippers that include SGWCPFA representatives and the “Coordinator At Sea”. Management of the strategy is informed by data obtained during commercial fishing and involves reducing the area opened to fishing to avoid areas with small prawns or unsuitable catch rates. The nature of the fishing strategy under the 2014 Management Plan may be conservative, standard or maximum, and is dependent upon the relative indices of future and current biomass obtained from fishery- independent surveys (mean 20+ prawn grade catch rate and total mean catch rate, respectively). Standard strategies aim to capture the normal harvest strategy protocols that industry has employed in most years. Conservative strategies aim to reduce the amount of prawns harvested when indices of biomass are poor. Maximum strategies aim to take advantage of a high relative biomass by enabling more prawns to be harvested. Within-season decision-making involves setting management arrangements that control catch or effort based on the status of the prawn stock. These within-season management arrangements have evolved from fishing operations described in previous management plans and used in the past by the fishery and have proven effective in maintaining stocks at sustainable levels. The annual and within-season activities as part of the harvest strategy are depicted in Figure 7.

Annual Decision Within-season Decision Making Making

Pre-Season Pre-Christmas Post-Christmas

SAS Sept/ Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June Sept/ Oct Oct SAS SAS SAS Next Stock Fishing Fishing No No Fishing Fishing Fishing Fishing season’s status run run Fishing Fishing run run run run Stock

Previous Season’s Season’s Previous status

Figure 7. Timeline of annual and within-season decision-making. Fishing runs are periods of fishing activity between quarters of the lunar cycle that include a new moon and are only relevant to years when the fishery is assessed as being a ‘Sustainable’ or ‘Transitional’ (Figure 6 of Management Plan).

29 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Table 10. Glossary of terms used in the harvest strategy Term Description Fishing strategy The rules that guide fishing operations during a fishing run, including pre-Christmas total allowable fleet catch, bucket counts and fleet catch rates. There will be a number of fishing strategies developed throughout the fishing season.

Fishing run A period of fishing activity between quarters of the lunar cycle that include a new moon. Bucket count Measure of prawn size derived from the number of prawns in a 7 kg sample monitored during SASs, industry spot surveys and at- sea monitoring of fishing strategies. Recruits A prawn size category defined as ≥20 prawns/pound. While this size category will include some sexually mature prawns (adults), it generally comprises prawns that have recently recruited to the fishery. Adults A prawn size category defined as less than 20 prawns/pound (prawns that are larger than recruits). This size category generally comprises prawns that are sexually mature (although there will be exceptions), and therefore makes up the spawning component of the fishery. It is also the predominant component that is commercially harvested.

Stock assessment A fishery independent survey undertaken in November, February and survey (SAS) April to assess the stock status; SASs involve more than 150 survey trawl shots of 30-minute duration at predetermined locations in the gulf. Spot survey A fishery dependent survey undertaken when SASs are not during the fishing season; evaluate potential fishing areas with regard to prawn sizes.

Annual decision-making Annual stock status for the fishery is to be determined prior to the start of a fishing season and will remain in place for the entire season. The annual stock status will be reported in the annual stock assessment report and is defined as either ‘Sustainable’, ‘Transitional’ or ‘Overfished’ (Figure 8). This terminology is consistent with the Australian national status reporting framework (Stewardson et al., 2018): • Sustainable: stock for which biomass (or biomass proxy) is at a level sufficient to ensure that, on average, future levels of recruitment are adequate (i.e. not recruitment overfished) and for which fishing pressure is adequately controlled to avoid the stock becoming recruitment overfished. • Transitional recovering: biomass is recruitment overfished, but management measures are in place to promote stock recovery, and recovery is occurring, or Transitional depleting: biomass is not yet recruitment overfished, but fishing pressure is too high and moving the stock in the direction of becoming recruitment overfished. • Overfished: stock is recruitment overfished, and current management is not adequate to recover the stock; or adequate management measures have been put in place but have not yet resulted in measurable improvements.

30 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 8. Flow diagram describing the process for determining annual stock status The catch rate of adult prawns (kg/hour or lb/min) is used as an indicator of relative spawning stock biomass in the absence of a formal biomass estimate. The catch rates from each of the three annual SASs are weighted as follows, based on the relative contribution of recruits to the total catch in the relevant SASs over the last eight years of surveys: November February April 0.20 0.35 0.45 Within-season decision-making Within-season management arrangements are set on the basis of the annual status of the fishery described above. Different strategies (and combinations of these) are utilised to manage catch or effort levels at different times in the fishing season – fishing pre-Christmas and fishing post-Christmas (Figure 9). The management arrangements controlling fishing operations within a particular fishing run are collectively described as a ‘fishing strategy’ in the harvest strategy. Several fishing strategies are developed throughout a fishing season and are broadly described below. For a fishery assessed as being Sustainable, fishing strategies are: • Set a total allowable catch for pre-Christmas fishing; • Set areas of fishing based on target prawn size; • Maintain minimum fleet catch rates post-Christmas. The pre-Christmas and post-Christmas fishing periods are both constrained by criteria set for prawn size, while pre- Christmas fishing is also constrained by a maximum fleet catch. Post- Christmas fishing is also restricted by requiring the fleet to maintain a minimum average nightly catch per vessel. The fishing strategies for a Sustainable fishery closely follow the framework used in the previous management plan (PIRSA, 2007) although there are some differences in the performance indicators and reference levels used to set fishing levels. ‘Pre-Christmas’ fishing takes place in November and December. This fishing period overlaps with the main spawning period for western king prawns in Spencer Gulf, which is from October to January with a peak in November and post- larval survival (Noell and Hooper, 2015). Historical catch records indicate the importance of pre-Christmas catch on ongoing fishery sustainability. On each of four occasions between 1991-92 and 2001-02 when pre-Christmas catch exceeded 500 t, total annual catch declined in the following year (Noell and Hooper, 2019).

Fishery Stock Status

OVERFISHED TRANSITIONAL SUSTAINABLE

Pre-Christmas

Fishing Strategy Fishing Strategy No Fishing • Max. allowable nights • Catch cap •Target prawn size •Target prawn size

Post- Christmas

Fishing Strategy Fishing Strategy • Total Allowable Season •Target prawn size No Fishing nights fishing •Min fleet catch rates •240 prawns/7kg

31 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 9. The framework of within-season decision-making Fishing strategies in this period aim to protect spawning adult prawns by targeting smaller prawns. This strategy allows for fishing during this period of high market demand and strong prices, while protecting adequate spawning biomass to ensure a sustainable fishery. The decision rules for pre-Christmas fishing set a total allowable catch for the entire fleet during November and December fishing runs. This is determined based on the catch rate of adult prawns from the November SAS (for example, a November survey adult catch rate of 2.37 lb/min results in a TAC of 400 t; see Table 9 of Management Plan for more detail). In addition, the SGWCPFA Management Committee identifies fishing areas that meet a target prawn size of 260 prawns per 7 kg sample or less, using shot-by-shot information from the November SAS or industry spot surveys in months when SASs are not available. Management of pre-Christmas fishing strategies for a Sustainable fishery requires monitoring of the total fishery catch and average prawn size data from bucket counts. ‘Total pre-Christmas catch’ refers to the total catch for the fishing period for the entire fishing fleet, estimated from average fleet catches reported to the Committee-at-Sea. The fishery will be closed when the total allowable pre-Christmas catch is harvested. ‘Post-Christmas’ fishing: the fishing strategy for a Sustainable fishery will be further refined to ‘conservative’, ‘standard’ or ‘increasing’ levels, based on the most recent fishery independent survey data available on: • Adult biomass indicated by catch rates of adult prawns (larger than recruits), and then • Future biomass indicated by catch rate of recruits.

The reference points used to determine the fishing strategy level are described in Table 8 (Table 7 of Management Plan). The decision-making framework for setting a fishing strategy level is illustrated in Figure 10.

SUSTAINABLE

Adult catch rate Adult catch rate Adult catch rate < aLRP ≥ aLRP and

Recruit catch Recruit catch Recruit catch Recruit catch rate rate < rLRP rate ≥ rLRP rate

CONSERVATIVE STANDARD INCREASING FISHING FISHING FISHING STRATEGY STRATEGY STRATEGY

Figure 10. Decision framework for refining the level of fishing strategies for a Sustainable fishery (Figure 9 of Management Plan) Fishing pressure is constrained in each fishing strategy level by setting different criteria for target prawn sizes (monitored through the number of prawns per 7 kg, a ‘bucket count’) and minimum average fleet catch rates (kg/vessel/night). Target prawn size (bucket count) criteria may result in the restricting of areas (spatial closures) that can be opened to fishing in order to protect a proportion of adult prawns in the fish stock. Low bucket count (less prawns/7 kg) criteria result in larger prawns being targeted and more constraints on the area to be opened to and remain open to fishing. This results in an area being protected from fishing as well as smaller prawns being protected when current stock abundance is at low levels. Similarly, minimum average fleet catch rate criteria required during a fishing run constrains effort in the fishery by stopping fishing in an area or the whole area when catch rates drop due to lower prawn abundance. The higher average catch rate criteria protect prawns by stopping fishing sooner and reducing the harvest from the fishery, or from an 32 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

area. Different levels of criteria for bucket counts and average fleet catch rates are set for conservative, standard and increasing fishing strategies to either constrain fishing in the case of a conservative fishing strategy to allow the fish stock to improve, or to operate with maximum flexibility if an increasing fishing strategy is set. In the development of a conservative, standard or increasing fishing strategy, the SGWCPFA Management Committee will identify areas of the fishery to be opened to fishing that meet the target prawn size criteria for each level of fishing strategy, using shot-by-shot information from the most recent SAS or industry spot surveys when SASs are not available (see Table 10 of Management Plan). The flow diagram for decision making is shown in Figure 11 (Figure 10 of Management Plan). Two areas in Spencer Gulf have been identified by industry as having differing characteristics and relative contributions to fishery sustainability, hence different target bucket counts and minimum fleet catches required to maintain fishing have been established (see Tables 10 and 11 of Management Plan). These areas are referred to as the Mid/North Gulf and the Southern Gulf. Management of the post-Christmas fishing strategies for a Sustainable fishery requires monitoring of average fleet catch/vessel/night and average prawn size data from bucket counts. Prawn size data ensures that the fishing activities are effectively managed to reduce the risk of recruitment overfishing by reducing the capture of large amounts of small prawns. When both areas are open to fishing, the fleet average catch is calculated from all available vessels against the Mid/North catch rate and bucket count criteria, regardless of where the vessels are fishing. If the Mid/North Gulf area is closed to fishing, the fleet average catch will be calculated from all available vessels against the Southern Gulf catch rate and bucket count criteria. For fishery assessed as Transitional, fishing strategies are: • Set a total maximum number of nights allowed for fishing for the whole season; • Within that allowable seasonal nights fishing, set a maximum number of nights that can be fished pre- Christmas; • Set areas of fishing based on target prawn size Transitional fishing strategies limit fishing, giving stocks time to recover to sustainable levels. This strategy sets a total allowable number of nights fishing in a fishing season and for fishing pre-Christmas. The number of nights fishing allowed for a fishing season for a Transitional fishery is determined by the secondary biological indicator of abundance of juvenile prawns (recruits), determined from weighted average recruit catch rate from the previous fishing season’s three SASs. Within the season’s total allowable fishing nights, a maximum number of nights that may be fished in November and December (pre-Christmas) will also be set (as described in Table 8) in recognition of the need to provide protection to adult spawning prawns during this period. Table 11. Total allowable fishing nights for a Transitional Fishery, and maximum nights for fishing pre-Christmas

Recent juvenile abundance level as Maximum allowable Maximum allowable fishing determined from Table 6 (Table 8 of season fishing nights nights pre-Christmas Management Plan). High 37 11 Medium 31 9 Low 25 7

A ‘night’ in this Harvest Strategy refers to approximately 12 hours of trawling. Any fishing activity carried out over one night exceeding six hours will be considered a night’s fishing effort and will be deducted from the season’s and pre-Christmas (if applicable) allocated total number of fishing nights. Fishing for any part of a night less than 6 hours will be considered to be half a night’s fishing and will be deducted from the season’s and pre-Christmas (if applicable) allocated total number of fishing nights. ‘Pre-Christmas’ fishing strategy: Development of a fishing strategy for fishing pre-Christmas for a Transitional fishery requires the SGWCPFA Management Committee to set a number of fishing nights that does not exceed the number of remaining unfished nights; and identify areas to open to fishing that meet or exceed a target prawn size of 240 prawns per 7 kg bucket using shot-by-shot information from the November SAS or industry spot surveys. 33 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Management of a pre-Christmas fishing strategy for a Transitional fishery will monitor the total number of fishing nights fished and average prawn size data from bucket counts. ‘Post-Christmas’ fishing strategy: Development of a fishing strategy for fishing post-Christmas for a Transitional fishery requires the SGWCPFA Management Committee to set a number of fishing nights that do not exceed the number of remaining unfished nights from the season’s allocation; and identify areas to open to fishing that meet or exceed a target prawn size of 240 prawns per 7 kg sample using shot- by-shot information from the most recent SAS or industry spot surveys. Management of pre-Christmas fishing strategies for a Transitional fishery will monitor the total number of fishing nights fished and average prawn size data from bucket counts. The fishery will be closed to fishing when the total number of fishing nights allowed for the season has been fished. For a fishery assessed as being Overfished, no fishing will be allowed for the fishing season. Survey results are used throughout the fishing season to inform within-season decision-making. The surveys include fishery independent SASs as well as spot surveys. In general, survey results inform the setting of fishing strategy levels, setting maximum allowable nights fishing (pre-Christmas and for the whole season) and maximum allowable catch (pre-Christmas), as well as identifying fishing areas that meet target prawn size. Spot surveys are used to identify fishing areas that meet target prawn size in the months when SASs are not conducted.

34 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Stock Status Determination Previous year’s SAS Average adult catch rate season

- <1.75 lb/min ≥ 1.75 < 2.5 lb/min ≥ 2.5 lb/min OVERFISHED TRANSITIONAL SUSTAINABLE Pre

Previous year’s November SAS Average SAS recruit catch rate Adult catch rate

Fishing Strategy Fishing Strategy No Fishing • Pre-Christmas Maximum • Pre-Christmas allowable fishing days catch cap •240 prawns/7kg •260 prawns/7kg Christmas Fishing - Manage CAS at-sea Manage CAS at-sea Fishing monitoring Fishing monitoring Pre Strategy Strategy

SUSTAINABLE Feb/April SAS Adult catch rate

Adult catch Adult catch Adult catch No Fishing rate ≥ LRP rate < LRP rate ≥ URP and

Post Recruit Recruit catch Recruit catch Recruit catch catch rate rate < LRP rate ≥ LRP rate ≥ LRP

Transitional Conservative Standard Increasing Fishing Fishing Fishing Fishing Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy

Fishing Strategy Most recent • Total Allowable Season Develop Fishing Strategy SAS or Spot days fishing •Target prawn size Survey •240 prawns/7kg

CAS at-sea Manage Fishing Strategy Manage Fishing Strategy monitoring

Figure 11. Flow diagram depicting the Harvest Strategy decision-making (Figure 10 of Management Plan)

Secondary biological performance indicators Fishing strategies are also refined on the basis of secondary biological PIs based on juvenile stock biomass (represented by recruit catch rate) and/or adult biomass (represented by adult catch rate). There are several secondary biological PIs: • Catch per unit of effort (kg/hour or lb/min) of adult prawns from individual SASs as an indicator of current adult abundance. • Catch per unit of effort (kg/hour or lb/min) of recruits from individual SASs as an indicator of current juvenile- sized abundance. • Weighted average catch per unit of effort (kg/hour or lb/min) of recruits from all three SASs in the previous fishing season as an indicator of recent relative juvenile stock biomass.

8.2.5 Harvest tools (P 1.2.2) 35 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

The SGPF is managed using a mixture of input controls (aimed at matching harvesting capacity with resource availability) and promoting stock sustainability. No fishing is permitted in waters that are shallower than 10 m in the Spencer Gulf, and trawling is banned during daylight hours. All licence holders are permitted to use single- or double- rigged gear with a maximum headline length of 29.26 m. A minimum mesh size of 4.5 cm applies. Commercial licence holders are permitted to retain, for the purpose of trade or business, the by-product species Balmain bugs (Ibacus peronii) and Southern Calamari (Sepioteuthis australis). When fishing is to proceed on the basis of the annual stock status, fishing strategies will be set prior to the commencement of commercial fishing for each fishing run, usually between quarters of the lunar cycle that include a new moon. Fishing runs will usually occur in November, December, March, April, May and June. For months when the new moon falls late in month preceding or early in the following month, fishing may commence in that month through to the new moon in the following month. Fishing strategies involve two phases – a ‘development phase’ that sets the initial fishing arrangements, and a ‘management phase’ where at-sea monitoring maintains fishing operations during a fishing run. As described in Section 3.3.4.3, for a fishery assessed as being Sustainable, fishing strategies are: • Set a total allowable catch for pre-Christmas fishing; • Set areas of fishing based on target prawn size; • Maintain minimum fleet catch rates post-Christmas. For fishery assessed as Transitional, fishing strategies are: • Set a total maximum number of nights allowed for fishing for the whole season; • Within that allowable seasonal nights fishing, set a maximum number of nights that can be fished pre- Christmas; • Set areas of fishing based on target prawn size. The development of a fishing strategy requires the SGWCPFA Management Committee to describe an area to be opened to fishing at the beginning of the run, and a number of fishing nights (if required) for the relevant fishing strategy level. Areas for fishing are identified, in consultation with PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture and SARDI Aquatic Sciences, on the basis of meeting target prawn sizes (measured by bucket counts or number of prawns per 7 kg), and other arrangements as appropriate for the fishing strategy. Once fishing has commenced during a fishing run, the fishing strategy is maintained by the Co-ordinator-at-Sea and the Committee-at-Sea. The Committee-at-Sea will monitor and manage fishing by the fleet against the fishing strategy criteria appropriate for the fishing strategy. Closure lines set for the fishing run may be adjusted on a daily or hourly basis if prawns of an unacceptable size are encountered in an area. The changes to the closure lines will reduce the area available to fishing by closing areas where prawn sizes are below the target levels. If target reference points of prawn size or average catch rates are not met in any area of fishing, the fishing strategy will be amended by the Committee-at-Sea to either close the area (or the whole fishery) for the remainder of that fishing run. Licences are transferable and corporate ownership is permitted. Any boat used in the fishery must be registered and be appropriately endorsed upon the license under which it is being operated. Boats must not exceed an overall length of 22 m and the main engine must not exceed 365 continuous brake horsepower. Both single and double rigged otter trawl nets are permitted to be used in the fishery with a minimum cod-end mesh size of 4.5 cm and a maximum headline length of 29.26 m. Permanent closures to trawling exist in shallow waters (<10 m depth). In addition, there are a number of gazetted area closures (north of Point Lowly, west of Port Broughton, adjacent to Shoalwater (near Cowell), and from Wardang (near Port Victoria) to Corny Point), which were first introduced voluntarily by the Association. These closures have been implemented to protect important habitats, juvenile prawn grounds and the benthic communities they support. The remaining trawl grounds are primarily sand and mud sediments, with relatively low species diversity and biomass. Seasonal closures aim to protect the spawning biomass, to maximise value by allowing for sufficient growth and to maximize capture efficiency, which is lowest during winter months. Table 12. Summary of current management arrangements (source: Noell and Hooper, 2019) Management control Specification Target species Western king prawn (Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus)

36 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Permitted byproduct species Slipper lobster (Ibacus spp.) Southern Calamari (Sepioteuthis australis) Limited entry Yes Number of licences 39 Corporate ownership of licences Yes Licence transferability Yes Minimum trawling depth 10 m Method of capture Demersal otter trawl Trawl net configuration Single or double rig (double rig exclusively used) Max. total headline length 29.26 m Min. mesh size 4.5 cm Max. vessel length 22 m Max. engine capacity 336 kw Catch and effort data Daily logbook, submitted monthly Recreational fishery Restricted to depths > 10 m; hand nets only

8.2.6 Application of the Harvest Strategy All three fishery-independent surveys were conducted in 2017/18 with fishing strategies developed immediately afterwards in accordance with a sustainable stock. The mean catch rate of adult prawns (size grades made up of less than 20 prawns per pound) 2.27 lb/min, leading to a pre-Christmas conservative catch cap of 400 t under the decision rules. The weighted mean catch rate of adult prawns from all three surveys was 3.83 lb/min, which places the 2017/18 result above the trigger reference point (2.50 lb/min) that delineates a sustainable stock from one that is transitional. The development of fishing strategies immediately after stock assessment surveys is a feature that has placed the SGPF as a leader in co-management. However, due to differences detected between the unvalidated survey data and data validated in the months following the surveys in previous years, the 2019 assessment (Noell and Hooper, 2019) reports on the outcomes of data validation. Compared to the unvalidated mean catch rates for adult and newly recruited prawns, validated values were generally within 5% of unvalidated values (SARDI, 2019). Validated means for adults and recruits were greater than their lower reference point (LRP), meaning that a standard fishing strategy, at a minimum, would be adopted following each survey. The validated catch rate for adult prawns in the February 2019 survey was also above the upper reference point (URP), translating into an increasing fishing strategy until the April 2019 survey. The weighted mean catch rate for adult prawns was 4.19 lb/min, above the trigger reference point (2.50 lb/min) that delineates a sustainable stock from one that is transitional (SARDI, 2019).

8.2.7 Revision of the Harvest Strategy The 2014 Management Plan indicates that the Plan will be fully reviewed as soon as practicable after the fourth anniversary of its operation. This review process and consultation on a draft revised plan (PIRSA, 2019a) has taken place over the past year. The draft plan was open for public consultation until 25 November 2019 but has not yet been formally adopted. One aspect of the draft revised plan is that aspects of the harvest strategy are to be changed. The primary change to the harvest strategy from that in the 2014 Plan is in the design and application of the stock assessment surveys. The new stock assessment survey design has reduced the number of survey shots in two of the annual three surveys (April and November), and moved the February survey to March. These changes in the number of shots for each survey have been applied taking into account historic data sets, information priorities and logistics. As indicated at 7.2.3 Stock Status, the revised design was implemented in the 2019/2020 season. The impact of these changes will require further consideration at a future surveillance audit of the fishery following the formal adoption of the plan.

8.2.8 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data The report shall include a Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data table using the table below. If possible, a separate table should be provided for each species or gear. 37 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Table 13: Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data (TACs are not in place for the fishery)

TAC Year NA Amount NA

UoA share of TAC Year NA Amount NA

UoA share of total TAC Year NA Amount NA

Year (most Total green weight catch by UoC 2018/2019 Amount 2121 tonnes recent) Year (second Total green weight catch by UoC 2017/2018 Amount 2197 tonnes most recent)

38 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

8.2.9 Principle 1 Performance Indicator scores and rationales In the Performance Indicator scoring tables, the report shall include sufficient rationale which makes direct reference to every scoring issue and whether it is fully met at each Scoring Guidepost (SG). References shall be included in the form of hyperlinks, citations or by providing the quantitative information.

For any Performance Indicator for which scoring is not required or a default score is applied, this shall be recorded in the relevant scoring table.

If a condition is required, the CAB shall assign a condition number for cross-references in assessment reports.

If the Risk-Based Framework (RBF) has been used to score a Performance Indicator, the report shall include a justification for use and the relevant RBF outputs table shall include scores and rationales.

Additional scoring tables shall be used and clearly marked for modified assessment trees e.g. PI 2.5.2 - Modified.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.17

The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability PI 1.1.1 of recruitment overfishing Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Stock status relative to recruitment impairment It is likely that the stock is It is highly likely that the There is a high degree of a Guide above the point where stock is above the PRI. certainty that the stock is post recruitment would be above the PRI. impaired (PRI). Met? Yes Yes Yes

Rationale Stock status of the western king prawn in the SGPF is not assessed via quantitative stock assessment models. Rather it is based on indicators collected from an ongoing time series of fishery-independent and fishery-dependent information. Stock status is based on a weight of evidence from the extensive survey and monitoring program for the fishery in conjunction with an understanding of the biology and ecology of the species. The fishery has been successfully managed with this approach, with available information indicating a healthy sustainable stock over time.

Stock assessment surveys have been undertaken since 1989. The current survey arrangements, with 3 stock assessment surveys per year, have been in place since 2004. Information is also obtained from industry-driven spot surveys targeted areas in which catch rates and size frequencies are recorded. Western king prawn catches have been relatively stable over 40 years with only two substantial reductions (1987/88 and 2002/03) following high early season (November/December) catches (Noell and Hooper, 2019). Management changes to stabilize the pre-Christmas harvest has seen a 25% increase in mean recruitment in recent years compared to the historic average, as well as a reduction in recruitment variability. Generally, all indications (catch, survey catch rates in all seasons, consistent size class proportions, egg production, reducing nominal effort, etc.) give a high degree of confidence that the stock has been fluctuating around a highly productive level for a number of years and that it is at a level well above that where recruitment might be impaired.

39 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Mean egg production in 2017/18 was 551 ± 28 million eggs per hour trawled. There has been a progressive decline since 2013/14 but egg production remains above the reference level (500 million eggs per hour trawled). The mean survey CPUErecruits from 34 locations during February surveys (the recruitment index) has remained above its reference point (2.38 lb/min) since 2004/05 (Noell and Hooper, 2019). The recruitment index in February 2017 (4.79 ± 0.42 lb/min) was double the reference point and increased to its highest recorded value in February 2018 (7.88 ± 0.98 lb/min) (Figure 5).

The 2019 assessment concludes the stock is at a sustainable level. The weighted mean catch rate of adult prawns from all three surveys in 2017/18 was 3.83 lb/min and in 2018/19 was 4.19 lb/min, above the trigger reference point (2.50 lb/min) that delineates a sustainable stock (Figure 3, Figure 4). The weighted mean survey catch rates of adult prawns for 2019/20 was 4.14 lb/min, again indicating a sustainable stock (Figure 6). The maintenance of catches and catch rates over the history of the fishery, as well as ongoing healthy levels of recruitment and egg production, is consistent conceptually with BMSY or better, and well above a level at which reproductive capacity might be impaired. SG60, SG80 and SG100 requirements are met.

Stock status in relation to achievement of Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) The stock is at or There is a high degree of fluctuating around a level certainty that the stock has b Guide consistent with MSY. been fluctuating around a post level consistent with MSY or has been above this level over recent years. Met? Yes Yes

Rationale MSC guidance states that where MSY may not always be reliably estimable, it may be sufficient to ensure that the stock is fluctuating around a ‘highly productive’ level that is clearly above any likely point of possible recruitment impairment (MSC, 2018b).

Reference levels against which to monitor the stock have been developed on the basis of a long history of regular surveys of the fishery. Continuing good catches and catch rates of adults (Figure 4, Figure 7), as well as ongoing healthy levels of recruitment (Figure 5) and egg production, and the long running maintenance of the stock consistently within the target range provide evidence of the stock being maintained at or above a level consistent with MSY with a high degree of certainty. SG80 and SG100 are met.

References MSC (2018b). MSC Guidance to Fisheries Standard, v.2.1, 31. August 2018. Marine Stewardship Council, London, 156 pp. Available at: https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program- documents/fisheries-program-documents/msc-fisheries-standard-v2-01.pdf?sfvrsn=8ecb3272_11.

Noell, C. J. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000770-10. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1029. 67pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/294526/SPG_Prawn_2017-18_Fishery_Assessment_- _FINAL_20190814.pdf.

SARDI (2018b). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – 2017/18 Stock Status Determination. 20 August 2018 SARDI (2019). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – 2018/19 Stock Status Determination. 11 October 2019 SARDI (2020). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – 2019/20 Stock Status Determination. 14 July 2020 40 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Stock status relative to reference points Type of reference point Value of reference point Current stock status relative

to reference point Reference point Adult catch rate (primary 3.5 lb/min 3.83 lb/min (2017/18) used in scoring indicator - from stock (trigger reference point of stock relative to assessment surveys) 2.5 lb/min) 4.19 lb/min (2018/19) PRI (SIa) 4.14 lb/min (2019/20)

Reference point Adult catch rate (primary 1.75 lb/min 3.83 lb/min (2017/18) used in scoring indicator - from stock stock relative to assessment surveys) 4.19 lb/min (2018/19) MSY (SIb) 4.14 lb/min (2019/20)

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

41 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Where the stock is reduced, there is evidence of stock rebuilding within a specified PI 1.1.2 timeframe Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Rebuilding timeframes A rebuilding timeframe is The shortest practicable specified for the stock that rebuilding timeframe is is the shorter of 20 years specified which does not a Guide or 2 times its generation exceed one generation post time. For cases where 2 time for the stock. generations is less than 5 years, the rebuilding timeframe is up to 5 years. Met? N/A N/A

Rationale The stock does not require rebuilding.

Rebuilding evaluation Monitoring is in place to There is evidence that the There is strong evidence determine whether the rebuilding strategies are that the rebuilding strategies rebuilding strategies are rebuilding stocks, or it is are rebuilding stocks, or it effective in rebuilding the likely based on simulation is highly likely based on b Guide stock within the specified modelling, exploitation simulation modelling, post timeframe. rates or previous exploitation rates or performance that they will previous performance that be able to rebuild the stock they will be able to rebuild within the specified the stock within the timeframe. specified timeframe. Met? N/A N/A N/A

Rationale The stock does not require rebuilding.

References

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range N/A

Information gap indicator

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

42 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

Harvest strategy design The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is expected to achieve stock responsive to the state of responsive to the state of management objectives the stock and the elements the stock and is designed Guide reflected in PI 1.1.1 SG80. of the harvest strategy to achieve stock a post work together towards management objectives achieving stock reflected in PI 1.1.1 SG80. management objectives reflected in PI 1.1.1 SG80. Met? Yes Yes Yes

Rationale The SGPF HS is laid out in the Management Plan (PIRSA, 2014a) and is described in Section 7.2.4 of this report. The strategy has evolved from a long history of industry involvement in management of the fishery supported by ongoing fishery-independent surveys and scientific support. The 2014 strategy replaces the strategy introduced in 2007 (PIRSA, 2007) and was developed to improve on the 2007 strategy and address perceived shortcomings. The 2014 strategy is the combination of the various rules and actions (considered under P1.2.2) and the information flows that enable implementation of those rules and actions (considered under P1.2.3). In addition, it includes ‘break out’ provisions in the form of performance indicators and specified actions. The strategy operates at three temporal scales: a) annual assessment of stock status; b) seasonal fishing strategies, and; c) daily management at sea.

The 2014 HS is responsive to the state of the stock with start-of-season and in-season rules and actions triggered by a range of indicators. These indicators rely on a wide range of information flows. The current strategy has been in place since the start of the 2014/15 season, though its underlying framework has been in place for a number of years and provide a direct response to indicators from close monitoring of the fishery. The strategy includes explicit target and limit reference points against which to monitor the stock and is designed to meet PI 1.1.1 SG80 objectives. The performance of the strategy has been evaluated at surveillance audits since the 2015 certification of the fishery and has continued to perform as designed. SG60, SG80 and SG100 requirements are met.

Harvest strategy evaluation The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy may The performance of the likely to work based on not have been fully tested harvest strategy has been prior experience or but evidence exists that it is fully evaluated and Guide plausible argument. achieving its objectives. evidence exists to show b post that it is achieving its objectives including being clearly able to maintain stocks at target levels. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale The HS provides a structured framework for decision making that specifies pre-determined management actions in response to information from the fishery. The underlying framework of the strategy has resulted in successful management of the western king prawn stock at sustainable levels since the 1980s. SG60 requirements are met. The current HS has been in place since the start of the 2014/15 season. The strategy is responsive to the state of the stock

43 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

and is precautionary in the hierarchical approach taken to reducing the exploitation rate as required by the data coming from the surveys and the fishery. Surveillance audits since the 2015 certification reveal that the HS continues to operate appropriately and is achieving its objectives, meeting SG80 requirements. SG100 is not met as the strategy has not been fully tested (e.g. using Management Strategy Evaluation).

Harvest strategy monitoring Monitoring is in place that c Guide is expected to determine post whether the harvest strategy is working. Met? Yes Rationale The fishery is subject to intensive monitoring to enable evaluation of the performance of the HS. SG60 is met.

Harvest strategy review The harvest strategy is Guide periodically reviewed and d post improved as necessary. Met? Yes Rationale The current strategy has only formally been in place since the start of the 2014/15 fishing season. It replaces the strategy laid out in the 2007 Management Plan, providing evidence that review processes are in place. The current Management Plan contains a requirement that a full review will be conducted as soon as practicable after the fourth anniversary of its operation. A draft revised Plan has been prepared and was open for public consultation until 25 November 2019 but has not yet been formally adopted (PIRSA, 2019a). SG100 requirements are met.

Shark finning It is likely that shark It is highly likely that shark There is a high degree of e Guide finning is not taking place. finning is not taking place. that shark finning post certainty is not taking place. Met? NA NA NA Rationale Sharks are not a target species.

Review of alternative measures There has been a review of There is a regular review There is a biennial review the potential effectiveness of the potential of the potential and practicality of effectiveness and effectiveness and f alternative measures to practicality of alternative practicality of alternative Guide minimise UoA-related measures to minimise measures to minimise post mortality of unwanted UoA-related mortality of UoA-related mortality of catch of the target stock. unwanted catch of the unwanted catch of the target stock and they are target stock, and they are implemented as implemented, as appropriate. appropriate.

44 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale The management system in place for the SGPF has evolved over a number of years and has been largely influenced by a downturn in catches in the 1980s. At that time, it was believed that the harvesting of smaller-size classes of prawns in the immediately preceding years was responsible for the downturn in biomass and subsequent catches. An important aspect of the HS is to change effort patterns in order to target areas with larger-sized prawns based on catch rates and ‘bucket count’ criteria. Fishing areas that meet the catch rate and ‘bucket count’ criteria are determined by each of the three SAS, with the most recent SAS used to determine the area to be fished in the fishing run. These aspects of the HS provide an ongoing approach to minimise UoA-related unwanted mortality. SG60, SG80 and SG100 requirements are met.

References PIRSA (2007). Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Management Series Paper N0 54.

PIRSA (2014a). Management Plan for The South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, 2014-2019. Available at: http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf.

PIRSA (2019a). Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Prawn Fishery. Retrieved https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public- consultation_19.pdf.

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

45 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

PI 1.2.2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules (HCRs) in place Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 HCRs design and application Generally understood Well defined HCRs are in The HCRs are expected to HCRs are in place or place that ensure that the keep the stock fluctuating available that are expected exploitation rate is reduced at or above a target level to reduce the exploitation as the PRI is approached, consistent with MSY, or rate as the point of are expected to keep the another more appropriate a Guide recruitment impairment stock a level taking into account post fluctuating around (PRI) is approached. target level consistent with the ecological role of the (or above) MSY, or for key stock, most of the time. LTL species a level consistent with ecosystem needs. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale The current Management Plan for the SGPF was implemented in October 2014. An important element of the Plan was a revised HS for the fishery (PIRSA, 2014a). The HS involves a complex hierarchy of decision-making which guides management and performance measurement – an estimation of the stock status at the annual level and then, given this status, a within-season level. The upper annual level provides 3 stock status categories (overfished, transitional, sustainable), and the within-season level. results in 5 fishing strategies (No fishing, transitional, conservative, standard, increasing). A comprehensive set of indicators and reference points guide in-season output controls (as conservative, standard or increasing strategies) and seasonal and restrictions and specifications for adaptive management (primarily real-time closures and changes to permitted fishing areas); see Figure 9, Figure 10 and Figure 11 for details. The assessment of annual stock status provides guidance for the overarching annual control rules for the fishery. The set of fishery-dependent and fishery-independent indicators and reference points includes the use of three annual surveys, considering both adult and recruit indices, mean size of prawns in the catch, and nightly average vessel catches. The main strategy is to ensure sufficient recruitment to underpin through-season and future year catches of large prawns. The range of indicators and reference points, and triggered actions, are fully documented and are well defined in the Management Plan. The rules are well designed to control total exploitation and exploitation of young prawns.

The implementation of the seasonal and in-season actions is organised through the SGWCPFA Management Committee and its Committee at Sea sub-committee. The implemented real-time decisions and actions, following the Management Plan indicators and reference points, are given strength through ongoing gazettal (e.g. of changes to spatial restrictions) by the management authority, PIRSA.

There is no formal estimation of MSY in the assessment process. However, the history of the fishery indicates a healthy sustainable stock over time suggesting the stock has been at a level consistent with MSY. The fishery has shown no indication of recruitment fishing over its recorded history. The survey-based catch rate reference points are interpreted to i) relate implicitly to maintaining the stock at a level consistent with MSY, and ii) providing limits and constraints sufficient to ensure that there is no appreciable risk of impaired reproductive capacity. In addition, it should be noted that MSC interpretations provide guidance on target reference points for short-lived stocks for which MSY can be inappropriate as the basis for reference points. The guidance states that where MSY may not always be reliably estimable, it may be sufficient to ensure that the stock is fluctuating around a ‘highly productive’ level that is clearly above any likely point of possible recruitment impairment (MSC, 2018b). The SGPF HS is consistent with this and the HCRs are expected to keep the stock at or above a level consistent with MSY. SG60, SG80 and SG100 requirements are met.

46 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

HCRs robustness to uncertainty The HCRs are likely to be The HCRs take account of robust to the main a wide range of uncertainties. uncertainties including the b Guide ecological role of the post stock, and there is evidence that the HCRs are robust to the main uncertainties. Met? Yes No Rationale The stock assessment surveys have provided robust estimates of recruitment and adult stock abundance. Potential effects of uncertainties in information are guarded against by the use of a very extensive set of indicators and reference points to guide actions, as well as additional rules to ensure actions are taken if reference points are breached sequentially. In-season monitoring and decision-making assist in accounting for uncertainty. The implementation of the HCRs under the management plan since the 2015 certification of the fishery support that the HCRs are robust to the main uncertainties. Overall, the HCRs effectively ensure main uncertainties are dealt with practically, meeting SG80 requirements.

There is a level of uncertainty in the use of unvalidated survey data in determination of fishing strategies, however catch rate analysis indicates that the nominal catch rate information used to monitor the fishery is appropriate for that purpose.

The current rules do not explicitly take the ecological role of the stock into account. The SG100 level is not met.

HCRs evaluation There is some evidence Available evidence Evidence clearly shows that tools used or available indicates that the tools in that the tools in use are c Guide to implement HCRs are use are appropriate and effective in achieving the post appropriate and effective in effective in achieving the exploitation levels controlling exploitation. exploitation levels required required under the HCRs. under the HCRs. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale The current tools have been in place in the 2014/15 fishing season since the adoption of the new Management Plan in October 2014 (PIRSA, 2014a). However, these tools build on the tools and specified actions in place since the implementation of the 2007 Management Plan (PIRSA, 2007). Prior to 2007, indicators, reference points and actions were less extensive and less well defined (under the previous Management Plan that operated from 1998 to 2006). Nevertheless, fishery performance and stock status was good throughout those years. As evidenced by the information assessed at surveillance audits, all indications are that the tools in use under the 2014 Plan continue to be effective in achieving appropriate exploitation levels (MRAG, 2017; MRAG, 2018; McLoughlin et al., 2019). SG60 and SG80 are met. SG100 requirements are potentially met under the current arrangements. However, the changes under the draft Management Plan (PIRSA, 2019a) have been partially introduced with a revision of the survey approach and additional changes are pending the formal adoption of the new plan. SG100 is not met.

References McLoughlin, K., Banks, R. and Zaharia, M. (2019). MSC 3rd Annual Surveillance Report ‘Review of Information’ for Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. MRAG Americas, September 2019. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer-gulf-king-prawn/@@assessments.

47 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

MRAG (2017). MSC 1st Annual Surveillance Report ‘Review of Information’ for Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. MRAG Americas, August 2017. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer-gulf-king-prawn/@@assessments.

MRAG (2018). MSC 2nd Annual Surveillance Report ‘Review of Information’ for Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. MRAG Americas, August 2018. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer-gulf-king-prawn/@@assessments.

MSC (2018b). MSC fisheries standard, v.2.1, 31 August 2018. Marine Stewardship Council, London. Available at: https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program-documents/fisheries- program-documents/msc-fisheries-standard-v2-01.pdf?sfvrsn=8ecb3272_11.

PIRSA (2007). Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Management Series Paper N0 54.

PIRSA (2014a). Management Plan for The South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, 2014-2019. Available at: http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf.

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

48 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

Range of information Some relevant information Sufficient relevant A comprehensive range related to stock structure, information related to of information (on stock stock productivity and fleet stock structure, stock structure, stock composition is available to productivity, fleet productivity, fleet support the harvest composition and other data composition, stock strategy. are available to support the abundance, UoA removals a Guide harvest strategy. and other information such post as environmental information), including some that may not be directly related to the current harvest strategy, is available. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale The SGPF has undergone extensive research throughout its history. A range of information is available on stock structure and productivity (growth, mortality, reproductive biology, etc.). There is extensive information on fleet composition and fishing activities. Environmental and habitat information is sufficient though not extensive, and ecosystem modelling of the fishery has been undertaken (Gillanders et al., 2015). A bio-economic model of the fishery has been developed (Noell et al., 2015). The biennial stock assessment reports (e.g. Noell and Hooper, 2017; Noell and Hooper, 2019) provide a good overview of the available information. The 2014 Management Plan incorporates Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) objectives and ESD risk assessment of the fishery has been undertaken (PIRSA, 2014b). Fishery removals are well monitored using mandatory reporting forms (South Australian Western King Prawn Daily Fishing Logbook Form). The daily logbook contains detailed reporting on each tow, including start and finish time, depth, latitude and longitude and catch of prawns. Size grade details are given daily, as are total daily catches of byproduct species. The level and accuracy of reporting is sufficient to provide a range of indicators to guide management decision making, seasonally and adaptively. The reporting provides information consistent with the harvest control rule requirements. There is a high degree of certainty as to the reported information as processing (cooking, size grading, freezing and packaging) all take place onboard, leading to detailed and accurate weight and size category recording which can also be verified against unloading information (South Australian Western King Prawn Fishing Unloading Form). There are no unaccounted removals. In addition to directly captured data, the Management Plan also requires Stock Assessment Surveys (SAS) and catch rate and prawn size inputs. A range of in-season reference points are derived from the SAS while catch rates are used as one of a set of performance indicators. The SAS are spatially extensive and are repeated at standardised time periods but they are not designed to ensure robust statistical interpretation. The extensive sampling, however, covering the full range of the prawn stock, should lead to unbiased annual indices so long as prawn distributions are reasonably stable between years. Sufficient relevant information related to stock structure, stock productivity, fleet composition and other data is available to support the HS, meeting SG60 and SG80 requirements. However, information is not comprehensive (e.g. stock structure is uncertain) hence SG100 is not met.

49 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Monitoring Stock abundance and UoA Stock abundance and UoA All information required removals are monitored removals are regularly by the harvest control rule and at least one indicator monitored at a level of is monitored with high is available and monitored accuracy and coverage frequency and a high with sufficient frequency consistent with the degree of certainty, and b Guide to support the harvest harvest control rule, and there is a good post control rule. one or more indicators understanding of inherent are available and uncertainties in the monitored with sufficient information [data] and the frequency to support the robustness of assessment harvest control rule. and management to this uncertainty. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale A system of monitoring has been developed over time to provide detailed information to support the HS. The level and accuracy of reporting is sufficient to provide a range of indicators to guide management decision making, seasonally and adaptively. The approach is consistent with the adopted harvest control rules. SG60 and SG80 requirements are met. The HS involves calculation of catch rates immediately after each survey to ensure fishing strategies are developed in a timely manner. This means there is limited time to verify the accuracy of electronic logbook data provided by skippers. Stock assessment reports have provided comparisons of unvalidated and validated survey results to determine whether there would have been implications for the actual fishing strategy applied (Noell and Hooper, 2019). The 2016/17 and 2017/18 data revealed differences between unvalidated and validated data, although this did not affect most fishing strategy outcomes in terms of size and catch criteria (lower validated CPUEadults for the November 2017 survey indicated a catch cap for the fleet of 375 t rather than 400 t). Further examination of the unvalidated and validated survey data for both years indicated that most errors were systematic, owing to an underestimation of the CPUErecruits in the electronic logbooks compared to the unloaded grade weights which are assumed correct. This resulted in the unvalidated mean CPUErecruits being up to 9% less than the validated value (Noell and Hooper, 2019). A counter effect was that the unvalidated CPUEadults overestimated the ‘true’ value by 6%. SARDI have concluded that the fact that because the HS is designed around survey data and analysis procedures have remained the same since 2004/05, it would not be beneficial to change the current approach. CPUE is commonly used to provide an index of abundance for a fishery. The assumption that abundance is proportional to CPUE often necessitates CPUE standardisation to remove factors that may influence CPUE and interpretation of biomass. At the time of the original MSC certification of the SGPF no CPUE standardisation had been attempted. Since then, stock assessment reports have examined CPUE information using generalised linear modelling (Noell and Hooper, 2017; Noell and Hooper, 2019). In the latest assessment it was found that standardised catches tracked the nominal trend reasonable well for the year-survey trends (though only 34% of the total deviance in survey catches was explained by the model) (Noell and Hooper, 2019). There is a high level of monitoring to support the harvest control rules as well as a good understanding of inherent uncertainties in the information. Research undertaken suggests the assessment and management are robust to the uncertainties. SG100 requirements are met.

Comprehensiveness of information There is good information Guide on all other fishery c post removals from the stock. Met? Yes

50 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Rationale Information on removals by the fishery, including location, total catches and size categories, is recorded by shot and reported daily or more frequently. All removals are known. Because of full processing at sea, the information is accurate. Western king prawn are not taken by other commercial fisheries in the region. Recreational fishing has historically been negligible, as fishers are permitted only to use hand-held nets in waters greater than 10 m in depth (the same depth limitation that applies to commercial fishers). SG80 is met.

References Gillanders, BM, Goldsworthy, S, Prowse, TAA, Doubell, M, Middleton, J, Rogers, P, Tanner, JE, Clisby, NA, James, C, Luick, J, van Ruth, P, Bradshaw, CJA and Ward TM (2015). Spencer Gulf research initiative: Development of an ecosystem model for fisheries and aquaculture. University of Adelaide and SARDI Aquatic Sciences, Adelaide.

Noell, C.J., O’Neill, M.F., Carroll, J.D. and Dixon, C.D. (2015). A bio-economic model for South Australia’s prawn trawl fisheries. Final Report. Prepared by the South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. CRC Project No. 2011/750.

Noell, C. J. and Hooper, G. E. (2017). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture (PDF 6.8 MB). South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000770-9. SARDI Research Report Series No. 950.

Noell, C. J. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000770-10. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1029. 67pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/294526/SPG_Prawn_2017-18_Fishery_Assessment_- _FINAL_20190814.pdf.

PIRSA (2014b). ESD risk assessment of South Australia’s Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/232477/FINAL_ESD_risk_assessment_of_South_Australias_S GPF_July_2014.pdf. Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

51 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Appropriateness of assessment to stock under consideration The assessment is The assessment takes into appropriate for the stock account the major features Guide a and for the harvest control relevant to the biology of post rule. the species and the nature of the UoA. Met? Yes Yes

Rationale The stock is assessed directly from regular fishery surveys and there is no model-based assessment. A biennial assessment report reviews the performance of the fishery and determines the current status of the resource. Performance against the HS is summarised annually (SARDI, 2018b; SARDI, 2019). There is a high level of monitoring of the fishery. Extensive data from the fishery and fishery-independent surveys have been in place for more than 20 years and are used directly to inform the HS using a wide set of indicators.

This approach requires a detailed understanding of the biology and distribution of the species, including growth, egg production, recruitment, nursery areas, spawning frequency and movement patterns. There is a high level of control over the distribution of fishing during the fishing seasons. This is appropriate for the stock and the control rules in place, meeting SG80. The approach also takes into account the major features relevant to the biology of the species and the nature of the UoA. SG100 is met.

Assessment approach The assessment estimates The assessment estimates stock status relative to stock status relative to Guide b generic reference points reference points that are post appropriate to the species appropriate to the stock and category. can be estimated. Met? Yes Yes

Rationale Reference points have been incorporated into the current HS. Assessment and monitoring of the fishery provides stock status information relative to these reference points which are appropriate to the stock and the fishery. SG60 and SG80 requirements are met.

Uncertainty in the assessment The assessment identifies The assessment takes The assessment takes into major sources of uncertainty into account. account uncertainty and is Guide c uncertainty. evaluating stock status post relative to reference points in a probabilistic way. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale The wide set of reference points and data flow guards against uncertainty through in-built redundancy. Catch rate standardization undertaken in recent assessments indicates that the nominal catch rate information used to monitor the

52 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

fishery is appropriate for that purpose. SG60 and SG80 requirements are met, however there is limited probabilistic evaluation of uncertainty.

Evaluation of assessment The assessment has been tested and shown to be Guide robust. Alternative d post hypotheses and assessment approaches have been rigorously explored. Met? No

Rationale There is no quantitative model for stock assessment. Data are used directly to inform the HS. Reporting for management purposes is provided in biennial “stock assessment” and status reports (e.g. Noell and Hooper, 2015; Noell and Hooper, 2019), as well as internal advice notes on stock status (SARDI, 2018b; SARDI, 2019). This is appropriate for the stock and the control rules in place. A bio-economic model of the fishery has been developed which has the potential to provide alternative approaches for managing the fishery, however results are considered preliminary (Noell et al., 2015). Alternative approaches have not been rigorously explored, hence SG100 is not met.

Peer review of assessment The assessment of stock The assessment has been Guide e status is subject to peer post internally and externally review. peer reviewed. Met? Yes No

Rationale The “assessment” (i.e. the collation and reporting of all data, determination of annual status and preparation of annual stock assessment report) is subject to internal peer review within SARDI but has not been reviewed externally. SG80 requirements are met.

References Noell, C. J. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000770-10. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1029. 67pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/294526/SPG_Prawn_2017-18_Fishery_Assessment_- _FINAL_20190814.pdf.

Noell, C.J., O’Neill, M.F., Carroll, J.D. and Dixon, C.D. (2015). A bio-economic model for South Australia’s prawn trawl fisheries. Final Report. Prepared by the South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. CRC Project No. 2011/750.

SARDI (2018b). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – 2017/18 Stock Status Determination. 20 August 2018).

SARDI (2019). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – 2018/19 Stock Status Determination. 11 October 2019).

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

53 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

54 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

8.3 Principle 2 8.3.1 Principle 2 background The report shall include a summary of the Unit(s) of Assessment (UoA) based on the topics below, referencing electronic or other documents used:

- The aquatic ecosystem, its status and any particularly sensitive areas, habitats or ecosystem features influencing or affected by the UoA. - The Primary, Secondary and Endangered, Threatened or Protected (ETP) species including their status and relevant management history. - Specific constraints, e.g. details of any unwanted catch of species, their conservation status and measures taken to minimise this as appropriate. - If cumulative impacts need consideration for any Principle 2 Performance Indicators, the report shall contain a summary of how this has been addressed, i.e. which other MSC UoAs/fisheries and how the cumulative impacts were considered.

Any information used as supporting rationale should be provided in the scoring tables.

The background shall include information justifying how scoring elements were assigned to components within Principle 2 of the MSC Fisheries Standard (Fisheries Standard v2.01 Section SA3.1, SA3.4.2- SA3.4.5, SA3.7.1). The team may amend the table below to present this information. The report shall include the catch and UoA related mortality of all main Primary, main Secondary and ETP species together with a description of the adequacy of information, identification of data sources used and whether they are qualitative or quantitative.

Reference(s): Fisheries Standard v2.01

The SGPF is the largest of the three prawn trawl fisheries in South Australia and it operates in Spencer Gulf (SG). SG is a large shallow body of water with a mean depth of 23 m, and a maximum depth of 87 m at its entrance in the south (Noell and Hooper, 2019). The predominant sediment type is sand/mud and seagrass habitats are common at depths less than 10m. SG is situated in a semi-arid climate where annual evaporation far exceeds precipitation (Noell and Hooper, 2019). Due to excessive evaporation, the gulf is classified as an inverse estuary, attaining salinities that are greater than the surrounding ocean and increase towards the head of the gulf (Nunes and Lennon 1986 in Noell and Hooper, 2019). The salinity gradient resulted, along with the vast areas of tidal flat and mangrove habitat, create ideal conditions for western king prawn development (Noell and Hooper, 2019). Together with the target species, the SGPF fishers are allowed to retain southern calamari (Sepioteuthis australis) and slipper lobster (Balmain bug) (Ibacus spp.) (Noell and Hooper, 2019). Prawn trawling has a low selectivity thus, a large number of non-target species are incidentally caught, each in low quantities (Currie et al, 2007, Burnell et al, 2015). In addition to the impact on non-target species populations, impacts from bottom prawn trawl fishing are often associated with physical disturbance to benthic habitat and ecological impacts to the associated benthic or demersal communities, as well as to the broader ecosystem. Australian fisheries, through the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) (DoE, 1992), are required to adopt a fisheries ecosystem management framework, which provides a holistic and sustainable approach to management of aquatic resources. The SGPF management plan integrates research, monitoring and evaluation in decision-making process to ensure the requirements of the ESD Strategy are met. The management plan was revised in 2019 and a draft of the new plan is available from PIRSA’s website (PIRSA, 2019a). Aside from managing impacts on the target species, the management of the fishery aims to minimise wider ecosystem interactions. The SGPF is managed according to an Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management Framework (EBFM) and it has received the Department of Environment (now the Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment -DAWE) accreditation of operating within the ESD Guidelines (DoE, 2018) and its export approval was extended to 25 July 2025 (DoE, 2015). Trawling is concentrated to a relatively small area of the SG, with a cumulative trawl footprint over 17 years of 27.5% of the allowable fishing area and 19.7% of the SG (Noell, 2017). Within the footprint, only 10% has been trawled at

55 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

high intensities, while 58% has been trawled at moderate intensities and the rest at low intensities (Noell & Hooper 2019). Over the last 40 years, the SGPF has constrained its effort through spatial and temporal closures, vessel size and power, gear configuration, and reductions to the number of licenses. Total annual effort reduced by about 60% between the late-1970s and early 2000s and has remained stable since (Noell & Hopper, 2019). Within SG, trawling is prohibited during daylight hours and in waters less than 10 m in depth. Noell & Hopper, 2019). Changes to the MSC Assessment for Principle 2 Components This reassessment of the SGPF follows the requirements of the new MSC Standard v2.01, while the previous reassessment of the fishery was undertaken according to the MSC Standard v1.3. The main changes to the assessment of the P2 components are: - non-target species are classified as: primary, secondary and Endangered, Threatened and Protected (ETPs) irrespective of the fact that they are retained or not (v1.3 classified non-target species in retained, bycatch and ETPs), - assessment of cumulative impacts from the overlapping MSC UoAs, - requirement for reviews of alternative measures to reduce the mortality of unwanted catch, - assessment of Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs) as ‘main’ habitats. Designation of Non-target Species (P2 species) Primary species are defined as species that are not covered under P1 and where management tools and measures are in place, intended to achieve stock management objectives reflected in either limit or target reference points. In cases where a species would be classified as primary due to the management measures of one jurisdiction but not another that overlaps with the UoA, that species shall still be considered as primary. (MSC, 2018a, p.27). The MSC defines secondary species as species in scope of the MSC standard (fish and shellfish species) that are not managed according to reference points. Secondary species can also include out-of- scope species that are not ETPs, although in Australia, all such species, in general, are protected. Secondary species could in some cases be landed intentionally to be used either as bait or as food for the crew or for other uses, but may also, in some cases, represent incidental catches that are undesired but somewhat unavoidable in the fishery. Given the often-unmanaged status of these species, it is unlikely that reference points for biomass or fishing mortality are in place, as well as a general lack of data availability is expected (MSC, 2018b, p.46). Endangered, Threatened and Protected species are species in the catch that: • are recognised by national ETP legislation; • listed in the binding international agreements given below: 1. Appendix 1 of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), unless it can be shown that the particular stock of the CITES listed species impacted by the UoA under assessment is not endangered. 2. Binding agreements concluded under the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS); and • are classified as ‘out-of-scope’ (amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals) and are listed in the IUCN Red List as vulnerable (VU), endangered (EN) or critically endangered (CE) (MSC, 2018a, p.28). The national legislation Act relevant to ETPs is the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). The requirements of the EPBC Act includes the requirements of all international binding agreements, thus compliance with this act reflects also compliance with the international legislation. The SGPF has been accredited under the EPBC Act Part 13 since 2004, with the latest accreditation in 2018 and the export approval extended to 20 August 2025 (DEE, 2015). A species is considered “main” if: - the catch by the UoA comprises 5% or more by weight of the total catch of all species by the UoA (SA3.4.2.1, MSC, 2018a, p. 33) or - the species is classified as ‘Less resilient’ and the catch of the species by the UoA comprises 2% or more by weight of the total catch of all species by the UoA (SA3.4.2.2, MSC, 2018a, p.33) A species is ‘Less resilient’ if

56 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

- The productivity of the species indicates that it is intrinsically of low resilience, for instance, if determined by the productivity part of a Productivity – Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) that it has a score equivalent to low or medium productivity; or - Even if its intrinsic resilience is high, the existing knowledge of the species indicates that its resilience has been lowered due to anthropogenic or natural changes to its life-history (SA3.4.2.2a, MSC, 2018a, p33). For ETPs, the above definitions of ‘main’ and ‘less resilient’ do not apply because these species are always considered ‘main’. The MSC guidance specifies that, when considering species for designation as ‘main’, temporal trend in catches needs to also be considered and a precautionary approach needs to be used to determine whether species shall count as ‘main’. This should include taking into account the variability of the catch composition over the last five years or fishing seasons (MSC, 2018b, p.57). The MSC guidance also clarifies that, depending on data availability, teams may choose a different length of the time series, but a rationale should be provided in all cases of the method chosen (MSC, 2018b, p.57). Quantitative information on catch composition is available from two comprehensive gulf-wide biodiversity surveys completed in 2007 (Currie et al 2009) and 2013 (Burnell et al 2015). No quantitative information on non-target catch is available from the last five fishing years for the SGPF (current certification period). A comprehensive bycatch survey similar to the 2007 and 2013 surveys has not been completed during the current certification period due to the fact that such surveys are resource intensive and have a series of limitations, and to allow planning for an adequate ecological monitoring program (Noell, 2019). A monitoring system for non-target species through regular (every five years) gulf-wide biodiversity surveys (as it is specified in the SGPF Management Plan 2014-2019) provides no information on inter-annual and intra-annual temporal variability of species composition in the catch (Noell, 2019). Another limitation is that, although the surveys were designed to reflect biodiversity of the gulf, the overall survey catch composition is not be representative of the commercial catch. Over 90% of the commercial effort and catch are from high and moderate intensity trawling areas, while 70% of the sites sampled in 2007 and 50% of those sampled in 2013 were from low intensity trawling areas (see Table 14). The overall catch composition, for both surveys, cannot be used to define ‘main’ species because species that are caught mainly in low trawl intensity areas are overrepresented. For this reason, for the previous MSC certification assessment, only the catch sampled from high and moderate intensity trawl sites was used to identify “main” species. Table 14. Number of survey sites in 2013 (2007) relative to fishing effort intensity in the five-year period preceding the survey – 2008-2012 (2003-2007).

Source: Burnell et al, 2019 The same quantitative data that were used in the previous reassessment was considered adequate to identify ‘main’ species’ for the current reassessment, noting that there is no evidence of increase in risks to non-target species from the SGPF. Even though there is no recent information on each species percentage contribution to the catch, there is a high confidence that the same most abundant species found in the catch from high and moderate intensity trawl sites continue to contribute most to the commercial catch. Burnell et al (2015) have found that the four most abundant species (King Prawn, Blue Swimmer Crab, Skipjack Trevally and Degen’s Leatherjacket) were consistent with those most commonly encountered in surveys over the past two decades, collectively accounting for 68% of the total abundance and 58% of the total biomass in 2013. The two crustaceans (King Prawn -target, and Blue Swimmer Crab) had significantly greater abundance and biomass in moderate-to-heavily trawled areas, whereas the two chordates (Skipjack Trevally and Degen’s Leatherjacket) were distributed homogenously among the three trawl intensities (Burnell et al, 2015). To identify ‘main’ species, quantitative data from the high and moderate intensity sites from the 2013 survey is used (grey column in Table 15). Species where stock assessments and reference points are available, are identified as primary (Table 15). Considering each primary species contribution to total catch of all species by the UoAs, the blue swimmer

57 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020 crab (BSC) meets the definition of “main”. However, in the case where individuals are released alive, the released catch does not contribute to the definition of “main” (SA3.4.3, MSC, 2018a, p.33). The MSC standard requires a post-capture survivability of 90% for a species to be considered released alive when defining main species (MSC, 2018a, p.58).There is evidence from research undertaken in SG and elsewhere that BSCs have very high post-capture survival although it is not≥ clear if > 90% of the discarded BSCs from the SGPF will survive (Box 1), thus BSC is assessed as ‘main’ primary species. The level of assessment for BSC could be downgraded by the final certification report if sufficient evidence of 90% survival is provided. All species that are >2% of the catch have high productivity and are not considered ‘less resilient’. All other primary and secondary species are assessed as ‘minor’. Table 15. Catch composition from 2013 survey (all sites, and high and moderate trawling intensity sites), main management measure in SGPF or overlapping fisheries and the MSC designation according to v1.3 and v2.01 Standard respectively (all species with %contributions >0.5 and all species managed according to reference points or under the EPBC Act). Common Name Latin Name % catch % total Reference MSC designation form all catch from Points (v2.01) sites high and moderate trawling intensity sites Blue Crab (Australian Portunus armatus 29.20 41.50 LRP/TaRP/TrR Primary blue swimmer crabs) P

Western King Prawn Melicertus 17.62 16.18 LRP/TaRP/TrR Target latisulcatus P

Skipjack Trevally Pseudocaranx 6,65 3.83 N/A Secondary wright Degens Leatherjacket Thamnaconus 4.20 2.74 N/A Secondary (Bluefin) degeni Rough Leatherjacket Scobinichthys 2.25 2.49 N/A Secondary granulatus Port Jackson Shark Heterodontus 1.47 1.62 N/A Secondary portusjacksoni Southern Calamary Sepioteuthis 1.47 1.58 TrRP Primary australis Red Mullet (Bluespotted Upeneichthys 2.03 1.51 N/A Secondary Goatfish) vlamingii Prickly Toadfish Contusus 0.74 1.29 N/A Secondary brevicaudus Small Tooth Flounder Pseudorhombus 1.09 1.26 N/A Secondary jenynsii Toothbrush Leatherjacket Acanthaluteres 1.31 1.08 N/A Secondary vittiger Spotted Stinkfish (Spotted Repomucenus 1.13 1.01 N/A Secondary Dragonet) calcaratus Hairy Mussel Trichomya hirsute 0.76 0.99 N/A Secondary Tiger Flathead Neoplatycephalus 0.99 0.95 N/A Secondary richardsoni Striped Perch (Western Pelates 0.68 0.73 N/A Secondary Striped Grunter ) octolineatus Australian Numbfish Hypnos 0.31 0.54 N/A Secondary (Coffin Ray) monopterygium King George Whiting Sillaginodes 0.19 0.15 TrRP Primary punctata Snapper Chrysophrys 0.01 0.02 TrRP Primary (Pagrus) auratus Southern Garfish Hyporhamphus <0.01 0.01 TrRP Primary melanochir Tiger Pipefish Filicampus tigris NA NA EPBC Act ETP

58 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Rhino Pipefish Histiogamphelus NA NA EPBC Act ETP cristatus Brushtail Pipefish Leptoichthys NA NA EPBC Act ETP fistularius Leafy Seadragon Phycodurus eques NA NA EPBC Act ETP Common Seadragon Phyllopteryx NA NA EPBC Act ETP taeniolatus Spotted Pipefish Stigmatopora NA NA EPBC Act ETP argus Knifesnout Pipefish Hypselognathus NA NA EPBC Act ETP rostratus Bigbelly Seahorse Hippocampus NA NA EPBC Act ETP abdominalis Sources: SARDI, 2015 Excel file, Noell, 2019, Beckmann and Hooper, 2019, Noell and Hooper, 2019, Steer et al, 2020 Box 1. Blue swimmer crab post-capture survival Most discarded crabs are expected to survive, this being the rationale on which retaining ban for sub-legal sized crabs and berried females is based in trawl fisheries that retain BSC (e.g. Shark Bay prawn fishery). All SGPF vessels use an additional large mesh “crab bag” inside the codend. The crab bag retains BSC (and other megafauna that passes through the grid) preventing them to reach the codend and be crushed and reducing the risk of physical damage to prawns. The crab bag was found to facilitate rapid discarding of BSC and to increase the chance of survival for the discarded crabs (Noell et al, 2018). After each shot, the cod end is emptied immediately into a hopper -sorting system, which immerses the catch in seawater prior to sorting. As the catch is dumped on the sorting tray, the content of the crab bag is divided from prawns and other bycatch species by separation racks which are then tilted, and the crabs and other megafauna returned immediately to the sea. This catch separation strategy reduces the time bycatch is out of the sea, which also improves the prospects of bycatch survival and improves prawn quality by reducing crushing (Mayfield et al, 2014, Ocean Watch, 2004). Lawrence and Rose reviewed the literature on bycatch post-capture survival in order to assess the effectiveness of the hopper systems that are used in Australian trawl prawn fisheries (Lawrence and Rose, 2004). They found that crustaceans generally survive trawling and exposure on conventional sorting trays. Crabs, being more robust, were found to have 100% and 86% survival rates in the Torres Strait and Moreton Bay respectively, with soft, newly moulted crabs being more likely to die (Laurence and Rose, 2004). The studies mentioned by Lawrence and Rose (2004) are the ones presented in Wassenberg and Hill (1989) and Hill and Wassenberg (1990). The findings of the former study have shown that in the catch from trawls of 60min duration, very few P. pelagicus were soft-shelled, newly moulted crabs that did not survive (less than 1%) but only about a half of the crabs caught had no physical damage (including damage from causes other than trawling). All crabs that were alive when brought on board survived 30 min exposure on deck. 86% survived after 8h on deck in tanks filled with sea water (Wassenberg and Hill, 1989). The latter study has shown that portunid crabs were the most robust crustaceans in prawn trawl catch and all survived after 12 hours of being returned to sea (30 minutes trawl and 10 minutes deck exposure, no hoppers) (Hill and Wassenberg, 1999). Experiments of post-capture stress and post-capture survival undertaken in SGPF revealed that post-capture death of BSCs, when occurred, was almost exclusively due to holes in the carapace or in the retained limbs, while loss of limbs was not usually associated with mortality. Holes in carapace were found only in crabs that were allowed to interact before discarding, to mimic on-deck sorting without hoppers and separation racks. No holes in carapace were produced during trawling. BSC caught in prawn trawls may suffer some mild physiological stress. Trawl capture generally resulted in higher hemolymph lactate and lower pH than the baseline level. Muscle energy balance was generally disrupted in trawl-caught crabs and post-capture damage and crab death increased as post-capture time increased. All trawl caught blue swimmer crabs were alive when brought on board during these experiments. Crabs that were allowed to interact with each other on deck had a lower survival rate after three days at sea in cages (77.8% after 25 min interaction, 55.6% after 40 min interaction) than the ones that did not interact (88.9%, Svane et al., 2007). Although BSC caught in SGPF are unlikely to have time to interact before discarded, experimental results suggest that, even though BSC are released alive, some might suffer physical damage from trawl capture or/and physiological stress causing mortality later (Thomas and Chick, 2007). Nevertheless, the longer time after release, the more difficult it is to attribute that mortality to prawn trawling.

Cumulative Impacts from MSC Fisheries and Harmonisation

59 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

To ensure that the cumulative impact of all MSC fisheries is within sustainable limits, the assessment of UoAs against the MSC Fisheries Standard v2.0 considers the combined impact of itself and other overlapping UoAs. This determination includes other UoAs assessed against earlier versions of the CR (e.g., v1.3). For P2 primary species, the CAB evaluates whether the cumulative impact of overlapping MSC UoAs hinders the recovery of ‘main’ primary species. For secondary species, cumulative impacts only need to be considered in cases where two or more UoAs have ‘main’ catches that are ‘considerable’, defined as a species being 10% or more or the total catch. For ETP species, the combined impacts of MSC UoAs needs to be evaluated, but only in cases where either national and/or international requirements set catch limits for ETP species. All of the requirements for cumulative impacts and harmonisation for species are applicable to their respective Outcome PIs. For habitats, in contrast, cumulative impacts are evaluated in the management PI (2.4.2). The requirements here aim to ensure that vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) are managed such that the impact of all MSC UoAs does not cause serious and irreversible harm to VMEs. No VMEs were identified within the managed area. Currently, the only overlapping fishery in SG that is MSC certified is the SA Sardine Fishery (SASF, Banks et al, 2018) which is a pelagic fishery. The available evidence shows that, except for marine mammals (ETPs), none of the species the SASF catches/interacts with (Banks et al, 2018), are likely to be ‘main’ in the SGPF (SARDI, 2015, Excel file). A single dolphin interaction has been recorded in 2016/17, the first cetacean interaction in the SGPF’s history (Mackay, 2018). Also, one seal interaction was recorded in 2010/11, with the seal being released alive. Currently, no national or international requirements set limits for ETP in Australia and cumulative impacts and harmonisation do not need to be scored. The SASF does not impact on benthic habitats because it is a pelagic fishery (Banks et al, 2018), thus there are no cumulative impacts on benthic habitats. Approach to Scoring Principle 2 PIs Section 7.17 of the MSC Fishery Certification Process v2.1 was applied to score each PI: • Each PI was assessed against each of the scoring issues at the SG60 level. If one or more of the SG60 scoring issues is not met, the UoA fails, and no further scoring is required for the PI. • If all the SG60 scoring issues are met, the PI must achieve at least a 60 score, and each of the scoring issues is assessed at the SG80 level. • If not all the SG80 scoring issues are met, the PI is given an intermediate score (65, 70 or 75) reflecting overall performance against the different SG80 scoring issues:

o 70 where performance against the scoring issues is mid-way between SG60 and SG80 (some scoring issues are fully met, and some are not fully met). o 75 when performance against the scoring issues is almost at SG80 (most scoring issues are fully met, but a few are not fully met). o 65 when performance against the scoring issues is slightly above SG60 (a few scoring issues are fully met, but most are not fully met).

• If 1 or more of the SG80 scoring issues is not met, the PI is assigned a condition (or conditions). • If all the SG80 scoring issues are met, the PI must achieve at least an 80 score, and each of the scoring issues is assessed at the SG100 level. • If not all the SG100 scoring issues are met, the PI is given an intermediate score (85, 90 or 95) reflecting overall performance against the different SG100 scoring issues:

o 90 where performance against the scoring issues is mid-way between SG80 and SG100 (some scoring issues are fully met, and some are not fully met). o 95 when performance against the scoring issues is almost at SG100 (most scoring issues are fully met, but a few are not fully met). o 85 when performance against the scoring issues is slightly above SG80 (a few scoring issues are fully met, but most are not fully met).

• If all the SG100 scoring issues are met, the PI shall be given a 100 score. (MSC, 2018c, p.28)

60 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Where there are multiple scoring elements (i.e. multiple species or habitats assessed), the overall score for the PI is determined according to the rules provided in MSC Fishery Certification Process v2.1, Table 4 (MSC, 2018c, p28). 8.3.2 Primary Species Outcome (PI 2.1.1) Main Primary Species The Outcome PI for primary species is scored assessing the status of their stocks against the Point of Recruitment Impairment (PRI). For an unconditional pass, main primary species should be “highly likely” above PRI, where “highly likely” corresponds to an 80% probability (MSC, 2018a, p31, Table SA9). The PRI is defined as the level below which recruitment may be impaired (MSC, 2018b, p.19). In the absence of precise analytical estimates for this level, proxies can be used (e.g. in general, PRI = 20%B0 = ½ BMSY; BMSY=40%B0, MSC, 2018b, p.21). Other proxies that can be used are fishing mortality and any pre-recruitment indices and limit reference points that are used in stock assessments, if they are scientifically derived and justifiable (MSC, 2018b, p22). For a higher MSC score, a ‘high degree of certainty’ (90% probability) that the stock is above the PRI and fluctuating around a level consistent with MSY is required (MSC, 2018a, p31, Table SA9. Blue Swimmer Crab (main primary) Blue Swimmer Crabs (Portunus armatus) (BSC) are distributed throughout the coastal waters of the tropical regions of the western Indian Ocean and the eastern Pacific (Kailola et al. 1993 in PIRSA, 2019b). BSCs are found throughout South Australian waters but the majority of the stock inhabits the warmer shallow waters of Gulf St Vincent (GCV) and SG (PIRSA, 2019b). The species occurs in a wide range of algal and seagrass habitats and on both sandy and muddy substrata, from the intertidal zone to at least fifty metres of depth (PIRSA, 2019b). In coastal waters, smaller crabs are found in shallow waters, while adults are found in comparatively deeper waters. Juvenile crabs spend the first eight to twelve months of their lives in mangrove creeks and mud flats until they attain a size of 80 to 100 mm carapace width (PIRSA, 2019b). The Blue Swimmer Crab populations within SG, GSV and the West Coast regions of South Australia are believed to represent separate sub-populations with a limited gene flow. The level of migration between these populations is probably limited and likely to be determined by local factors (PIRSA, 2019b). Male and female P. armatus generally reach sexual maturity at a size of 70 to 90 mm in carapace width, when they are approximately one year old. The spawning season lasts for 3 to 4 months over the summer/autumn period. The duration of the growing season varies among individuals because those settling in early summer have a longer growing season than those settling in mid-to-late summer. In South Australian waters, crabs close to the minimum legal-size (110 mm) are approximately 14 to 18 months old, are sexually mature with females having produced at least two batches of eggs within one season (PIRSA, 2019b). SGPF’s Impact on BSC The BSC is a highly mobile and aggressive crab that grows rapidly and reaches maturity in one year (Thomas & Chick, 2007). Juvenile BSC are not susceptible to be caught in prawn trawl due to their preference for shallow and mangrove habitats. Although adults BSCs are good swimmers, it is unlikely that they are able to escape the trawl net. Crabs are swept to the crab bag/cod end of the net or they may become entangled in the net on contact (Thomas & Chick, 2007). Bycatch surveys undertaken for the SGPF found that BSCs were distributed in high abundance and biomass in North, Mid-North and Central regions of SG but absent in the South region. There were no significant differences in the abundances and biomasses of this species between 2013 and 2007 surveys. However, BSCs distribution in the SG was positively correlated to fishing effort history (Currie et al., 2009, Burnell et al., 2015). The findings of Svane et al. (2007) on the correlations between BSC abundance and trawl hours and benthos biomass were mixed. The observed patterns of abundance suggested that habitat affects abundance, but the strongest correlation was with trawl hours (Svane et al., 2007). Blue swimmer crabs are important scavengers, feeding on discards (Svane et al., 2007), and this explains the maintaining of the positive correlation with trawl intensity. In consequence, the SGPF might have a favourable effect on the main primary’s species abundance. BSC have high chances to survive trawl capture and most discarded individuals are expected to survive, although some may suffer injuries and be susceptible to predation (see Box 1). BSC Stock Status

61 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

BSCs are targeted in the South Australian (SA) Blue Crab Fishery (BCF) and are managed according to target, limit and trigger reference points. The species is also retained in the SA Marine Scalefish Fishery (MSF). The SGPF is not allowed to retain any BSCs. The latest stock status information shows that SG stock of BSC is sustainable (Beckmann and Hooper, 2019). Information from the most recent stock assessment of BSC in the BCF is summarised below. Legal-sized BSC CPUE, measured during the Fishery Independent Surveys (FIS), is the primary biological performance indicator (PI) to determine BSC stock status. This is used as an index of relative biomass and fishing mortality. Since 2002, a comprehensive FIS program has been conducted to contribute towards the assessment of the status of the BSC stock in SG and GSV. The methods used to collect the data have remained relatively consistent with the exception of changes to the survey program in recent years (Beckmann and Hooper, 2019). In addition, secondary PIs such as FIS pre-recruitment CPUE and commercial CPUE data-series information can be used as proxies for stock status. Commercial Catch Following the introduction of annual TACC setting in 1996/97, CPUE remained below 370 kg/boat-day until 2006/07, before peaking at 616 kg/boat-day in 2010/11. Since 2012/13, CPUE has remained at or below 570 kg/boat-day. In 2017/18 CPUE was 569 kg/boat-day and this was above the 10-year mean (548 ± 16 kg/boat day) (Beckmann and Hooper, 2019). Daily potlift CPUE ranged from 2.4 kg/potlift in 1998/99 to 4.4 kg/potlift in 2011/12. Since 2011/12, CPUE has remained relatively stable (range: 3.6–4.4 kg/potlift). In 2017/18, CPUE was 4.1 kg/potlift, which was an 8% increase compared to 2016/17 (3.8 kg/potlift) and the highest value since 2013/14 (4.0 kg/potlift) (Beckmann and Hooper, 2019).

62 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 12. Fishery-dependent outputs for the Spencer Gulf zone of the Blue Crab Fishery. (a) Trends in total catch (t) for pot fishing (PF) and Marine Scalefish Fishery (MSF) including total allowable commercial catch (TACC) limit; (b) total effort (boat days) for PF and MSF sector; (c) total effort from first and second potlifts for PF sector; and (d) catch per unit effort (CPUE) expressed per day (kg.boat day-1) and per potlift (kg.potlift-1) for the PF sector.

Fishery-Independent Surveys FIS are conducted using BCF vessels, skippers and crews, with independent observers placed on each vessel. The primary aim of the FIS is to determine the relative abundance and size composition of BSC in SG and GSV. While there has been some inter-annual variability in the timing of the FIS, they have been generally undertaken during June and July (winter) in both gulfs since 2002 (Beckmann & Hooper, 2019). In order to reduce the time- lag between the FIS and beginning of the TACC year, in recent years, sampling period was moved from June/July to March/April (Beckmann & Hooper, 2019). Consistent with the South Australian fisheries harvest strategy policy developed by PIRSA, limit, target and trigger reference points (RPs) have been developed to guide decision making process, and guide determination of stock status consistent with the guidelines and the national reporting framework for stock status classification system described in

63 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Stewardson et al. (2018 in PIRSA, 2019b). The RPs have been developed based on analysis of catch rate data from March/April FIS compared to historical catch rate data from June/July FIS across 60 sites in each gulf (PIRSA, 2019b). Overall, stock sustainability was reflected in the levels of commercial CPUE, which have remained relatively stable for at least the past eight seasons. In addition, trends in FIS data indicate that FIS CPUE of legal-size crabs has been above the trigger RP (TrRP) since 2006 (Figure 13). During 2016 and 2018, the proportion of legal-size male crabs was reduced and overall legal-size CPUE declined (but still above TrRP). Pre-recruit data from the FIS indicates that since 2010, pre-recruit FIS CPUE has remained relatively high (Beckmann & Hooper, 2019).

Figure 13. Key fishery-independent outputs used to assess the status of the Spencer Gulf. Fishery- independent (FIS) catch per unit effort (CPUE) by (a) weight of legal- size crabs (kg.potlift-1) and (b) weight of pre-recruit crabs (kg.potlift-1). Historical sites refer to the 52 sites which have not changed since 2003 (excludes new sites) and Harvest Strategy sites refer to the subset of 60 sites sampled since 2008 (includes new sites). Green, yellow and red lines represent the target, limit and trigger reference points identified in the Harvest Strategy (see Table 1.2). Error bars, standard error. Surveys were not conducted in 2011, 2013 or 2015. Source: Beckmann & Hooper, 2019). Although precise analytical estimates of MSY are not available, most of the values obtained for the FIS CPUE of legal size BSC in the most recent 10-year period were above target RP (TaRP) and all were above TrRP (Figure 13), which suggest that the stock is maintained at a highly productive level consistent with MSY. This is supported by a stable trend in the commercial catch and CPUE (Figure 12). The available information on the BSC stock status qualitatively meets the probability level required for a ‘high degree of certainty’ that the stock is above PRI. Minor Primary Species There are no requirements for minor primary species at scoring guideposts (SG) 60 and 80. At SG100, the requirement is that the stocks are highly likely to be above PRI. “Highly likely”, for primary species, means that there is a probability 64 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

higher than 80% that the stocks are above PRI (for main primary species this probability is required at SG80) (MSC, 2018a, p.31). Southern Calamari Southern Calamari (Sepioteuthis australis) is targeted by the SA commercial multispecies, multi-gear and multi-sectoral Marine Scalefish Fishery (MSF). The most recent assessment of southern calamari was published in 2020 and used data to the end of 2018 (Steer et al. 2020). The SA stock of southern calamari was classified as sustainable. The SGPF’s commercial allocation is 7.47% of the TACC, with an allowance up to 11.20% (Steer et al, 2020). At least since 2013, the catch of southern calamari landed by the SGPF did not exceed its allocation. However, according to independent surveys data, the total catch of calamari in the SGPF might be one order of magnitude higher (Roberts and Steer, 2010). Nevertheless, southern calamari stock assessment shows that the species is highly likely to be above PRI. Consistent catches from all fisheries combined and increased CPUEs since early 2000’s confirm that the stock is maintain at a highly productive level (Steer et al, 2020). King George Whiting King George Whiting (Sillaginodes punctata) is an important species that is heavily targeted by both the commercial and recreational sectors (Steer et al. 2018a). It is also retained in the Northern Zone and Southern Zone Rock Lobster Fisheries (NZRLF, SZRLF). SG stock of King George whiting was classified as sustainable at the most recent stock assessment (Steer et al, 2020). King George whiting is not retained in the SGPF. The estimated catch from this species in the SGPF is less than 10% of total catch of the species (estimated from % data, SARDI, 2015, excel file). From 2014 to 2018, the MSF’s total catch from this stock varied around 100 t/yr. King George whiting stock is highly likely to be above PRI and if the stock would fall below PRI, the UoA would not hinder its recovery. Snapper Snapper (Chrysophrys (Pagrus) auratus) is a large, long-lived, demersal finfish species that is broadly distributed throughout the Indo-Pacific region including Australia. In Australia, the species extensive distribution includes the coastal waters of the southern two-thirds of the continental mainland as well as northern Tasmania (Kailola et al. 1993 in Fowler et al, 2019). Throughout this distribution, Snapper occupy a diversity of habitats from shallow bays and estuaries to the edge of the continental shelf across a depth range of at least 200 m. The stock structure for Snapper in Australian waters is complex, as there is considerable variation in the spatial scales over which populations are divisible into separate stocks (Fowler et al. 2019). A recent otolith chemistry study has indicated that the South Australian population involves three stocks, with SG snapper population belonging to the Spencer Gulf / West Coast Stock (SG/WCS) (Fowler et al, 2019). Snapper is a primary target species of the commercial and recreational sectors of South Australia. Licence holders from four different commercial fisheries have access to the fishery, i.e. the MSF, the NZRLF and SZRLF, and the Lakes and Coorong Fishery (LCF) (Fowler et al, 2019). Based on the most recent recreational fishery survey, the relative contributions to total catch by the commercial and recreational sectors were 62% and 38%, respectively (Giri and Hall 2015, Fowler et al. 2016b in Fowler et al, 2019). Fishery-dependent and fishery-independent sources of information were used for the latest stock assessment (Fowler et al, 2019). Fishery-dependent data involved commercial fishery statistics; recreational fishery data; and population size and age structures determined through market sampling. Fishery-independent data were obtained as estimates of spawning biomass for two regional populations (SG and GSV) using the daily egg production method (DEPM) that was undertaken in December 2018 (Fowler et al, 2019). Annual catches from the SG/WCS have varied cyclically with peaks in 1990, 2001 and 2007. The latter year produced the highest catch of 616.6 t (Figure 4-3). From 2007 to 2013, annual catches fell considerably, and have subsequently remained relatively stable at a low level. The lowest catch of 66.3 t was taken in 2016, which increased marginally to 77.9 t in 2017 before dropping back to 73.5 t in 2018. It was concluded that the SG/WCS is ‘depleted’ (Fowler et al. 2019). These suggest that snapper stock from SG is below PRI. Prawn trawling is not undertaken near the rocky reef or hard substrate areas where snapper aggregate to spawn and snapper bycatch in the SGPF is negligible (PIRSA, 2019e). SGPF’s catch of snapper is approximately 0.02% (about 3t/year estimated from % data from SARDI, 2015- excel file). The SGPF catches incidentally much less than 30% of the total catch from snapper stock and cannot hinder its recovery. Southern garfish Southern garfish (Hyporhamphus melanochir) are distributed from Shark Bay in Western Australia, along the southern coast of Australia including Tasmanian waters, and as far east as Eden in New South Wales (Kailola 1993, Noell and

65 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Ye 2008). The species forms schools in sheltered bays and shallow, inshore, marine waters to depths of ~20 m. They are particularly abundant throughout the gulf regions of South Australia (Steer et al, 2020). At least five regional divisions of the stock were identified. Two of these were clearly defined in SG as they exhibited negligible levels of inter-regional mixing: Northern Spencer Gulf (NSG) and Southern Spencer Gulf (SSG) (Steer et al, 2020). Southern garfish is a significant inshore fishery species of southern Australia. This species is also a popular target amongst South Australian recreational anglers (Jones 2009 in Steer et al, 2020). In South Australia, licence holders from four different commercial fisheries have access to Southern Garfish: MSF, NZRLF, SZRLF and LCF. The southern garfish fishery is principally located in SG and GSV and managed as part of the multi-species, multi-gear MSF through a series of input and output controls (Steer et al, 2020). The stock assessment model used for southern garfish estimates biological performance indicators: fishable biomass, egg production, recruitment and harvest fraction (i.e. exploitation rate) (Steer et al, 2020). The latest stock status classification for the NSG stock was ‘recovering’ while for the SSG stock, ‘sustainable’. The SGPF’s trawl footprint mostly overlaps with the NSG garfish stock and in a lesser extent with the SSG stock. The contribution of the southern garfish to the SGPF catch was estimated at 0.01% of total catch, based on high and moderate intensity survey sites catch (SARDI, 2015, excel file). This would correspond to less than 2t/year while the recent total catch from the NSG stock approached 100t (Steer et al, 2020). The marginal impact of the SGPF on garfish stocks is very low and it cannot hinder the recovery of the stocks. 8.3.3 Primary Species Management (PI 2.1.2) The MSC requires that at least ‘measures’ are in place for a score of 60, a ‘partial strategy’ for a score of 80 and a ‘strategy’ for a score of 100. At SG60 and SG80, the requirements refer only to “main” species. Measures are actions or tools in place that either explicitly manage impacts on the component or indirectly contribute to management of the component under assessment having been designed to manage impacts elsewhere. A partial strategy represents a cohesive arrangement which may comprise one or more measures, an understanding of how it/they work to achieve an outcome and an awareness of the need to change the measures should they cease to be effective. It may not have been designed to manage the impact on that component specifically. A strategy represents a cohesive and strategic arrangement which may comprise one or more measures, an understanding of how it/they work to achieve an outcome, and which should be designed to manage impact on that component specifically. A strategy needs to be appropriate to the scale, intensity and cultural context of the fishery and should contain mechanisms for the modification of fishing practices in the light of the identification of unacceptable impacts. (MSC, 2018a, p.29). Goal 3 of the current SGPF Management Plan (PIRSA, 2014) relates to the management of the fishery using an Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) approach. The objectives of this management plan to achieve this goal are: • Fishery impacts on by-catch and by-product species are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on threatened, endangered and protected species (TEPS) are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on benthic habitat and associated species communities are sustainable. Management strategies implemented to achieve this goal are: • Controls on fishing effort. • Closed areas. • Promoting activities that reduce the impacts of fishing activity (CAB’s note- for example closing areas with high abundance of juveniles from one of the primary species, and best practice handling of discarded fish). The management plan has been updated and the new SGPF Draft Management Plan 2019–2029 is currently in public consultation phase). The new plan includes similar long-term management goals and objectives referring to the protection of non-target species. The new management plan lists the following measures to minimise the incidental catch: • Control fishing effort through, restriction on the number of licences (mesh size and headline length restrictions); limits on the amount of gear used in the fishery, restrictions on horsepower.

66 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

• Closed areas maintained e.g. waters <10m. • Risks to by-catch and by-product species monitored through surveys and assessed through ESD risk assessment • Closed areas through co- management arrangements promoted. • Promote investigation into technology to reduce impacts of fishing activity (technology for reducing impacts of fishing activity on by-catch species sustainability are adopted where appropriate). • Industry codes of practice for by- catch species where available. • Long term by-catch reporting and monitoring (ESD risk assessment report will be reviewed within the lifetime of the plan which is ten years). (PIRSA, 2019a). The management plan has been developed to be consistent with other fisheries management plans including the ‘Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Marine Scalefish Fishery’ (PIRSA, 2013) (hereafter referred to as the MSF management plan) ensuring primary species management is consistent. SGPF’s performance and the risk to target and non-target species, habitats and ecosystem are assessed regularly through Ecological Sustainable Development (ESD) Risk Assessments (or Ecological Risk Assessments -ERAs). The results are reported to the relevant Commonwealth Authority as part of the requirements for export approval and management plan accreditation under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) Part 13 (PIRSA, 2014a). The export approval for the SGPF is valid until 25 July 2025 (DoE, 2015). To achieve the objectives stated in the Management Plan (PIRSA, 2014), primary species management strategy includes specific measures and measures that might not have been specifically designed to manage primary species but work together to mitigate the impact on this component. The main strategy to minimise impact on incidental catch in the SGPF has emphasised harvest control through temporal and spatial measures through near real-time decisions making by the Committee-at-Sea, aiming to avoid bycatch (Banks et al, 2011). Licence holders have agreed to close off areas in the Spencer Gulf to contribute to the protection of various benthic habitats and species (including commercial species that are primary). An example is the closure at Corny Point that was mainly implemented due to high abundance of incidental catch, but mainly King George whiting. Self-imposed closures policy can be considered a measure designed to manage primary species among other components. However, this measure will not work for all primary species, and especially for the main primary species, BSC, which have a distribution that positively correlates with fishing intensity. . Blue Swimmer Crabs

The main measure to manage the impact of the SGPF on BSC is the rapid handling and discarding, assuming that most of discarded individuals will survive. The crab bag and hopper sorting system ensure prompt separation and discarding of the crabs. BSC catch in the SGPF is not regularly recorded during commercial fishing operations, although this is recorded during independent prawn stock assessment surveys (Trott, 2019).

Southern Calamari Southern calamari is the only primary species the SGPF is allowed to retain. The MSF and recreational fisheries are the highest contributors to the SA catch of adult southern calamari. However, prawn fisheries land about 10% of the total commercial landings of the species, mainly sub-adult (Steer et al, 2020). The species is managed by PIRSA according to TrRP in order to maintain the sustainability of the stock, which is regularly assessed (e.g. Steer et al, 2020). The only species-specific measure in the SGPF is the requirement for compliance with the southern calamari resource allocation, although this measure might not have significant benefits for the species, considering that discarded catch is much higher and not recorded. There are no other species-specific measures for southern calamari management in the SGPF, although the species has been subject of a comprehensive research study showing that the species has low vulnerability at the levels of fishing at the time of the study. The authors suggested that additional management measures in the SGPF would unlikely result in improving the sustainable harvest of this species (Roberts and Steer, 2010). Considering that there was no increase in the level of fishing since the research study, southern calamari is still considered to have low vulnerability. This is demonstrated by the consistent catches in the SGPF and other fisheries, and sustainable stock levels (Steer et al, 2020). The PSA risk to southern calamari was ranked as ‘high’ at the latest (2019) and the previous (2013) risk assessments due to the high susceptibility scores (i.e. availability, encounterability and post-capture mortality) for the species (PIRSA, 2014b, Noell and Beckmann, 2019). In 2013, the stakeholder panel agreed that the SGPF does not impact the

67 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

sustainability of the species and no further management strategies are required (PIRSA, 2014b). A full ERA report from the 2019 workshop is not yet available, although there is no evidence of risk increase since the previous assessment. Other minor primary species The SGPF incidentally catches very low quantities of the other identified primary species, i.e. snapper, southern garfish and King George Whiting. These species are finfish species of commercial and recreational interest managed by PIRSA and the status of the stocks is assessed regularly (e.g. Steer et al 2020). The SGPF is not allowed to retain any finfish species. In addition to non-retention, the SGPF has to comply with the rules imposed by PIRSA for the management and protection of these primary species, e.g. closed areas. In 2019 the SGPF received a Ministerial exemption from fishing ban in snapper closures (four closures in SG), and the fleet was allowed to fish within snapper closures with the condition that if one snapper is caught, the whole fleet needs to cease fishing in the area and the Coordinator-at-Sea to define a closure area no less than 0.5 nautical miles from the location the snapper was caught (PIRSA, 2019d, 2019e). SGPF fishers were also required to record the number of any snapper incidentally caught (inside or outside closures) as well as the location of the trawl shot and report this information to the Coordinator-at-Sea of the SGWCPFA (PIRSA, 2019d). All primary species were assessed at ERAs, where the appropriateness of the existing management and the need for additional measures are is discussed. The SGPF’s risk to garfish was ranked as “low” while the risk to King George whiting and snapper was ranked as ‘high’ due to high susceptibility scores. The stakeholder panel workshop in 2013 noted that snapper and King George Whiting made up a small component of the trawl bycatch. Industry indicated that juveniles of these two species were mostly caught around nursery grounds in the northern gulf and are, therefore, protected by the Broughton and Wardang fishery closures. The stakeholder panel agreed that the SGPF does not impact the sustainability of the species and no further management strategies were required (PIRSA, 2014b). Also, Corny Point area was closed by the prawn industry specifically for the protection of King George whiting (SGWCPFA, 2017). From 2020, SG, GSV and West Coast are closed to commercial snapper fishing until 2023 (https://pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/snapper_management_review_2019) while the SGPF’s catch of snapper is very low and not considered to hinder the recovery of the stocks. In addition, PIRSA is in the process of reducing the number of licenses in the MSF to 50% which will lower the overall fishing pressure on the stocks of the species that are minor primary in SGPF. Despite the low catch in the fishery, the SGWCPFA has decided to undertake trials for fisheye BRD that would allow finfish to escape (SGWCPFA, 2020). The methods tested in 2020 include variations to the fisheye (number of meshes from the cod-end and/or impact of using two fisheyes) and using lights on the footline as in the method described by Hannah et al, 2015. The results from these trials were not available at the time of writing the ACDR. General measures that benefit all primary species include: Limited entry Fishing effort is controlled by restricting the number of operators. 39 licenses are allowed in SGPF. Short trawl duration The duration of trawl shots is generally around 30 – 50 minutes (compared to other Australian prawn trawl fisheries where a trawl shot can be up to 4 hours – Ocean Watch, 2004), after which the catch is emptied into a hopper-conveyor system for sorting, grading and packing. The short shots increase the chance of survival for all non-target species catch that is subsequently discarded. Gear Net size and mesh are controlled through regulation, although mesh size alone has low selectivity due to the small size of the target prawns. The vessels in the SGPF are restricted to towing twin nets. Because of the size and headline of the trawls (a maximum 29.26 m in total or 14.63 m per net), the trawls are relatively light. Some distinguishing features from this fishery, which facilitate light bottom trawling and reduction in incidental catch are:

• The slight angle of the trawl boards, too acute angle would result in heavier contact with the sea bottom; • The position of the headline rope is towed in a position that is in front of the footline; • There is sufficient space between the drop chain and the footrope to allow for some escapement of species (Banks et al 2016).

68 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

All commercial trawl nets use a large size net ‘crab bags’ within the codend which retains crabs and other macrofauna. This prevents small sized bycatch from being crushed and enable large bycatch to be immediately returned to the marine environment, thereby likely improving the survival rates of the majority of species, particularly crabs, large fish, rays and sharks (Mayfield, et al., 2014). Hoppers The hopper system enables the total catch to be maintained in a ‘wet well’ with continuous water flow that efficiently separates bycatch from prawns. This system is supported by the use of ‘crab bags’ which contain the macrofaunal bycatch. Collectively, these (i) prevent small bycatch species from being crushed; and (ii) enable the larger bycatch to be immediately returned to the marine environment, thereby likely improving the survival rates of the majority of species, particularly crabs, large fish, rays and sharks (Mayfield, et al., 2014). After each shot, the cod end is emptied immediately into the hopper, which immerses the catch in seawater prior to sorting. As the catch is dumped on the sorting tray, the content of the crab bag is divided from prawns and other bycatch species by separation racks. In addition to improving the quality of the product, this catch separation strategy reduces the time non-target species are out of the sea, which also improve the prospects of their survival (Mayfield et al, 2014). Bycatch Reduction Device (BRD) Trials Although BRDs have not been implemented in the SGPF, the Industry participates in bycatch reduction workshops to keep up-to-date with bycatch reduction best-practices (e.g. Low Impact Fuel Efficient Trawls – LIFE workshop, in 2018) and a number of BRDs have been periodically trialled. BRD trial include Nordmøre grids (Kennelly and Broadhurst, 2014, Noell et al, 2017), ‘wok’ shaped grids (Dixon et al., 2014) and different mesh configurations (i.e. T90) (Dixon et al., 2014a). While in most instances these are yet to satisfy all of the pre-trial performance indicators for adoption identified by the fishery (Dixon et al., 2014a, Clark and Lukin, 2019), collaborative research between SGPF and SARDI Aquatic Sciences is ongoing (Burnell et al., 2015, SGWCPFA, 2019b). There is a commitment to continue research for alternative measures to reduce BSC catch (PIRSA, 2019a). Temporal closures Trawling is undertaken at restricted periods during the dark of the moon. Fishing takes place only at limited periods (i.e. generally no more than 14 nights per month) in the months of November and March fishing lasts for approximately 7 nights, while during December, April, May and June trips generally last for 10-12 nights. The fishery is closed for the rest of the year (PIRSA, 2014a). Spatial closures Waters with depths less than 10 meters are closed to trawling (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). In addition, there are three industry self-imposed permanent closures. The Point Lowly and Wardang closures were implemented to protect sensitive benthic habitats while the Broughton closure was implemented to protect juvenile and spawning marine scale species (SGWCPFA, 2017). The self-imposed closures are implemented through each fishing strategy and recorded through the fishing and gazette notices (SGWCPFA, 2017). A fourth self-imposed closure is the Corny Point which has been identified to limit the fishery’s impact on spawning King George whiting. Corny Point area is closed until further notice (SGWCPFA, 2017). The self-imposed closures are complemented with marine parks, which also protect various habitats that are important for primary species stocks (established 2014). At-Sea Decision Making The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing, in accordance with the fishing strategy established by the Management Committee, such as move-on rules (e.g. due to a high concentration of a transient species, Simon Clarke pers comm) or closures when high catches of species of interest are recorded. These decisions require authorisation of the SGWCPFA Coordinator-at-Sea. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a) Ecological Risk Assessments (ERAs) The risk to primary species from the SGPF is regularly assessed, with the latest risk assessment having been undertaken in 2019 (a draft summary report of the results is available – Noell and Beckmann, 2019). All primary species were assessed using a Productivity- Susceptibility Assessment (level 2 of the Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing – ERAEF – Hobday et al, 2007). The PSA method applied is more precautionary than the MSC PSA requirements (part of the MSC Risk Based Framework). When ranking the ‘availability’ score (or areal overlap of the species range with the trawl footprint), only the species ranges in SG were considered, and this resulted in many false

69 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

positive ‘high risk’ scores for the abundant species that have extensive ranges around Australia and further. A full report from the recent PIRSA’s ERA workshop for the SGPF is not yet available, although the same approach was used for the previous ERA in 2013 (PIRSA, 2014b) where the stakeholder panel has agreed that the SGPF did not pose high risk to the species assessed here as primary and no additional management measures were required. There is no evidence that the risk posed by the SGPF to these species has increase since the previous ERA.

Improved data collection on primary species catch will be adopted as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program (EMP) that was implemented in 2020. The implementation of the EMP was agreed through an MoU between PIRSA/SARDI and SGWCPFA (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019).

Overall, there is a strategy at least for main primary species and a partial strategy for minor primary species. It represents a cohesive and strategic arrangement which comprises specific and non-specific measures and there is an understanding of how they work together to ensure the SGPF does not affect sustainability of primary species stocks. Such understanding is derived from research and empirical evidence from daily fishing operations. There are mechanisms for the modification of fishing practices in the light of the identification of unacceptable impacts, through the Committee- at-Sea and ERAs.

Primary Species Management Strategy Evaluation and Implementation Evidence that the strategy is working can be derived from the regular stock assessment of the primary species that show the species stock are sustainable (BSC, southern calamari, King George whiting, SSG stock of garfish) or recovering (NSG stock of garfish) while for those below PRI, the catch is very low and the SGPF will not hinder recovery. To ensure strategies are implemented successfully performance indicators are specified in the SGPF management plan (mainly ERAs outcomes) and the performance is reported regularly to the Commonwealth Department of Environment (now the Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment -DAWE), as part of the ESD accreditation requirements. The co-management arrangements for the SGPF are designed to achieve successful implementation of the strategy for non-target species management. Fishing strategies, including bycatch management strategies, are developed, according to the management plan, by the SGWCPFA Management Committee (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing, in accordance with the fishing strategy established by the Management Committee, such as move-on rules or closures when high catches of species of interest are recorded. These decisions require authorisation of the SGWCPFA Coordinator-at-Sea for the fishing to take place. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture runs a compliance program that has dual objectives to: i) maximise voluntary compliance with fisheries rules and ii) create effective deterrence to breaching fisheries rules. Voluntary compliance is maximised through ensuring that fishers are aware of and understand the rules that apply to their fishing activities, that they understand the purpose of the rules, and that they operate in a culture of compliance. Effective deterrence is created through the presence of fisheries officers and compliance operations, as well as through the detection and prosecution of illegal activity (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a) Review of Alternative Measures for Unwanted Catch “Unwanted catch” represents the part of the catch mortality designated as “discards” or “bycatch” in the management plan of the fishery and also species that are prohibited in that fishery. Unwanted catch may also include the part of the catch that has been thrown away or slipped where the components of that catch may not survive after release (MSC, 2018b, p 49). The MSC guidance specifies that in cases where there is negligible unwanted catch of a species, the team may use their discretion as to whether the scoring issue would be scored, but the decision should be made in accordance with a precautionary approach. If there is no unwanted catch of primary species, the ‘Review of alternative measures’ scoring issue (e) is not scored “(MSC, 2018b, p.65). The MSC guidance defines “Alternative measures” as alternative fishing gear and/or practices that have been shown to minimise the rate of incidental mortality of the species or species type to the lowest achievable levels (MSC, 2018b, 35). When assessing the review of alternative measures, CABs are expected to review evidence to determine whether the client (UoA) has undertaken a review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise mortality of unwanted catch of main species, in order to achieve a conditional pass and evidence that such reviews

70 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

occur at least every five years, for an unconditional pass. This evidence could be, for example, a summary document listing information and measures reviewed along with an analysis of the measures and their appropriateness for the UoA, or the minutes of a meeting which has considered alternative measures (MSC, 2018b, p 64). The ‘regular review’ at SG80 may be met if at least one review of alternative measures has been undertaken, that measures are implemented as appropriate, and there is a commitment from the client or the management body to have another review within the 5-year window. As most discarded BSC are expected to survive, these do not constitute unwanted catch. However, given the considerable quantities that are caught and discarded (see Table 15), even a low post-capture mortality of the species can result in non-negligible unwanted catch. A precautionary approach is applied in this assessment and unwanted catch scoring issue is scored. The SGPF make continuous efforts to reduce BSC incidental catch in order to decrease mortality of this important commercial species targeted in the BCF, but also to increase the quality of the western king prawn product. The crabs being retained by the crab bag suffer low physical damage, although they can still inflict damage to the prawns that have to pass through the crab bag to reach the codend (Noell et al, 2018). The adoption of the ‘crab bag’ as alternative measure is the result of detailed investigation and trial in the fishery (Banks et al, 2011). Alternative gear configurations and BRDs have been periodically trialled in the fishery. Within the current MSC certification period Nordmøre grid trials have been extended to commercial fishing conditions after experimental trials in 2015-16 have shown promising results. In experimental trials, incremental refinements were made to a generic Nordmøre-grid to minimise bycatches of BSC and giant cuttlefish Sepia apama, while maintaining catches of western king prawns (Noell et al, 2018). These refinements involved varying bar spaces, escape-exit areas and guiding-panel lengths, and were compared against a conventional trawl. Catches of teleosts and western king prawn were not significantly affected by the changes, while some gear configurations have led to up to ~90% reductions in BSCs and giant cuttlefish catches. It was concluded that, while there were some unresolved operational concerns, the results demonstrated the potential improvements in selectivity in the SGPF using a Nordmøre-grid (Noell et al, 2018). In order to review and implement this alternative measure, the successful Nordmøre grid configuration was used in one SGPF vessel during May 2018 and November 2018 fishing periods. During the May 2018, the Nordmøre grid was used in one net while the other net was used as control (operating as normal). The grid side experienced an average 10% reduction in prawn volume. It was also observed there was no significant reduction in soft and broken product between the grid and non-grid side. Consistent with the experiential outcomes the grid reduced the number of crabs. It was also noted holes were chaffed in the net around the corners of the grid. Some of the prawn loss could have been due to the holes. It was concluded that a modification will be required for any future trial. The grids were easily caught by the wind, which influenced their management and operation of the cod ends on deck. Also, the grid required cleaning between each shot, which took additional time. During the November trial, the goal was to target high volumes of weed as experienced in the previous season, however only small weed loads were recorded. The grid side produced less prawns, and it was assumed the grid excluded them as the prawns may have fallen out with the weed, along with other by-catch. As with the previous research results the grid excluded larger volumes of crabs and weed/sponges. The grid caught on average 12.6% less prawns than the control side. Prawn loss was more noticeable when there was a greater volume of weed recorded in the catch. A value analysis indicated that the loss of prawns would equate to nearly $3,000 less revenue in a commercial night (Clark and Lukin, 2019). The parameter set for previous grid trials as a measure of success was that a loss of prawns > 5% should not be acceptable. The partial implementation of the alternative measure indicated that an unacceptable loss of prawns was experienced. The management committee of the SGWCPFA has decided that the grid was not be suitable in all fishing conditions experienced in the SG and it should only be offered as an alternative voluntary tool to skippers, to be used when they determine the conditions are right (SGWCPFA, 2019b). The SGPF Research Plan 2019 makes provision for reviews of alternative measures to reduce the impact on the ecosystem components, including BSC within the lifetime of the plan (2-3 years) (SGWCPFA, 2019b). There is evidence for regular alternative measures (at least every five years) to reduce mortality of BSC. The measures were implemented as appropriate (the implementation was not compulsory because the trials have shown unacceptable loss of target catch).

71 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Southern calamari were assessed at PSA in 2013 and 2019 and the risk from the SGPF was ranked at low (PIRSA, 2014b, Noell and Beckmann, 2019). Alternative measures for calamari were not considered necessary, given the stock is maintained at sustainable levels and the byproduct research study has shown low impact from the SGPF (Roberts and Steer, 2010, PIRSA, 2014b). Although a large proportion of calamari caught by the SGPF is discarded and not likely to survive, the quantity discarded will still be very low because the percentage of this species in the catch is less than 2%. For the finfish minor primary species, alternative measures have been reviewed and a trial of fisheye BRDs has been undertaken in 2020, however, evidence of the results from this trial was not provided. In any case, the SGPF’s catches from these species are in very low quantities (see Table 15) which could be considered negligible unwanted catch.

8.3.4 Primary Species Information (PI 2.1.3) When assessing the Information PI, the availability and the adequacy of the information are required to be assessed. In assessing the adequacy of information, the following need to be considered: - The precision of the estimates (qualitative or quantitative); - The extent to which the data are verifiable (on their own or in combination with other data sources); - Potential bias in estimates and data collection methods; - Comprehensiveness of data; and - The continuity of data collection. (SA3.6.3.2, MSC, 2018a, p.37) Table 16 offers some examples of the degree of verifiability of most often used information sources. Table 16. Examples of data collection methods according to their level of verifiability

Source: MSC, 2018a, p72, Table GSA5 The most recent quantitative information on the SGPF’s catch of primary species is available from the 2013 fishery independent bycatch survey. The survey methods for sampling, processing and analyses were compatible to the previous survey (2007) so as to allow comparison, although with a reduced number of sites (Burnell et al, 2015). In 2013, the survey design was reduced in size for efficiency reasons. with a number of sites located in areas of low trawl intensity being removed from the design (Burnell et al., 2015). The survey was designed to reflect the abundance and distribution of the species caught in the SGPF and not their relative abundance in the commercial catch. Because about 90% of the commercial catch is taken from moderate and high intensity areas (Table 14) the information on catch composition from these areas was considered to be representative of the commercial catch, verifiable and low bias. In addition, the bycatch survey studies offer reliable information on spatial distribution and abundance of the non-target species relative to trawl intensity and other environmental factors. By comparing the results from the most recent survey (2013) with those from the 2007 survey and previous bycatch surveys (undertaken since 1980’s, e.g. Carrick, 1997), changes in the relative abundance of the primary species and in the level of risk over time can be inferred. Combined with information from primary species robust stock status assessments and landed catch from these species in overlapping fisheries, there is information available and adequate to infer the impact of the UoA. ERA workshops are undertaken regularly (the latest in 2019) to assess the risks the SGPF poses to primary species and this information is used to support management strategies. Empirical evidence from fishery’s regular operations (At-Sea) is also used in the decision-making process to adjust or change strategies, e.g. to close areas that are proven to be important for primary species’ sustainability.

72 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Although quantitative information from the last five years was not available, there is a commitment to improve fishery- independent information on all primary species by collecting quantitative data during the three annual surveys that are undertaken for the stock assessment of the target species. In a MoU between PIRSA/SARDI and SGWCPFA primary species monitoring has been agreed to be adopted as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program (EMP) that was implemented starting with 2019/20 season (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019).

8.3.5 Secondary Species Outcome (PI 2.2.1) Secondary species are assessed against biologically based limits. According to Table SA8, in MSC Fisheries Standards v2.01, biologically based limits constitute a benchmark against which status of a species can be evaluated, and the benchmark is chosen to provide a high probability of persistence of the species over time. In general, for fish species this will be equivalent to the point below which recruitment may be impaired (PRI). The benchmark should be derived from biological information that is relevant to the ecosystem feature and UoA, although the information does not necessarily have to come from the specific area (MSC, 2018a, p.29). No ‘main’ secondary species were identified for this MSC reassessment (Table 15). There is no requirement related to minor secondary species outcome at SG60 and SG80. Because the information that is available is not sufficient and adequate to assess minor species stock status against their biologically based limits, minor species will not be scored at SG100.

8.3.6 Secondary Species Management (PI 2.1.2) For ‘main’ secondary species, the MSC standards requires that at least ‘measures’ are in place for a score of 60, a ‘partial strategy’ for a score of 80 (if necessary) while at SG100, a ‘strategy’ to manage all secondary species is required. The same definitions for these concepts apply as described for primary species. A strategy for ‘main’ secondary species is not necessary because no main secondary species were identified. However, because there is no recent quantitative information on secondary species catch by the UoA, it is recognised the possibility that the catch of some species, such as skipjack trevally or leatherjacket species may be above the ‘main’ thresholds in some years. These species are not assessed as ‘main’ here, although it should be noted that there is a strategy to manage these species. The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing, such as move-on rules due to a high concentration of a transient bycatch species such as leatherjackets (Simon Clarke pers comm) or even temporary closures. These decisions require authorisation of the SGWCPFA Coordinator-at-Sea. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). Such measures could be considered specific measures for the most abundant secondary species, although it might not benefit all secondary species caught by the UoA. SGPF is being managed under an EBFM framework, meaning that not only the impact to target species is managed to achieve sustainable exploration, but also the impacts on all ecosystem components needs to be minimised (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). General operational measures such as effort and gear limits, crab bag and hopper sorting system, permanent and temporal closures, monitoring and data collection on bycatch (independent surveys, published research studies e.g. Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2013, risk monitoring through ERAs) constitute a partial strategy to manage secondary species. General operational measures were presented in primary species management section. The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing, such as move-on rules due to a high concentration of a transient bycatch species (Simon Clarke pers com, July 2020) or even temporary closures. These decisions require authorisation of the SGWCPFA Coordinator-at-Sea. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). Such measures could be considered specific measures for secondary species, although it might not benefit all secondary species. In a MoU between PIRSA/SARDI and SGWCPFA, monitoring of indicator bycatch species has been agreed to be adopted as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program (EMP) implemented starting with 2019/20 season (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). These species include skipjack trevally, leatherjackets, Port Jackson shark, blue spotted goatfish and Balmain bug. The EMP is likely to strengthen the information to support a full strategy for secondary species. Currently, there is a partial strategy to manage all secondary species.

73 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Management Strategy Evaluation Although a strategy for main secondary species is not necessary, there is a partial strategy to minimise impact on all secondary species, the SGPF being managed under an EBFM framework (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). There is some objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy will work. This is based on information from the two most recent bycatch surveys, where no significant differences between the patterns of abundance and distribution of secondary species were found (Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015). The same four species were most abundant in the catch since 1980’s (e.g. Carrick 1997, Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015) Also, the results of the 2019 ERA show no increases in the risks the SGPF poses to secondary species (PIRSA, 2014, Noell and Beckmann, 2019). Management Strategy is Successfully Implemented and Achieving its Objective There is some evidence that the partial strategy (general operational measures) for minor secondary species is implemented successfully, as presented in primary species management section. However, because there is no recent (from the last five years) quantitative information on minor secondary species, clear evidence that the partial strategy is achieving its objective (i.e. minor secondary species are highly likely above biologically based limits) cannot be demonstrated. Review of alternative measures to minimise mortality of unwanted catch “Unwanted catch” and “alternative measures” are defined as for primary species. The requirements at SG60 and SG80 refer to main secondary species. There are no main secondary species, thus regular reviews of alternative measures are not required for the SGPF to meet SG60 and SG80. However, the SG 100 requires biennial review of potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of all secondary species, and they are implemented, as appropriate. The SGPF Research Plan 2019 makes provisions for reviews of alternative measures for all ecosystem components, including secondary species, although such reviews do not seem to occur every two years as required at SG100. 8.3.7 Secondary Species Information (PI 2.1.2) When assessing the Information PI for secondary species, as for primary species, the availability and the adequacy of the information are required to be assessed. MSC guidance specifies that, when considering species for designation as ‘main’, temporal trend in catches needs to also be considered and a precautionary approach needs to be used to determine whether species shall count as ‘main’. This should include taking into account the variability of the catch composition over the last five years or fishing seasons (MSC, 2018b, p.57), information that is not available for the UoA. The MSC guidance also clarifies that, depending on data availability, teams may choose a different length of the time series, but a rationale should be provided in all cases of the method chosen (MSC, 2018b, p.57). As discussed in the Principle 2 Background section, quantitative information that is available from the more recent (Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015), and historical independent bycatch surveys and studies (e.g. Carrick, 1997) is adequate to classify secondary species in ‘main’ and ‘minor’ (i.e. that all secondary species are ‘minor’). The similarity in the findings from more recent surveys and historical surveys gives confidence that the same species continue to be dominant in the catch (king prawn and BSC) and it is unlikely that any other species have become ‘main’ in the last five years. The information is considered adequate to determine that there are no ‘main’ secondary species in the SGPF’s catch, although not adequate to determine if ‘minor’ species are within biologically based limits, mainly because information on such limits is lacking. Regular ERAs of the SGPF are in place to monitor the risk to each component of the ecosystem. All species that were identified in independent bycatch surveys were assessed at level 2 (PSA) of the ERAEF framework (Hobday et al, 2007). The results of the ERAs are used to inform management strategies (additional measures for species ranked at high risk might be applied is deemed necessary by the ERA stakeholder panel). Empirical evidence from fishery’s regular operations (At-Sea) is also used in the decision-making process to adjust or change strategies, e.g. to close areas that are proven to be important for non-target species’ sustainability. Overall, the information is adequate to support a partial strategy for ‘minor’ secondary species.

8.3.8 Endangered, Threatened, Protected Species (ETPs) Outcome (PI 2.3.1) ETP species are species that are recognised by national ETP legislation or listed in the binding international agreements such as Appendix 1 of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), or binding agreements 74 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

concluded under the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS). The requirements of the EPBC Act include all the other binding agreements’ requirements, thus compliance with this act reflects also compliance with other national or international legislation. The SGPF is accredited by the Commonwealth Department of the Environment (now DAWE) under the EPBC Act Part 13, with the export approval extended to 20 August 2025 (DoE, 2015). The SGPF interacts mainly with seahorses and pipefish. In the SGPF’s history there was only one reported interaction with a seal (released alive) in 2010/11, one great white shark (released alive) in 2011/12 and one dolphin (killed) in 2016/17 (Mackay, 2018). Direct Effects Reporting interactions with ETPs has been compulsory in SGPF since 2007. The number of reported interactions and the number of ETP individuals that interacted with the SGPF varied, with the lowest number in 2008/09 and the highest in 2012/13 (Table 17). Table 17. Number of interactions (number of individuals) with protected fish species reported in Wildlife Interaction Logbooks (> 99 % of individuals were syngnathids). 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Total 5 (17) 53 (61)* 120 129 66 (122) 27 (40) 35 (138) 44 49 (127) 526 (188)** (327) (71)*** (1089) Source: Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019 * one seal ** one white shark ***one dolphin

Syngnathids (seahorses and pipefish) Biology and life history Many syngnathids are slow moving, cryptic fishes and appear relatively stationary, difficult to detect (Ahnesjö and Craig, 2011). Nevertheless, they belong to a family of highly skilled marine predators that ambush small prey in complex habitats (Manning et al, 2019). Syngnathids’ diet consist mainly in small crustaceans such as amphipods, copepods and decapods (Manning et al, 2019). Many syngnathid species occur in shallow habitats, seagrass beds in particular, but also among corals, mangroves, macroalgae, estuaries and artificial constructions (Ahnesjö and Craig, 2011). In many shallow fish communities, syngnathids, due to their abundance and behaviour, may have important ecological roles. These environments, however, frequently face anthropogenic disturbance or habitat destruction, as well as natural changes, with negative effects on syngnathid abundance. Eutrophication is one such common perturbation that affects seagrass to become increasingly overgrown by filamentous algae, and pipefishes have been shown to avoid such habitats (Sundin et al. , 2011 in Ahnesjö and Craig, 2011). Pollutants are also of concern, for instance, as endocrine disrupters in syngnathids (Scobell & MacKenzie, 2011 in Ahnesjö and Craig, 2011). Changing sea temperatures due to global warming is another concern, both for biodiversity and because temperature is an important factor influencing the brooding times of males and thus their reproductive ecology (Ahnesjö et al, 2008 in Ahnesjö and Craig, 2011). Further prime concern is that seahorses Hippocampus sp. in particular are globally over exploited in an unsustainable manner (Vincent et al. , 2011 in Ahnesjö and Craig, 2011). They are both targeted and caught as by-catch for the trade in traditional medicine, aquariums and curiosities. In Australia, all species from Syngnathidae family are listed as marine species under the EPBC Act and are protected from activities that may result in their death or injury (DoE, 2009). In South Australia, syngnathids are fully protected under the Fisheries Act 2007. Generally, the syngnathid populations in SA are small, the fecundity is low and population dispersal restricted (Browne et al 2008, Sorokin et al, 2009). Syngnathids’ distribution and abundance in Spencer Gulf and SGPF’s impact Data on the distribution and abundance of syngnathids is available from the gulf-wide bycatch surveys (2007 and 2013) as well as from annual prawn stock assessment surveys (SAS) (Mayfield et al, 2014). In 2007, 112 individual syngnathids were captured from 120 sites (Currie et al., 2009) and 31 individuals from 62 sites in 2013. The abundance data for syngnathids presented in the bycatch reports represents only those syngnathids found in the sub- samples of the catch i.e. the abundance was not standardised as it was done for the more common bycatch species, nor

75 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

were any statistical analyses undertaken on the abundance or occurrence of syngnathids. This is due to the increased uncertainty associated with scaling infrequently captured species (Burnell et al., 2015). Bycatch surveys showed a pattern of syngnathids captured in relation to trawl intensity that was consistent between the 2007 and 2013. The most individuals were taken from low trawl intensity blocks (93-94%) and the least individuals were taken from blocks of high trawl intensity (0-1%). This is likely to be due to habitat preferences of the syngnathid species (seagrass and reef associated), which do not coincide with the highly trawled habitats (soft bottoms and rhodolith habitat). No syngnathids were captured from the ten high trawl intensity sites in 2013, while in 2007 one individual (1%) was captured from the same number of sites. Within areas of moderate trawl intensity, two syngnathids (6%) were captured in 2013, compared to seven (6%) in 2007, from 23 and 27 sites, respectively. The number of low intensity trawl sites differed between 2013 (25) and 2007 (75), which was reflected in the lower total number of syngnathids captured at these sites during 2013 (21 or 68%), compared to 2007 (61 or 54%). Higher numbers of syngnathids were caught during bycatch surveys from sites located in areas closed to trawling. Eight syngnathids (26%) were captured in 2013, compared with 43 (38%) in 2007, from seven and eight sites, respectively. Due to the different number of trawl sites between 2013 and 2007, in particular those from areas of low trawling intensity, direct comparisons of syngnathid abundance can be misleading. Nevertheless, Burnell et al (2015) hold that the combination of raw and percentage data shows the distribution of syngnathid catch has remained relatively stable in relation to trawl intensity between 2007 and 2013. According to Mackay (2018), between 2007/08 and 2016/17, 14.5% of the number of syngnathids reported in the SGPF logbooks were recorded as dead. Of these, 79% were pipefish, 16% were seahorse and 5% were common seadragon. No mortalities were reported for leafy seadragons (Phycodurus eques), pipehorse or potbelly seahorse (Hippocampus abdominalis). Goldsworthy and Boyle (2019), the latest Wildlife Interactions in SA Managed Fisheries report, does not provide a breakdown by species/group for each fishery but only amalgamated data. Table 18 provides information on the status of the syngnathids that interacted with the SGPF since 2010. To be noted that ‘unknown status’ is mainly due to the cryptic, immobile nature of these ETPs, making it difficult to assess ‘alive’ status (Simon Clark, pers com, July 2020)

Table 18. The number of syngnathids caught in the SGPF reported in Wildlife Interaction Logbooks from the fishery and from the three annual fishery independent surveys (SAS), combined.

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19

Caught 61 187 326 122 40 138 70 127 47 Alive (released) 59 105 224 92 33 22 24 16 47 Dead (discarded) 2 52 12 8 3 4 6 2 0 Injured (released) 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unknown 0 30 89 22 4 112 41 109 0 (released) Source: Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019 and SARDI, 2020

Eight syngnathid species were identified as being caught in the SGPF (Table 19). Although all these species are protected under the EPBC Act, none is not listed as vulnerable or endangered. All these species were assessed for the IUCN Red Least as ‘least concern’. Table 19. Syngnathid species identified during gulf-wide bycatch surveys and their IUCN Red List status (LC = least concern). Species common name Latin Name IUCN Red List status Tiger Pipefish Filicampus tigris LC (Pollom, 2016a) Rhino Pipefish Histiogamphelus cristatus LC (Fujii and Pollom, 2016) Brushtail Pipefish Leptoichthys fistularius LC (Pollom, 2016b) Leafy Seadragon Phycodurus eques LC (Pollom, 2017a) Common Seadragon Phyllopteryx taeniolatus LC (Pollom, 2017b) Spotted Pipefish Stigmatopora argus LC (Carlyle and Pollom, 2016)

76 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Knifesnout Pipefish Hypselognathus rostratus LC (Vaidyanathan and Pollom, 2017 Bigbelly Seahorse Hippocampus abdominalis LC (pollom, 2017c)

All syngnathid species identified were assessed at ERA, PSA, in 2013 and 2019. The risk to tiger pipefish was ranked as ‘medium’ because of the higher ‘availability’ score (due to habitat preference) while the risk to all the other species of syngnathids was ranked as low (Noell and Beckmann, 2019). The same results were obtained from the previous ERA (PIRSA, 2014b). While fishers do not record pipefish to species level in logbooks, data from SAS have shown that less than 10% of pipefish caught were tiger pipefish. It is acknowledged that there is uncertainty about the actual mortality rate of syngnathids caught in the SGPF, nevertheless, there is no evidence of significant increases or decreases in the number of interactions over the years and the number of individuals caught remained relatively consistent. As no significant differences between the patterns of abundance and distribution of syngnathids were found between the two gulf-wide surveys, these patterns are expected to have remained the same. Combined information from the bycatch surveys, recent ERA, and recent and earlier interaction reports from the fishers’ logbooks and fishery-independent surveys, direct effects are highly likely to not hinder recovery of syngnathids (if there would be a need for recovery). Other ETPs In the SGPF’s history, the fishery reported interactions with one seal (released alive) in 2010/11, one great white shark (released alive) in 2011/12 and a dolphin in 2016/17 (killed). This information is not verified through a dedicated observer program, although ETP information is collected also during the fishery-independent surveys undertaken three time per year for the king prawn stock assessment and no ETP interactions other than with syngnathids were recorded. Robbins et al (2017) assessed anthropogenic threats to selected marine wildlife species. The authors found that fishing and aquaculture threats had the lowest mean scores, compared to other threats. However, prawn trawling was a medium threat for syngnathids and elasmobranchs and a low threat for mammals and birds (Robbins et al, 2017, Supplementary material 6). Sharks. The white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) are considered apex predators and are often associated with seal colonies on islands (Gillanders et al., 2013). White sharks move into SG in spring and summer to hunt snapper and other large prey (Bruce et al., 2006 in Gillanders et al., 2013). The white shark is an EPBC Act listed species as vulnerable and migratory. The recovery plan for white shark sets out management actions to stop the decline and support recovery (Commonwealth of Australia, 2013). Commercial fisheries are required to quantify mortality as bycatch, including post-release mortality and minimize interactions as to not hinder recovery. The white shark is subject to bycatch by fisheries that operate in SG, however, interactions with SGPF are very rare. There was one reported interaction with the great white shark in 2011/2012 fishing season when the shark was released alive but injured. There has been no capture of white sharks in the SGPF during independent research surveys conducted in the Spencer Gulf from 1980-2003, which has involved more than 10,000 trawl shots ranging from 30-60 minutes duration (PIRSA, 2003). No capture of white sharks occurred after 2003 (Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). Hence, the risk of capture of these sharks in trawl nets is considered extremely low and the fishery does not hinder populations’ recovery. Marine mammals Pinnipeds Australian sea lions are endemic to Australia and restricted to South and Western Australia. The species is listed as marine and vulnerable under the EPBC Act although there are no set limits. It is also listed as “endangered” on the IUCN Red List (Goldsworthy, 2015). The Australian sea lions exhibit high site fidelity and little or no movement of females between colonies has been observed, even between those separated by short distances (Campbell et al. 2008). Also, it has been suggested that each breeding colony on the west coast of Australia could be considered a distinct management unit due to the low gene flow between even quite closely located colonies. Site fidelity has implications to the risk of local extinction, especially at sites with low population numbers. Due to the species long breeding cycle (17.6 months), the time required to increase population size is longer than for other pinniped species with shorter breeding cycles. In addition, there is evidence of a

77 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

reduction in the numbers of breeding sites along the greater Perth metropolitan coastline area, and along Victorian and Tasmanian coastline (Campbell et al. 2008). Long-nosed fur seals are native to southern Australia and New Zealand and listed as ‘marine’ under the EPBC Act with no set limits. This species was IUCN assessed as “least concern” (Chilvers & Goldsworthy, 2015). The long-nosed fur seal breeds in southern Australia from New South Wales to WA; it also breeds in New Zealand and its subantarctic islands. Most of the Australian population is in SA, between Kangaroo Island and the southern tip of Eyre Peninsula (Shaughnessy et al. 2014). The Australian fur seals are endemic to south-eastern Australian waters and are found from the coasts of Tasmania, New South Wales, Victoria and across to South Australia with the centre of their distribution in Bass Strait. Australian fur seal is a subspecies of Australo-African fur seal, the other sub-species being the Cape fur seal. The ranges of both subspecies are expanding, with the new colonies established in the last decade (Goldsworthy, 2015). Australian fur-seal is listed as ‘marine’ under the EPBC Act with no set limits, and it was IUCN assessed as ‘least concern’. It is not clear which species of seal has interacted with the SGPF however, the seal was released alive. Interactions with seals are very rare and the fishery is highly likely to not hinder recovery of these mammal species. Cetaceans All cetaceans are protected under both, South Australian state and Australian Commonwealth Legislation. The EPBC Act prohibits the intentional killing or exploitation of any listed marine species, including dolphins, in both South Australian and Australian Commonwealth waters. Although there are protection requirements, there are no conservation plans or rebuilding strategies and there are no set limits. Within SG, dolphins are the most common cetacean species (Gillanders et al., 2015). The two main groups are the short- beaked common dolphin (Delphis delphis) and members of the bottlenose dolphin genus (Tursiops spp.). At least two species of Tursiops have potentially been documented from the region, the coastal Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin (T. aduncus) and common bottlenose dolphins (T. truncatus), which are predominantly distributed in shelf and oceanic waters further offshore than the Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin (Kemper and Ling 1991, Kemper 2004, Gibbs et al. 2011 in Gillanders et al., 2015). The A single interaction with one dolphin has been reported in the SGPF in 2016/17 season (Mackay, 2018). Although the species was not recorded, it was assumed that the interaction involved a common bottlenose dolphin (Noell and Beckmann, 2019). The risk to common bottlenose dolphin was ranked as high at the 2019 ERA. Reporting dolphin interactions in wildlife interactions logbook is mandatory (PIRSA, 2014a) and there have been no compliance issues identified in this respect. From other fisheries, dolphins are known to follow their prey into the trawl nets (e.g. in Pilbara Trawl Fishery, Allen et al., 2014). Allen et al. (2014), in Pilbara Trawl Fishery study, shows that dolphins are most active and most likely to be caught in nets during daytime and 84% of the interactions occur from 7am to 8pm. However, SGPF fishing is only permitted at night (PIRSA, 2014a). Moreover, the absence of interactions can be validated within the three annual independent stock assessment surveys that are carried out in SG (PIRSA, 2014a). No dolphin interactions occurred during fishery independent SAS, since these started in 1981. Birds Spencer Gulf provides important foraging and breeding habitats for a diverse range of seabird species. This includes resident species present year-round and migratory species, such as shearwaters and waders, that return to the region to breed and/or feed for several months of the year (Gillanders et al., 2013). However, the SGPF is more likely to impact scavenger species such as gulls, known to feed on discarded bycatch from prawn trawls (Svane, 2005). There have been no reported interactions of SGPF with seabirds since 2007 when mandatory reporting was introduced. There is no evidence that the SGPF has any direct effects on bird populations. Marine turtles Three marine turtle species (leatherback, loggerhead and green) have been recorded in South Australia; however, the SGPF is not known to interact with turtles. Since 2007 no interactions with turtles have been reported by the commercial fishers through wildlife interaction logbooks (Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). The primary reason for the lack of interaction is that there are no turtle rookeries in the Spencer Gulf (the nearest turtle rookeries are situated some 1,800 nautical miles from the Spencer Gulf at 25 50’ S). In addition, the seasonal temperature of the Spencer Gulf, the

78 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

oceanographic processes (currents and fronts) and food resources (for leatherback) would impose barriers (or limits) on turtle feeding (PIRSA, 2003). A United States of America ban on imports of prawns from fisheries not using approved turtle excluder device designs was successfully lifted for the SGPF in 1999/2000 in recognition of the fishery having low levels of by-catch and no occurrences of turtle interactions, as researched by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (PIRSA, 2003). Indirect Effects The MSC vocabulary does not clearly define “indirect effects” to ETP populations, although these can be interpreted as effects other than from direct contact with fishing gear or fishing activities. These can occur as entanglements in lost gear, behaviour modification of predators that feed on discards (e.g. dolphins and birds), trophic effects, e.g. the fishery acting as a competitor for the ETP species preferred food, selective catch of certain sizes and life stages of a species, ETP species habitat degradation etc. Indirect effects of lost gear, water quality, discarding of debris, oil discharge, sewage, as well as discarding bycatch are considered and assessed at ESD ERAs. A full report with the results from the 2019 ESD ERA was not available at the time of writing the ACDR. At the previous ESD assessment all except discarding bycatch were ranked as negligible (PIRSA, 2014b). It is not expected that these risks have increased. The risk of discarding bycatch was ranked as moderate due to possible changes in the trophic structure, with more scavenger species such as prawn, crabs, opportunistic fish species moving in areas that are trawled (PIRSA, 2014b). Although the SGPF is yet to find an appropriate alternative measure that can be implemented to minimise discarded bycatch, efforts are made through BRD trials to reduce BSC catch. Nevertheless, most BSC are expected to survive prawn trawl capture, while discard mortalities are much lower quantitatively compared to total discards (Table 15). Indirect effects trophic on ETP species can also be inferred from studies of the fate of discards and population effects. For example, Svane (2005) estimated that only 0.3 -2.6% of all discards is consumed by dolphins that follow prawn trawlers in the SGPF. There is no evidence that this this would be harmful for dolphin populations (Svane, 2005, Chilvers and Corkeron, 2001, Ansman et al., 2012). Chilvers and Corkeron, 2001, show that bottlenose dolphins may form different social structures, with certain groups following trawls and others foraging in seagrass. This suggests that trawling could have a different impact on different groups of dolphins. In this way, seasonal closures would affect trawler foragers by food depletion. Ansman et al. (2012) however notice that: “The previously described partitioning into two communities has disappeared, with former ‘trawler’ and ‘non-trawler dolphins’ now dispersed over the entire social network and associating with each other. This restructuring suggests that although fisheries can influence the social behaviour of bottlenose dolphins, their social structure represents a complex adaptive system that is resilient to disturbance”. Svane (2005) also found that up to 165kg per year, or less than 0.03% of the discards from the SGPF, might be consumed by seabirds, quantity that cannot significantly affect seabird feeding behaviour. Overall, indirect effects are considered to be highly likely to not hinder ETP species recovery, if the stock will need to recover. Other trophic effects that might indirectly affect ETP species will be assessed under PI 2.5.1 Ecosystem Outcome.

8.3.9 ETPs Management (PI 2.3.2) In addition to the definitions of ‘measures’ ‘partial strategy’ and ‘strategy’, defined under Primary Species Management PI section, a ‘comprehensive strategy’ is applicable to the ETPs Management at the SG100. A “comprehensive strategy” (applicable only for ETP component) is a complete and tested strategy made up of linked monitoring, analyses, and management measures and responses (MSC, 2018a, p.29-30). For a “comprehensive strategy” to be achieved, information is required to ensure and continue to confirm that the UoA has no impact upon that component (ETPs) (MSC, 2018b, p. 52). Also, a comprehensive strategy should be able to manage direct and indirect effects (MSC, 2018b, p.77). Long-term management objectives, which are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC PI 2.3.1, are defined in the SGPF Management Plan, to ensure fishery impacts on ETPs are sustainable. These are included in Goal 3: Protect and conserve aquatic resources, habitats and ecosystems, and relates to the management of the fishery using an EBFM approach. An objective of Goal 3 is: ‘minimise the interaction with TEPS’, where TEPS are Threatened,

79 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Endangered and Protected species. The Management Plan sets performance indicators for ETPs as follows: i) Interaction rate for ETPs (number of interactions per fishing day reported in wildlife interaction logbooks), ii) Number of TEPS/hectare reported in EBFM reports, iii) Closed areas maintained, iv) Industry codes of practice followed (PIRSA, 2014a). These performance indicators are evaluated based on fishery dependent and fishery independent data on interactions, and compliance program outcomes. Specific measures As specific actions for syngnathids’ protection, the SGWCPFA has voluntarily closed areas known to be abundant or indicating likely habitat for syngnathids, e.g. Wardang Island (established 2002) (Mayfield et al., 2014). In 2010, the Wardang closure was further increased in size, voluntarily, for the protection of seahorse, pipefish and seadragon (Banks et al, 2011). Two additional closures have been implemented seasonally since 1981 (Point Lowly and Cowell). These areas support sensitive benthic and syngnathid populations, along with typically being dominated by small prawns (Mayfield et al., 2014). Information on ETP interactions as well as the time and location of the interactions during commercial fishing operations is collected through fishers’ statutory logbooks. Each logbook has attached the Wildlife Identification Guide and Logbook to help fishers identify ETPs and with instructions on reporting and filling in the Wildlife Interactions Forms at the end of the book (see appendix 6 in Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). Crew members are encouraged to identify syngnathids (the only ETP group with significant interactions) through crew survey observer training and other port type meetings, although due to the cryptic nature of these fish some interactions may go unnoticed. The crew survey observers participate in SAS surveys, when detailed and reliable ETP information is collected (Simon Clark, pers com, July 2020). The risk to ETP species is also assessed through ERAs and any increases in risk will prompt to an evaluation of the management measures and additional measures are implemented if necessary (Noell and Beckmann, 2019). General measures General operational measures such as effort and gear limits, crab bag and hopper sorting system, permanent and temporal closures, monitoring and data collection are likely to benefit ETP species populations. In SG, about 19% of the allowable trawling area (less than 15% of the Spencer Gulf) is moderately to highly trawled and (Noell and Hooper, 2019). The limited spatial extent of fishing activities allows for adequate areas of refuge for ETP species throughout the gulf. Additionally, as trawling occurs over sand / mud substrates, the trawl gear does not impact on important habitats at depths less than 10m, such as seagrass meadows and rocky reefs, where ETP species such as syngnathids, are likely to prefer. Habitats that support ETP species are also protected in permanent fishery closures that were implemented to protect nursery habitat for prawns or other commercially important species (Mayfield et al., 2014). Spencer Gulf also has a system of marine parks with no trawl zones that support representative fauna, flora and habitats, which contribute to maintaining biodiversity and offer refuge for ETPs in SG and in wider SA marine waters (www.marineparks.sa.gov.au). The hopper system enables the total catch to be maintained in a ‘wet well’ with continuous water flow that efficiently separates by-catch from prawns. This system is supported by the use of ‘crab bags’, which contain the macro faunal bycatch. These prevent small ETP bycatch species such as syngnathids, to be crushed and allows rapid return to the marine environment, thereby likely improving the survival rates (Mayfield et al., 2014). Larger ETPs are unlikely to be caught in the net, because of the low opening of the net. If capture occurs, they are retained in the large mesh ‘crab bag’ and returned immediately to water (Mayfield et al, 2014). The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing (such as move-on rules, or temporary closures due to a high concentration of a species (Simon Clarke pers com, July 2020). These decisions require authorisation of the SGWCPFA Coordinator-at-Sea. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). General and specific measures in place constitute a strategy and work together to minimize the impact on ETPs. Because it is difficult to identify trends in syngnathid interactions and limited information on syngnathid populations in SG exists, the strategy cannot be considered fully tested and comprehensive. Management Strategy Evaluation and Implementation Evidence that the strategy is working can be derived from the results of the two gulf-wide independent bycatch surveys (Currie et al 2009 and Burnell et al, 2015) and ERAs (PIRSA, 2014b, Noell and Beckmann, 2019), as well as from the wildlife interaction reports for the SA managed fisheries (e.g. Mackay, 2018, Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019).

80 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Despite the limitations to performing statistical analyses due to low interaction rate, Burnell et al (2015) suggest that the distribution of syngnathid capture has remained relatively stable in relation to trawl intensity between 2007 and 2013 thus, the bycatch surveys have shown no indication of syngnathid populations depletion. The ERAs have also shown that the risk to ETP species did not increase. The available information suggests that the strategy works and will continue to work to ensure the risk to ETPs is minimised. To ensure strategies are implemented successfully, performance indicators are specified in the SGPF management plan and the performance against these indicators is reported regularly to the Commonwealth Department of Environment (now the Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment -DAWE), as part of the ESD accreditation requirements. The co-management arrangements for the SGPF are designed to achieve successful implementation of the strategy for non-target species management, including ETPs. Fishing strategies, including ETP management strategies, are developed, according to the management plan, by the SGWCPFA Management Committee (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing, in accordance with the fishing strategy established by the Management Committee, such as move-on rules or closures when high catches of species of interest are recorded. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture runs a compliance program that has dual objectives to: i) maximise voluntary compliance with fisheries rules and ii) create effective deterrence to breaching fisheries rules. Voluntary compliance is maximised through ensuring that fishers are aware of and understand the rules that apply to their fishing activities, that they understand the purpose of the rules, and that they operate in a culture of compliance. Effective deterrence is created through the presence of fisheries officers and compliance operations, as well as through the detection and prosecution of illegal activity (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). Review of Alternative Measures for Unwanted Catch of ETPs ‘Unwanted catch’ and ‘alternative measures’ are defined as for primary species. Syngnathid catch is unavoidable and gear modification measures are not likely to work because of the size of the syngnathids that is similar to the size of the target species and syngnathids’ immobile behaviour. Current measures that were implemented to minimise syngnathid mortality are based on self-imposed permanent and temporary closure of areas with high abundance of this group (through an Industry code of practice) and rapid on-board handling to increase chances of post-capture survival. In 2010, the Wardang closure was increased in size specifically for the protection of high abundance of syngnathids. In addition, skippers were provided with training including identification and handling techniques expected to reduce mortality of ETPs (Simon Clark, July 2020). There are no other measures that are expected or known to minimise mortality of syngnathids from trawl catch that can be reviewed. The review of the appropriateness of the existing closures is ongoing through the Committee-at-Sea decision-making process. A review of alternative measures to reduce syngnathids’ mortality can be considered ‘not applicable’ because there are no known alternative measures that would reduce mortality of these specie. 8.3.10 ETPs Information (PI 2.3.2) Information Availability and Adequacy to Assess the Impact Some information on the spatial distribution and status of ETP populations in Spencer Gulf is available from various sources. For syngnathids, such information is available from two gulf-wide fishery independent bycatch surveys (Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015, Sorokin et al, 2009) and from the South Australian Museum records. Data from the 2007 bycatch survey (Currie et al., 2009) provided the basis for an opportunistic study of morphometrics and stable isotope signatures of syngnathids in Spencer Gulf, contributing with insights for understanding of these species’ biology, mesoscale distribution and habitat use (Sorokin et al., 2009). For other ETP species, some information on the distribution and migration patterns of iconic species and apex predators in the Eastern Great Australian Bight (EGAB), including dolphins, seals, sharks and birds, is available from The Great Australian Bight Research Program 2013-2017, a collaborative project BP, CSIRO, SARDI, University of Adelaide and Flinders University (Evans et al, 2017). These sources of information can be considered low bias and high verifiability (Table 16), being published peer reviewed information. Quantitative information on the level of impact with ETPs is available from fishery-dependent and fishery-independent monitoring. Mandatory reporting of commercial fishery interactions with ETP species was introduced in 2007/08. Due to the cryptic nature of the syngnathids (the only group with significant interactions) some interactions during commercial fishery operations might go unnoticed, the crew being focused primarily of sorting prawn catch (Simon Clark, pers com July 2020). An independent observer program to verify fishery-dependent data during commercial operations has not been implemented in the SGPF. To compensate for this limitation, fishery-independent observers 81 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

from SARDI Aquatic Sciences have been recording ETP interactions in Spencer Gulf during stock assessment surveys for the target prawn species which are undertaken three times per year (Mayfield et al., 2014, Simon Clark, pers com July 2020). Interactions recorded during from survey shots are reported cumulatively with those recorded in fishers Wildlife Interaction Logbooks, in published interaction reports (e.g. Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). Information from the two gulf-wide fishery-independent bycatch surveys has also shown that the distribution of syngnathid capture has remained relatively stable in relation to trawl intensity between 2007 and 2013 (Burnell et al., 2015). However, due to the low number of interactions, no statistical analyses are available to compare fishery-dependent with fishery independent data. Also, no extrapolations were possible to estimate fishery’s interactions based on fishery-independent data. This is due to the increased uncertainty associated with scaling infrequently captured species (Burnell et al., 2015). The information that is available and continue to be collected on ETPs from a combination of sources of higher and lower bias and verifiability (Table 16) is adequate to assess the UoA related mortality and impact and to determine whether the UoA may be a threat to protection and recovery of the ETP species. There is a commitment to improve fishery-independent data collection on ETP species, more specifically on syngnathids, during the three annual stock assessment surveys. PIRSA/SARDI and SGWCPFA have agreed through a MoU to adopt an independent monitoring ETP interactions as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program (EMP) that was implemented starting with 2019/20 season (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). It was proposed that the data to be collected by observers would ideally include counts and weights of all selected species (including ETP species identified in bycatch surveys) for estimating their relative abundance and biomass. The same methods developed for the gulf-wide bycatch surveys of 2007 (Currie et al. 2009) and 2013 (Burnell et al. 2015) should be followed to ensure consistency and comparability of results. The nature of interaction and status of all ETP species should also be recorded by the survey observer (which is a crew member) and cross-checked with the skipper to ensure accuracy of entries in the Wildlife Interaction Logbook. During normal fishing (including fishery-dependent, or ‘spot’, surveys), the skipper is required to record interactions with ETP species in the Wildlife Interaction Logbook. The independent data could be used to determine whether there is a significant discrepancy in rate of reporting of ETP species between surveys and fishing. As the majority of interactions with ETP species in the SGPF is with syngnathids, a detailed identification key and training should be regularly provided (i.e. at least annually) by SARDI to industry as part of the existing skipper/observer meetings to ensure accurate reporting (Noell, 2019). In addition to fishery independent monitoring, research on post-capture survival of syngnathids has been proposed (Noell, 2019). The SGPF Research Plan also makes provisions for reviews of alternative measures to be undertaken although a schedule for such reviews is not yet available (SGWCPFA, 2019b). The proposed fishery-independent monitoring of ETPs and research are likely to strengthen the information on the status of ETP species and the impact from the SGPF and support a comprehensive strategy in the future.

8.3.11 Habitat Outcome (PI 2.4.1) The MSC standard requires that fisheries do not cause serious or irreversible harm to the structure and function of the habitat. Serious or irreversible harm to “structure or function” of the habitat means changes caused by the UoA that fundamentally alter the capacity of the habitat to maintain its structure and function (MSC, 2018a, 30). The MSC’s definition of “serious or irreversible harm” for habitat is similar to the FAO Guidelines’ definition of “significant adverse impacts”. A key consideration in both definitions is the concept of reversibility or recoverability. Both definitions consider the time frame required for a habitat to recover. Damage requiring 5-20 years (or more) from which to recover should be considered “serious or irreversible” or “significantly adverse”, consistent with FAO (2009 in MSC, 2018b, p.83). The MSC defines “recovery” as recovering to at least 80% of the level to which the habitat would eventually recover in the absence of all fishing, considering the existing environmental and anthropomorphic conditions – a hypothetical climax state under existing conditions. This is often referred to in the text as an “unimpacted” level. The MSC has nominated the 80% level as a reasonable point at which to expect most of the habitat’s structure and function (including abundance and biological diversity) to have been restored, taking into consideration the likely logistic population growth of habitat-forming organisms (MSC, 2018b, p.83). ‘Main’ habitats are the commonly encountered ones and Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs), while all other habitats classify as ‘minor’.

82 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

The impact to habitat is assessed against potential ‘serious or irreversible harm’. To understand the impact of the SGPF, habitat types and ranges need to be identified and fishery’s trawl footprint and the overlap with each habitat range need to be analysed. The MSC’s intent in specifying the “area covered by the governance body responsible for fisheries management in the area where the UoA operates” (the “managed area” for short) is to consider by default the habitat impacts within the areas controlled by the management regimes under which the UoA operates (MSC, 2018b, p 86). This would imply that the whole ‘managed area’ under the jurisdiction of PIRSA Fisheries and Agriculture (SA state waters) should be considered. As an inverse estuary, Spencer Gulf has unique environmental conditions, although mapped habitat types encountered in Spencer Gulf are also encountered in other areas within the ‘managed area’ (see Table 21). Habitat classification The available habitat mapping has been reviewed when South Australia’s Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (SARSMPA) was established and presented in a Technical Report (DEH, 2009). Based on the national Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia (IMCRA) marine bioregions developed in 1998, eight marine bioregions have been recognised by the South Australian Government for the ‘managed area’, three of which completely or partially overlapping Spencer Gulf (Figure 14). Each marine bioregion contains biological and physical characteristics distinct from those elsewhere in Australia (DEH, 2009). Habitat mapping was mainly available for shallow nearshore habitats and most of the ‘managed area’ was unmapped (

Figure 15. The extent of habitat mapping within the ‘managed area’ considered for the MSC assessment (blue = unmapped area). Source: Seamap Australia, Lucieer et al (2017).

Table 20). However, North Spencer Gulf Area, where most of the SGPF high trawl intensity areas are located (Figure 16), had the highest level of mapping. Table 21 presents mapped benthic habitat types identified in the Technical Report and their presence or absence in each bioregion.

83 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 14. South Australia’s marine bioregions. Source: DEH (2009)

Figure 15. The extent of habitat mapping within the ‘managed area’ considered for the MSC assessment (blue = unmapped area). Source: Seamap Australia, Lucieer et al (2017).

Table 20. Area of each marine bioregion and percent of the State's waters Bioregion Bioregion extent km2 % of State waters % of bioregion unmapped Eucla 1863 3.1 76 Murat 6482 10.8 78

84 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Eyre 18610 30.9 80 Spencer Gulf 11539 19.1 66 North Spencer Gulf 5235 8.7 1 Gulf St Vincent 13184 21.9 71 Coorong 2048 3.4 42 Otway 1320 2.2 48 TOTAL 60282 100 66 Source: DEH (2009)

Table 21. Benthic habitats mapped within SA state waters

Nth Benthic (subtidal) habitats Otway Coorong GSV Spencer Spencer Eyre Murat Eucla

Sparse seagrass ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Medium seagrass ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Dense seagrass ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Dense seagrass patches ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Granite reef ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Heavy limestone or calcarenite reef ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Low profile platform reef ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Bare sand ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Source: DEH, 2009 ♦occurs in bioregion Spencer Gulf Habitats and SGPF Overlap Commonly Encountered Habitat A commonly encountered habitat is defined as a habitat that regularly comes into contact with a gear used by the UoA, considering the spatial (geographical) overlap of fishing effort with the habitat’s range within the management area(s) covered by the governance body(s) relevant to the UoA. Jones et al (2018) have collated all available data on benthic habitats in for their study of cumulative impacts on Spencer Gulf habitats. Unmapped habitats were inferred based on biological communities and sediment type (Figure 16) (Jones et al, 2018). Sediment types and their distribution in Spencer Gulf have been identified in O’Connell et al (2016). Information on spatial distribution and abundance of habitat forming species is available from the two gulf-wide bycatch surveys. Mayfield et al (2014) have analysed and mapped data on habitat forming species from the first bycatch survey (Figure 17).

85 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Figure 16. Average trawl intensity of the SGPF from 2001/02–2018/19, and benthic habitat (Jones et al. 2018) and sedimentary facies (O’Connell et al. 2016) of Spencer Gulf.

Based on the above information, habitat types and their overlap with the SGPF have been identified by PIRSA and SARDI and were subject of a semi-quantitative risk assessment to identify the level of risk the SGPF poses to main habitats. Areas of low (0.5–1 h km-2 yr-1) and medium (1–10 h km-2 yr-1) trawl intensity predominantly overlapped subtidal soft habitat (87% and 76%, respectively), which mostly consists of mixed skeletal sand (69% and 64%). The area of high trawl intensity (>10 h km-2 yr-1) overlapped subtidal soft (60%) and seagrass habitat (32%), each of which consist mostly of rhodolith gravelly sand (74% and 93%, respectively). When compared to the overall trawl footprint total area, most of the area is occupied by subtidal soft habitat (77%), the proportion of seagrass is 16%, while the sedimentary facies consist of either mixed skeletal sand (49%) or rhodolith gravelly sand (26%) (Table 22) (Noell and Beckmann, 2019).

86 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Although the overlap between the benthic habitat map and the trawl footprint has been quantified, there still is some uncertainty. The benthic habitat map represents the collation of available spatial data from several sources; however, these data varied in resolution and collection method, which can introduce uncertainty into the resulting map (Jones et al. 2018). PIRSA and SARDI considered the overlap of the benthic habitat map and the trawl footprint appropriate for broadly identifying the main habitat trawled by the SGPF and conducting a Consequence Spatial Analysis (CSA), using the MSC Risk Based Framework methodology (Noell and Beckmann, 2019). Based on the predominant habitat and sedimentary characteristics, and when matched to nomenclature used by the MSC to define habitat in terms of substratum, geomorphology and characteristic biota, one main habitat type was identified (Noell and Beckmann). The SGPF operates in the benthic zone with substrate consisting of fine sandy or muddy sediment. The geomorphology of this environment is generally flat, with simple surface structure and mixed small/low encrusting invertebrate communities. The habitat type commonly encountered by the SGPF was classified for the ERA as ‘Fine-Flat-Small encrusting’ (Noell and Beckmann, 2019). Table 22. Area of overlap (km2) between benthic habitat and sedimentary facies for each trawl intensity category of the SGPF. Shaded bars indicate the predominance of habitat-sediment combination by trawl intensity category (colour) and total trawl footprint (i.e. sum of low, moderate and high intensity) (black).

87 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

The CSA output undertaken by PIRSA was considered as information for this assessment, although the scores were not translated into MSC score for commonly encountered habitat. The CSA score resulted in ‘medium’ risk. Based on Table 21, and habitat forming species distribution maps produced in Mayfield et al (2014), CAB decided that although there is one broad scale commonly encountered habitat, this can be sub-divide into two types of commonly encountered habitats (mesoscale): - rhodolith habitat with encrusting and low biota (e.g. low seagrass, algae, cnidarians, see Figure 17) - open sand habitat with sponges (mapped as ‘bare sand’ in the NSG, Figure 17).

Figure 17. Spatial distribution of habitat forming species groups from the 2007 bycatch survey (Currie et al, 2009) overlaid on trawl intensity contours (10 years average trawl intensity 2002/03 – 2011/12). Source: Mayfield et al (2014)

Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems VMEs have one or more of the following characteristics, as defined in paragraph 42 of the FAO Guidelines: • Uniqueness or rarity – an area or ecosystem that is unique or that contains rare species whose loss could not be compensated for by similar areas or ecosystems • Functional significance of the habitat – discrete areas or habitats that are necessary for survival, function, spawning/reproduction, or recovery of fish stocks; for particular life- history stages (e.g., nursery grounds, rearing areas); or for ETP species • Fragility – an ecosystem that is highly susceptible to degradation by anthropogenic activities • Life-history traits of component species that make recovery difficult – ecosystems that are characterised by populations or assemblages of species that are slow growing, are slow maturing, have low or unpredictable recruitment, and/or are long lived • Structural complexity – an ecosystem that is characterised by complex physical structures created by significant concentrations of biotic and abiotic features (MSC, 2018b, p.82). Habitats with the above characteristics classify as VMEs if they are protected specifically because of these characteristics.

88 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

The MSC’s intent is that, even though the FAO Guidelines were written for deep-sea fisheries, the Guidelines’ VME characteristics also apply to non-deep-sea fisheries. Further, when the FAO Guidelines are applied in shallow, inshore waters, the definition of VME could include other species groups and communities (e.g., seagrass beds, complex kelp- dominated habitats, biogenic reefs) (MSC, 2018b, p.83). To identify VMEs, CAB considered closed areas and the reasons for closures.

In 2009, nineteen marine parks, covering more than 26,000 km2 of sea, were declared in South Australian waters. The scope of the marine parks is to protect marine biodiversity, including iconic animals and birds such as Australian sea lions, leafy sea dragons, dolphins, great white sharks, little penguins and pelicans. They also conserve mangrove forests and other important habitats and places with strong cultural heritage associations, including those with special significance to Aboriginal people. Spencer Gulf contains five of the SA marine parks, with a total of 8621 km2 each park with its own outer boundary and internal zoning and with its own management plan. Prawn trawling is prohibited within both Sanctuary Zones and Habitat Protection Zones and detailed maps and GPS coordinates for the parks are available from the SA Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (Figure 18). Habitat protection zones were selected to include representative for the habitats encountered in Spencer Gulf (DEH, 2009). However, no habitats that were recognised as VME could be identified within the SA marine parks network.

Figure 18. Marine parks in Spencer Gulf. Green filled zones are marine sanctuary zones and blue dark areas represent habitat protection zones where trawling is not allowed (https://www.environment.sa.gov.au/marineparks/home) Waters with depths less than 10 meters are closed to trawling (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). In addition, currently, there are four industry self-imposed permanent closures (Figure 19). The Point Lowly and Wardang closures were implemented to protect sensitive benthic habitats and syngnathids while the Broughton closure was implemented to protect juvenile and spawning marine scale species (SGWCPFA, 2017). A fourth self-imposed closure is the Corny Point which has been identified to limit the fishery’s impact on spawning King George whiting. Corny Point area is closed until further

89 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

notice (SGWCPFA, 2017). Although some of Industry closures protect sensitive habitats that are important for syngnathids and other species, these habitats were not recognised as VMEs and were not primarily closed because of the VME characteristic. Based on the information available at this stage, although organisms that could be VME indicator (e.g. filter feeders) occur in Spencer Gulf no habitats were recognised as VME so far.

Figure 19. Location of Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery self-imposed closures. Source: SPWCPFA, 2020

Minor Habitat All remaining benthic habitat types within the managed area classify as minor: SGPF impact on main habitats (commonly encountered) Rhodolith Habitat

90 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Rhodoliths occur throughout 70% of Australia’s coastline. In SA, rhodoliths occur in Spencer Gulf, Gulf St Vincent and Kangaroo Island (Figure 20). Their distribution is extensive from the intertidal zone down to 10-m depth, frequently co- dominant with seagrass and brown algae species; common at 20-m depth in Spencer Gulf and isolated in the shallows of Gulf of St Vincent (Harvey et al, 2017). According to the Scientific Working Group (SWG) (2011) these coralline algae thrive in the euphotic zone where seagrasses are excluded by either high tidal currents (northern gulf) or high nutrients, promoting phytoplankton growth that limits light at the seafloor. However, Harvey et al (2017) have found that rhodoliths thrive coexisting with seagrass because they are protected from bleaching when growing under dense seagrass canopy. Although rhodolith habitats are protected elsewhere (e.g New Zealand, SWG, 2011) due to their high productivity and species richness, Svane did not find the same characteristics for Spencer Gulf’s rhodolith habitat. The distribution of rhodoliths in Spencer Gulf seems to be patchy and does not support a high biodiversity according to Svane et al. (2009), may be due to historical exposure to considerable trawling effort. However, the unimpacted status and distribution of rhodolith habitat in Spencer Gulf is not known. Considering the dynamic life-history of these biogenic structures and tidal movement and wind-driven waves that seem to control the rhodolith distribution in bays and gulfs (SWG, 2011), change in the distribution of this type of habitat over time are expected but cannot be attributed to a certain cause. Two main regions with rhodolith habitat, which may differ as structure and service to ecosystem, seem to occur in Spencer Gulf, one in the north region of SGPF area and the second in the southwest (Figure 16) (O’Connell et al., 2016). High and medium intensity trawling occurs on gravelly sand rhodolith patch from NSG. The exact percentage overlap of rhodolith habitat from ‘managed area’ with the SGPF trawl footprint is not known, although at visual inspection of the distribution maps in Spencer Gulf and South Australia, probably this is less than 20% of the habitat range. Rhodoliths are known to be slow to recover, although they were found to be highly resilient following following the Deep Horizon oil spill(Harvey et al, 2017).

Figure 20. Distribution of rhodoliths along Australia’s coast. Source: Harvey et al (2017) Rhodolith beds have withstood over 40 years of prawn trawling history and continue to be caught in significant quantities in trawl nets (2.5% of the catch biomass from high intensity sites and 0.8% of the catch from high and medium sites combined, SARDI, 2015 excel file). The consistent presence of rhodoliths in high trawl intensity areas demonstrates that this habitat regenerates at a sufficient rate to maintain its presence, even if perhaps at lower densities. The current SGPF fishing activity is highly unlikely to further cause irreversible harm. Open Sand Habitat with filter feeders This habitat was categorised as ‘bare sand’ in the NSG (EPA, 2018), although considering habitat forming species mapping (Mayfield et al, 2014), this habitat type may support filter feeder organisms with low coverage (maximum catch rate for sponges on trawl grounds seems to be 5g/ha, Figure 17). The low sponge coverage on trawl grounds has been correlated with high intensity trawling area, although it is possible that low coverage is also due to the high bottom shear stress (Figure 21) coinciding with high prawn fishing intensity areas. By controlling trawl footprint and maintain fishing effort at the current level, Spencer Gulf adopts a precautionary management to not increase the risk to filter feeder communities (PIRSA, 2015). Also, real time management includes decision to move on when sponge bycatch is high (Clark, 2015, pers. comm.). The percentage overlap of the range of habitat with filter feeder

91 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

assemblages is not known exactly. MPA Technical Report mentions abundant sponge habitat in Gulf St Vincent and Otway bioregions, but not in Spencer Gulf (DEH, 2009). In addition, bare sand habitat occurs in all bioregions and possibly supporting filter feeder organisms. It is highly unlikely that the SGPF impact more than 20% of this habitat type. While the fishery probably had some impact on habitat over the fifty years of activity, the SGPF is highly unlikely to further reduce habitat structure and function to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm because, as the trawl footprint and the sponge distribution maps show, most of the sponge and other filter feeder communities occur in no or low trawling areas.

Figure 21. Bottom stress (shear stress) magnitudes during the month of the highest bottom stress (August), according to a hydrodynamic model that incorporates tidal influence and other bottom currents within Spencer Gulf (model, Luick et al., 2013). Source: O’Connell (2016) Minor Habitats Seagrass habitat is the only minor habitat that overlaps with the fishing grounds. Most dense seagrass meadows occur in closed areas under 10m depth and Lowly and Wardang closures. Low to high intensity trawling has occurred on approximately 12% of the total seagrass habitat in Spencer Gulf (5,512 km2, EPA, 2018). The highest abundance of seagrass in SA occurs in Spencer Gulf (EPA, 2018), although if all seagrass habitat within the ‘managed area’ is considered, the percentage overlap will be lower. The SGPF is highly unlikely to reduce the structure and function of the minor habitat to a point of serious or irreversible harm (to less than 80% of the unimpacted structure and function). Subtidal rocky habitat is avoided because it can damage trawl gear, although trawl footprint suggests a slight overlap. The percentage overlap is not known although heavy limestone or calcarenite reef occurs in every SA bioregion, except for NSG (Table 21) and it is unlikely that the overlap with SGPF is higher than 20% of the unimpacted level. Relative Benthic Status Under a recent project (Pitcher et al. 2018), the impact of Australian trawl fisheries on benthic habitats was assessed, with consideration of existing spatial management. The project aimed to quantify the overlap of mapped seabed assemblages with trawl footprints, and with areas of spatial management that exclude trawling, by building on previously collated data and assemblage mapping, as well as data for Commonwealth and state demersal trawling effort, fishery closures and marine reserves. This report showed that the majority of habitats that overlap with Australian trawl fisheries are minimally exposed to trawl effort or adequately protected by existing spatial closures. Pitcher et al. (2018) have estimated the Relative Benthic Status (RBS) of the predicted assemblages as a measure of the habitat status. RBS provides an estimate of the long‐term equilibrium status of the benthos with current trawling effort, relative to that with no trawling (Pitcher et al, 2018). The RBS is calculated as the rate of change in the identified assemblage over time 92 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

(depending on the rate of depletion due to trawling and the rate of recovery) compared to unimpacted level (carrying capacity) (Pitcher et al 2017). The RBS is precautionarily estimated based on the upper confidence interval for depletion and the lower confidence interval for recovery (Pitcher et al, 2017). The RBS is the average status, considering the proportion of the habitat with status of 100%, the proportion with status 80%, the proportion with status 50% and the proportion with status 0%. This measure allows an assessment of habitat status against sustainability standards that require that 80% of the habitats to be in 80% status (Pitcher et al. 2018).≥ SA habitats were found to have a≥ low swept area and adequate closures, with average status (RBS index) higher than 90 (Pitcher et al, 2018). Cumulative Impact Assessment for SG Habitats Jones et al (2018) aimed to captured expert opinions and uncertainty within spatial cumulative impact assessments. The authors identified 10 broad scale benthic ecosystems. Three of these could not be included in the impact assessment due to limited spatial data. These sponge habitat, rhodolith beds and native shellfish. These are thought to be small in extent. This study produced the first full coverage broad scale benthic habitat map for Spencer Gulf based on surrogates in the absence of ground truthing mapping. Seven habitat types, including habitats trawled by the SGPF (Figure 16) were subject to an impact assessment. The authors found that the greatest cumulative impacts occurred in areas close to the coast, especially near major industrial developments and towns. The most significant threats for benthic and pelagic ecosystems were pollution, and climate change. Most impacted zones for benthic and pelagic broad scale ecosystems tended to be northern gulf and coastal areas while less impacted are in southern parts of the gulf and areas with moderate depth. Overall, results of the impact assessment indicated that benthic habitats are relatively unaffected by human activities. This study supports the fact that SGPF does not create serious or irreversible harm to habitats. 8.3.12 Habitat Management (PI 2.4.2) PIRSA together with the Government of South Australia Department of Environment and Water (DEW) manage and conserve the aquatic habitats of South Australia. Habitat management is based around a bioregional marine planning framework, and an ecosystem-based fisheries management approach, involving ecological risk assessments. Management takes a precautionary approach to risks identified for habitats and includes areas that are permanently closed to trawling and other gears and a system of representative marine protected areas that offering permanent protection from any bottom-contacting gears. All commercial fisheries and recreational fisheries are managed by PIRSA and a comprehensive set of spatial management closures within the SA bioregions, including in Spencer Gulf, has established. Trawl closures include all waters shallower than 10m (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). In addition, extensive Industry self-imposed closures protect habitats that are important for the biology and sustainability of commercial species targeted in overlapping fisheries and ETPs. Goal 3 of the SGPF Management Plan aims to protect and conserve aquatic resources, habitats and ecosystems. Measures to achieve these objectives are: i) controls on fishing effort through: restriction on the number of licences, mesh size and head line length restrictions, limits on the amount of gear used in the fishery; ii) restriction to areas and times in line with fishing strategy, iii) closed areas maintained e.g. waters <10m, iv) technology to reduce impacts of fishing activity on habitats developed and promoted where appropriate, v) impacts on habitat and associated species communities continue to be monitored. These measures are supported by defined and measurable performance indicators, management reference levels, and control rules (see Table 24) (PIRSA, 2014a). Habitats within the managed area have been partially mapped while the unmapped habitats can be inferred from information on sediments and biota. Strategic research is undertaken to addressing the remaining gaps and develop performance indicators for habitat strategy evaluation. Means to modify the management measures in place if proven inefficient are available through the SWCSGPA’s research and management committees. A key part of the management strategy is to limit fishing to the existing trawl area and not allow any expansion into other areas. As a reference point, management measures will be triggered if fishing annual footprint changes more than 2% over the historic maximum annual fishing footprint (PIRSA, 2014a). These precautionary reference points are likely to change when, based on more research, appropriate performance indicators are going to be developed and included in an ecological management program (PIRSA, 2019a, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). Overall, there is a precautionary strategy in place for managing the impact of all MSC UoAs/non-MSC fisheries on habitats. Management Strategy Evaluation Evidence that the strategy works can be drawn from the two gulf-wide bycatch surveys which show that variations in benthic communities were not significant over time and are related to other physical and environmental factors rather than trawling. To support the strategy for mitigating impacts on benthic habitat, in the absence of accurate information on composition and distribution of habitat types across Spencer Gulf in waters >10m depth, historic trawl footprint

93 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

was mapped using location and intensity of fishing effort as an index of potential impact. This indicator is likely to be further developed and used for strategy evaluation based on new research the SGWCPFA and PIRSA agreed on (SGWCPFA and PIRSA 2019). Management Strategy Implementation The co-management arrangements for the SGPF are designed to achieve successful implementation of the strategy for managing impact of all habitat elements. Fishing strategies, including habitat impact management strategies, are developed, according to the management plan, by the SGWCPFA Management Committee (PIRSA, 2014a). The Committee-at-Sea, makes real-time decisions about fishing, in accordance with the fishing strategy established by the Management Committee, such as move-on rules when a high catch rate of sponges is recorded, although there is no set rule on the quantity of sponges that would trigger a move-on. To ensure strategies are implemented successfully PIRSA Fisheries runs a compliance program that has dual objectives. Voluntary compliance is maximised through the co- management system and ensures that fishers are aware of and understand the rules that apply to their fishing activities, such as maintaining historical footprint; that they understand the purpose of the rules; and that they operate in a culture of compliance. Effective deterrence is created by peer pressure as applied by the Committee at Sea, along with the occasional presence of fisheries officers and compliance operations. Trawl Track monitoring of the fishing activity ensures that trawl footprint is maintained. 8.3.13 Habitat Information (PI 2.4.3) Information on the distribution and vulnerability of the benthic habitats in Exmouth Gulf and the UoAs’ impact is available from (list not exhaustive): - Habitat mapping and habitat characterisation for nearshore habitats presented in a Technical Report produced when SARSMPA was established (DEH, 2009); - Information on Spencer Gulf’s sedimentology (O’Connell et al, 2016) - Information on the distribution and abundance of habitat forming species in Spencer Gulf (Mayfield et al, 2014) - Reports from two gulf-wide bycatch surveys (Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al 2015) - Report on the distribution and diversity of sponges in Spencer Gulf (Sorokin and Currie, 2009) - Spatially resolved catch and effort data sourced from fishery logbooks and used by SARDI to estimate trawl footprint - Cumulative trawl footprint estimation (Noell, 2017, Noell and Hooper, 2019, Noell and Beckmann, 2019) - A compilation of all habitat information with an inference of the unmapped habitat types and ranges, in a study of cumulative effects on Spencer Gulf habitats (Jones et al, 2018) - An interactive mapping service, Seamap Australia, (Lucieer et al, 2019) - Reports from a quantitative method for assessing the risks to benthic habitats by towed bottom fishing gears (Pitcher et al, 2018) - Quantitative information of the extent of the trawl footprint overlap with each habitat type identified from a semi-quantitative assessment of risk for commonly encountered habitat (Noell and Beckmann, 2019). Although not all the habitats over the ‘managed area’ have been mapped, at least for Spencer Gulf, habitat types and their ranges could be inferred from information on sedimentology, geomorphology and biota. This information was used by PIRSA to determine and assess the risk the SGPF poses to commonly encountered habitat. In doing so, the extent of the overlap of the trawl footprint and habitat was estimated, although it is not known what percentage of each habitat range is impacted by the fishery. Only for seagrass habitat in Spencer Gulf habitat overlap could be estimated because information on total seagrass area is available (EPA, 2018). Nevertheless, habitats that were identified in Spencer Gulf occur across the managed area, while the SGPF’s impact is very localised. Footprint data was used also in Pitcher project which aimed to estimate a national level of impact from trawl fisheries on benthic habitats (Pitcher et al. 2018). This project estimated RBS indices for soft sediment habitats higher than 0.90 suggesting that fishery’s impact does not reduce the structure and function of the habitat to levels lower than 80% from the unimpacted level. Physical impact on all other habitats have been quantified through trawl footprint area overlap, although for the commonly encountered habitats, it is not clear what percentage of the habitat range is impacted. All Physical impacts of the gear on all habitats have not been quantified fully. There is commitment from the SGWCPFA and PIRSA for research and implementation of an ecological monitoring program (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). SGPF Research Plan 2019 makes provisions for an assessment of habitat types to be conducted in trawled and untrawled areas, to provide information on the fishery’s overlap with the various habitats, and to assess potential habitat recovery. This will be incorporated as a component of the ecological monitoring program (SGWCPFA, 2019b).

94 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

8.3.14 Ecosystem Outcome (PI2.5.1) The MSC Standard requires that fisheries should not cause serious or irreversible harm to the structure or function of the ecosystem where they are undertaking their fishing activities. Serious or irreversible harm to “structure or function” means changes caused by the UoA that fundamentally alter the capacity of the ecosystem to maintain its structure and function (MSC, 2018a, p. 30). The fishery should not reduce those key features that are crucial to maintaining the integrity and structure of the ecosystem, ensuring that ecosystem resilience and productivity are not adversely impacted. Serious and irreversible harm includes, but not limited to, permanent changes in the biological diversity of the ecological community and the ecosystem’s capacity to deliver ecosystem services (MSC, 2018a, p. 30) The ecosystem impacts of the SGPF have been assessed and modelled by Gillanders et al (2015). Results from this project indicated that the trawling activities in Spencer Gulf over 20 years did not affect the overall biodiversity and cannot be distinguished from other sources of variations in community structure (Gillanders et al 2015). The authors, however, advise that an increase in fishing effort would negatively impact various trophic levels. Scenario testing suggested that the ecological impacts of increased bycatch were more significant than an increase in targeted catch, the western king prawn (Gillanders et al., 2015). The SGPF is a limited entry fishery with 39 licensed operators since 1976 (has been operating since late 1960’s). Trawling activity is prohibited during daylight hours and in waters less than 10 m in depth. Effort is restricted by spatial and temporal closures, vessel size and power, and configuration of trawl gear (including type and number of nets towed, maximum headline length and minimum mesh size). The effort in the fishery has been stable since 2001/02, with a mean of 18,756 ± 1,208 h (CV 6.4%), which is 41% of the historic peak. There were no significant increases in fishing effort since the ecosystem modelling study was undertaken (see Noell and Hooper, Figure 3.6b) and it is expected that ecological impacts from the fishery remained low and undistiguishable from other sources of variation. Ecosystem Effects of Catch Removal and Discarding The 2011 ERA workshop panel ranked the impact of fishing on the overall ecosystem as moderate and identified knowledge gaps in trophic level analyses and food web information. The stakeholder panel agreed that the impact of fishing is sustainable as long as effort controls are in place and fishing does not extend to new areas. It was considered that because the fishery operates within a small area (< 30% of the area allowed for trawling, or <15% of the gulf, Noell and Hooper, 2019) that the integrity of the community overall is maintained even if there are some localised changes (PIRSA, 2014b). To reduce the identified knowledge gaps, Gillanders et al. (2015) undertook a FRDC funded project to develop an Ecosystem Model for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Spencer Gulf. The authors note that some change has already occurred in the Spencer Gulf ecosystem although, at the current levels of fishing effort, the SGPF does not appear to create serious or irreversible harm to the overall ecosystem. While several measures of the marine ecosystem increased slightly over time (mean trophic level of catch, fishing in balance index (FIB)), general biodiversity measures were similar throughout the 1990s and 2000s (Gillanders et al, 2015). To be noted that the ecosystem model included impact from all fisheries in Spencer Gulf and, during the reference period, fishing effort increased about 300% due to the increase in sardine catch, while other fisheries reduced their effort. At the same time, catches of king prawn and calamari remained at the 1990’s levels (Gillanders et al, 2015). The changes Gillanders et al (2015) identified to have occurred over the period studied consist in increased biomass of New Zealand fur seals, while the biomass of Australian sea lion decreased after an initial increase in early and mid- 2000s. There was some decrease in common dolphin biomass, bottlenose dolphin biomass was estimated to have remained relatively stable between 1991 and 2010 (Gillanders et al, 2015). Changes in seabird biomass include declines in petrels and little penguins (driven by predation by seals) and increases in gulls. For the combined groups of pelagic sharks (white, whaler, smooth hammerhead and common thresher sharks), demersal sharks (gummy, school, Port Jackson and other demersal sharks) and rays and skates all were projected to have increased in biomass over the modelled period, with the greatest increases in rays and skates and demersal sharks. Most increases in the biomass of these groups are attributed to marked reductions in fishing mortality that have occurred principally through declines in fishing effort in the Marine Scalefish Fishery (Gillanders et al, 2015). None of these changes seem to have been driven by the SGPF’s operations. The ecosystem modelling study did not identify western king prawn as a key element of the ecosystem, such key elements were rather cephalopods and some pelagic fish. The only species bottom-up controlled by prawns were the gummy sharks. There were no significant top-down controls from prawns to other species. Gummy sharks are

95 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

incidentally caught in the MSF and other fisheries in Spencer Gulf, under strict license conditions. The species is targeted by a Commonwealth fishery within Commonwealth waters and the stock of gummy sharks was assessed as sustainable in 2018 (Emery et al, 2019). Gillanders et al. (2015) ecosystem model forecasted that an increase in king prawn exploitation rates would impact most on the target species (western king prawns), and their key predators. Declines in biomass would be mostly directed towards medium-sized crustacean specialist fish, and medium-sized piscivorous fish, and declines in these groups would lead to declines in apex predators biomass, including demersal sharks (Port Jackson, gummy and school), some pelagic sharks (smooth hammerhead, whaler and white), shags and cormorants and marine mammals (dolphins and seals). Small increases in biomass would occur in southern calamari, anchovy, medium molluscan fishes and small polychaete specialist fishes, silverbelly, barracouta, southern bluefin tuna, thresher shark, little penguin and Australasian gannet (Gillanders et al., 2015). Current levels of discarding were not found to have significant effects on the ecosystem overall or its components. Svane et al., (2003) studied the fate of prawn trawl discards. The authors calculated that a discarding rate of 53mg/m2 per year would be available to scavengers, assuming an even distribution of discards. This was calculated using the low bycatch ratio found by Carrick (1997). Using the discard ratio found at the 2013 gulf-wide bycatch survey, this quantity would probably be higher. Considering that fishing effort is not evenly distributed over the allowable fishing area, but concentrated on about <30% of this area (based on cumulative trawl footprint, Noell, 2017), the discarded bycatch would be concentrated in this area. Also, discarded by-catch is not distributed evenly in time, fishing being open for only about 60 days per year. Svane et al (2003) observed that first to feed on discards were dolphins and seagulls. The mean number of dolphins feeding on discarded by-catch was 1.3 dolphins per boat and observation while for seabirds, 1.2 seagulls per boat and observation. If fishing takes place 60 days a year an estimated 190.4 ton of discards, according to Svane’s calculation, can potentially be consumed by dolphins while seagulls can potentially consume 1591.2 kg discards from the prawn fishery per year. The remaining 808 ton will sink to the bottom and be consumed by sealice at night and what remains will be consumed by leatherjackets and blue crabs by day. A large unknown amount is likely to be consumer by Port Jackson sharks and stingrays. As the authors note, these results were based on estimates involving several assumptions and likely to be associated with both observational and experimental errors (Svane et al., 2003). To be noted that when the discard rate estimated from the latest bycatch survey and the current level of target catch are used, the quantity of discards is probably 10 times higher than Svane et al (2003) estimated. In Gillanders et al. (2015), models of increases in prawn catch showed impacts mainly on the target species and its predators. However, models that took discards into consideration when modelling the increase in fishing effort, showed impacts on several trophic levels. The ecosystem modelling study suggested that the ecological impacts of increased bycatch will be more significant than increases in target catches of western king prawn, therefore efforts to reduce bycatch in SGPF should be continued to mitigate the ecological impacts of this fishery on the Spencer Gulf ecosystem or the effort should not increase (Gillanders et al. 2015). More information to support that the structure and function of the Spencer Gulf ecosystem is not seriously or irreversibly harm due to the SGPF can be derived comparing the results of the two gulf-wide bycatch surveys. Burnell et al (2015) have analysed and compared these results. The authors found that the overall biodiversity did not change in a five-year interval and there where no significant differences between the patterns of abundance and distribution of the species caught. Other Effects of Prawn Trawling Other possible negative ecosystem effects from prawn trawling are regularly assessed during ERA workshops. These include translocation of organisms, turbidity, physical effects of trawling, anchoring, lost gear, pollution by debris, oil spills and sewage. A final report for the 2019 ERA is not available, although this assessment is expected to have resulted in risk scores for these hazards that are similar to the one from the previous ERA. Except for the physical effects of trawling and oil spills, all risk scores were ‘negligible’ (PIRSA, 2014b). The risk of oil spills was ranked as ‘moderate’ due to the serious consequences if such spills would occur, although the likelihood was considered low. The risk of physical impacts from trawling was ranked as ‘moderate’. Such impacts were considered discernible in high intensity fishing areas, although these constitute only a small area of the gulf. These effects were considered appropriately managed by controlling effort in the fishery and trawl footprint (PIRSA, 2014b). Overall, SGPF is highly unlikely to disrupt the key elements underlying ecosystem structure and function to a point where there would be a serious or irreversible harm. Ecosystem modelling study and the results from bycatch surveys

96 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

can be considered evidence for this statement. While the precision of estimation for the conclusions derived in the ecosystem modelling report is not explicit, this would not be lower than 80% for the analytical work carried out.

8.3.15 Ecosystem Management (PI 2.5.2)

The SGPF Management Plan defines long-term management objectives, which are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC PI 2.5.1 (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). A goal of this management plan is the management of the SGPF as part of the broader ecosystem, using an ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) approach. Goal 3 of the SGPF management plan, constitutes a plan to address all main impacts of the SGPF on the ecosystem, and at least some of these measures are in place. The objectives of Goal 3 are: • Fishery impacts on by-catch and by-product species are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on threatened, endangered and protected species (TEPS) are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on benthic habitat and associated species communities are sustainable.

To efficiently meet the EBFM requirements, PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture has adopted the ‘National Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) Reporting Framework for Fisheries’, developed by Fletcher et al. (2002). The steps of this analysis include: • Identifying the issues relevant to the fishery. • Prioritising these issues. In order to identify and prioritise issues, PIRSA uses a qualitative risk assessment for non-species components that make up the SGPF and some ecosystem components of the fishery, and a semi-quantitative assessment (ERAEF) for: target species, byproduct (retained bugs and calamari), bycatch species and defined habitat(s) in the fishery. To inform the ERAs, a vast range of information is available, among which, target species biennial stock assessments (e.g. Noell and Hooper, 2019), bycatch surveys (e.g. Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015), byproduct study (Roberts and Steer, 2010), ecosystem modelling study (Gillander et al, 2015), trawl footprint (Noell, 2017), sedimentology (e.g. O’Connell et al, 2016), habitat mapping (DEH, 2009, EPA, 2018), and others. At the ERA workshops, if high risks are identified, strategies in place to manage the risk for each component assessed are discussed and changes to this strategies and additional measures are triggered if considered necessary. The ecosystem management strategy focuses on minimising impacts on ecosystem through maintaining the biomass levels of prawns and other retained species as well as minimizing bycatch, in order to minimise the potential for trophic perturbations. Other arrangements, such as gear restrictions, spatial and seasonal closures, a limited number of vessels and continue monitoring and research, further minimise the potential for ecosystem impacts through reducing potential impacts on the ecosystem components (i.e. retained non-target species, bycatch, ETP species and habitats). Performance indicators for achieving the objectives of Goal 3 include maintaining closed areas and controlling trawl footprint, maintaining appropriate monitoring and reporting, promoting technological changes for reducing impacts of fishing activity on the ecosystem components, developing Industry codes of practice where necessary (PIRSA 2014a, 2019a). Performance indicators are still in a development phase, with more research to be undertaken within the next few years and the development of an ecological monitoring program (SGWCPFA, 2019). There is some objective basis for confidence that the strategy will work, based on empirical testing - practical experience, and based on bycatch and habitat research, as well as analytical testing – ecosystem modelling. Evidence that ecosystem indicators are considered in fishing strategies and management practices consists in maintaining the level of fishing effort within a narrow range for the last 20 years (Noell and Hooper, 2019) to ensure the risk to the ecosystem remains at negligible levels as recommended by the ecosystem modelling study. Also, trawl footprint did not increase or shift to impact on new areas and increase risk to the ecosystem, as recommended by the initial study for developing an EBFM reporting framework (Mayfield et al, 2014). Effort and footprint control are evidence that the plan for the management of the ecosystem has been put in place and is shaping operations and decision-making, as well as the compliance outcomes reported in Compliance Reports, showing no that any illegal activity that could increase the risk to the ecosystem is detected and prosecuted, although no significant issues have been identified in recent years (PIRSA, 2019c).

97 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

8.3.16 Ecosystem Information (PI2.5.3) For an unconditional pass, the MSC standard requires that information is adequate to broadly understand the key elements of the ecosystem. The MSC defines “broadly understood” as follows: “there is a general knowledge of the component’s status, the UoA’s impact on the component, the component’s distribution or the key elements of the component. This general knowledge can be acquired from diverse sources that are relevant to the component and UoA but does not have to be locally derived information” (MSC, 2018a. p.29). Note that the components of the ecosystem consist in the target, primary, secondary, and ETP species and habitats. Each of these components can include certain key elements with essential roles in the ecosystem (e.g. tiger prawn might be a key element, having an important trophic role as pray and predator as is the case in the Northern Prawn Fishery’s ecosystem (Bustamante et al. 2010)). For the SGPF, it is considered that there is adequate information to broadly understand the key elements of the ecosystem. Information on species that occur in the fishery area and their patterns of distribution and abundance as well as changes in these patterns is available from the bycatch research that has been undertaken since 1990s (e.g. Carrick, 1997, McShane et al., 1998; Svane et al., 2007, Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015). Also studies on particular species of interest are available, such as on syngnathids and habitat forming species distribution (Mayfield et al, 2014), on sponges distribution (Sorokin and Currie, 2009), on byproduct species status (Roberts and Steer, 2010), on giant cuttlefish (Steer, 2015), as well as regular stock assessments on target species (western king prawn), (e,g. Noell and Hooper, 2019). Also, there is spatial understanding of the ecosystem functionality of different areas (spawning, nursery or feeding areas) from research on the biology and life histories of the target species in SGPF (Dixon et al, 2013) and also in overlapping fisheries (e.g. information on MSF target species in Steer et al, 2020). This was, for example, the basis for setting up Industry self-imposed permanent closures to protect spawning grounds and nursery areas. Information on the key predator species and key prey as well as keystone species (cephalopods) and the trophic relationships that exist between the species in the ecosystem, is available from the Spencer Gulf ecosystem modelling study (Gillanders et al, 2015). There is also information on stable isotope signatures of syngnathids in Spencer Gulf, the main groups of ETPs that interacts with the SGPF (Sorokin et al, 2009). The impact of the SGPF has been investigated in detail, specifically within the Spencer Gulf ecosystem model for fisheries and aquaculture (Gillanders et al, 2015). Also, impacts of discarding bycatch on predators that feed on discards have been studied in Spencer Gulf and elsewhere (e.g. Svane, 2005, Chilvers and Corkeron, 2001, Ansman et al., 2012). The impacts of the SGPF on target species, primary, secondary and ETP species and habitats have been identified and described in previous PIs. The main functions of these species have been identified in research, including their place in the trophic system through ecosystem modelling, as well as the functions of the main habitats and the main in the ecosystem and are known, although not in detail for all species (e.g. there is limited information of secondary species and ETP populations).

Adequate data continue to be collected through fishery independent monitoring (fishing surveys, bycatch surveys, research studies) and fishery dependent monitoring (spot surveys, commercial catch and effort logbooks, wildlife interaction logbook, at-sea monitoring) (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). There is commitment from the SGWCPFA and PIRSA for research and implementation of an ecological monitoring program (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019).

Table 23 - Scoring elements

Component Scoring elements Designation Data-deficient

e.g. P1, Primary, e.g. species or stock (SA Secondary, ETP, Habitats, Main or Minor 3.1.1.1) Ecosystems Western King Prawn P1 Target No (Melicertus latisulcatus) Australian Blue Swimmer Primary Main No Crab (Portunus armatus) King George Whiting Primary Minor No (Sillaginodes punctata)

98 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Snapper (Chrysophrys Primary Minor No (Pagrus) auratus) Southern garfish Primary (Hyporhamphus Minor No melanochir) Southern Calamari Primary Minor No (Sepioteuthis australis) Skipjack Trevally Secondary Minor Not assessed (Pseudocaranx wrighti) Degens Leatherjacket Secondary (Bluefin) (Thamnaconus Minor Not assessed degeni) Rough Leatherjacket Secondary Minor Not assessed (Scobinichthys granulatus) Port Jackson Shark Secondary (Heterodontus Minor Not assessed portusjacksoni) Red Mullet (Bluespotted Secondary Goatfish) (Upeneichthys Minor Not assessed vlamingii) Prickly Toadfish (Contusus Secondary Minor Not assessed brevicaudus) Small Tooth Flounder Secondary Minor Not assessed (Pseudorhombus jenynsii) Toothbrush Leatherjacket Secondary Minor Not assessed (Acanthaluteres vittiger) Spotted Stinkfish (Spotted Secondary Dragonet) (Repomucenus Minor Not assessed calcaratus) Hairy Mussel (Trichomya Secondary Minor Not assessed hirsute) Tiger Flathead Secondary (Neoplatycephalus Minor Not assessed richardsoni) Striped Perch (Western Secondary Striped Grunter) (Pelates Minor Not assessed octolineatus) Australian Numbfish Secondary (Coffin Ray) (Hypnos Minor Not assessed monopterygium)

ETP Syngnathids Main No

Rhodolith Pavement Main/Commonly Habitat No Habitat Encountered Soft Sediment Habitat with Main/Commonly Habitat No sponges Encountered

99 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery MRAG-MSC-F28-v2.01 August 2020

Habitat Patchy Seagrass Sandflats Minor No

Habitat Dense Seagrass Meadows Minor No

Ecosystem Spencer Gulf Main No

100 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

8.3.17 Principle 2 Performance Indicator scores and rationales

The UoA aims to maintain primary species above the point where recruitment PI 2.1.1 would be impaired (PRI) and does not hinder recovery of primary species if they are below the PRI Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Main primary species stock status Main primary species are Main primary species are There is a high degree of likely to be above the PRI. highly likely to be above certainty that main the PRI. primary species are above OR the PRI and are fluctuating OR around a level consistent If the species is below the with MSY. PRI, the UoA has measures If the species is below the a Guide in place that are expected PRI, there is either post to ensure that the UoA does evidence of recovery or a not hinder recovery and demonstrably effective rebuilding. strategy in place between all MSC UoAs which categorise this species as main, to ensure that they collectively do not hinder recovery and rebuilding. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale Based on the available quantitative information, only one potentially main primary species has been identified, the blue swimmer crab (Portunus armatus) (BSC). No other species meet the thresholds of 5% or 2% by weight of the total catch of all species by the UoA (MSC, 2018a, p. 33). The BSCs have high post-capture mortality, and individuals released alive, do not contribute to the definition of main, however, sufficient evidence for 90% survival could not be found (see Box 1). If such evidence will be provided, the species will be assessed as ‘minor’. Two gulf-wide bycatch surveys undertaken for the SGPF have shown no significant differences in the abundances and biomasses of this species over a six year period. However, BSCs distribution in SG was positively correlated to fishing effort history (Currie et al., 2009, Burnell et al., 2015). Blue swimmer crabs are important scavengers, feeding on discards (Svane et al., 2007), and this explains the maintaining of the positive correlation with trawl intensity. In consequence, the SGPF might have a favourable effect on this species abundance. BSCs are targeted in the Blue Crab Fishery (BCF) and are managed according to target, limit and trigger reference points. The species is also retained in the SA Marine Scalefish Fishery (MSF). The SGPF is not allowed to retain any BSCs. The latest stock status information shows that SG stock of BSC is sustainable (Beckmann and Hooper, 2019). Legal-sized BSC CPUE, measured during the Fishery Independent Surveys (FIS), is the primary biological performance indicator (PI) to determine BSC stock status (Beckmann and Hooper, 2019). This is used as an index of relative biomass and fishing mortality (details are provided in the main text of this report). Because the stock assessment is based on the abundance of the crab during independent surveys undertaken for the BCF, incidental mortality from SGPF is indirectly accounted for even if the discarded catch and mortality of BSC is not regularly quantified and reported.

101 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Although analytically determined estimates of MSY are not available, various proxies used in stock assessment show that the stock is maintained at a highly productive level consistent with MSY. Most of the values obtained for the FIS CPUE of legal size BSC in the most recent 10-year period were above target RP (TaRP) and all were above TrRP (Figure 13). This is supported by consistently high FIS pre-recruit CPUE since 2010 as well as by a stable trend in the commercial catch and CPUE (Figure 12). The available information on the BSC stock status qualitatively meets the probability level required for “likely”, “highly likely” and ‘high degree of certainty’ that the stock is above PRI. SG60, 80 and 100 are met.

Minor primary species stock status Minor primary species are highly likely to be above the PRI.

OR Guide b post If below the PRI, there is evidence that the UoA does not hinder the recovery and rebuilding of minor primary species. Met? Yes Rationale

Minor primary species in SGPF are southern calamari (Sepioteuthis australis), King George Whiting (Sillaginodes punctata), Snapper (Chrysophrys (Pagrus) auratus and Southern garfish (Hyporhamphus melanochir). The only species allowed to be retained in the UoA is southern calamari, landed catch being recorded in logbooks. The SGPF’s commercial allocation is 7.47% of the TACC, with an allowance up to 11.20% (Steer et al, 2020). At least since 2013, the catch of southern calamari landed by the SGPF did not exceed its allocation. However, according to independent surveys data, the total catch of calamari in the SGPF might be one order of magnitude higher than landed catch (Roberts and Steer, 2010). Nevertheless, the byproduct research study undertaken in the SGPF concluded that the UoA does not impact on the sustainability of southern calamari stock from Spencer Gulf (Roberts and Steer, 2010). Southern calamari stock assessment, based on independent surveys of abundance, shows that the species is highly likely to be above PRI. Consistent catches from all fisheries combined and increased CPUEs since early 2000’s confirm that the stock is maintain at a highly productive level (Steer et al, 2020). The available information meets the probability level (80%, assessed qualitatively) required to demonstrate that the stock is ‘highly likely’ above PRI. SG100 is met. King George Whiting and southern garfish are targeted in overlapping commercial and recreational fisheries. Robust stock assessments are available from the MSF. At the latest stock assessment, Spencer Gulf stock of King George whiting was classified as sustainable, while Northern Spencer Gulf stock of garfish was ‘recovering’ and the Southern Spencer Gulf garfish stock was sustainable with most proxies used showing that the stocks were above PRI (Steer et al, 2020). The estimated catch by the UoA from these species is estimated at less than 10% and 1% respectively of total catch of the species in Spencer Gulf (estimated from %data from SARDI, 2015, Excel file. When marginal contribution of a fishery to total fishing mortality of a species is less than 30%, the fishery is considered to not hinder recovery of the species (MSC, 2018b, p.60). King George whiting and southern garfish stocks are highly likely to be above PRI and if the stocks would fall below PRI, the UoA would not hinder their recovery. SG100 is met. Snapper is a primary target species of the commercial and recreational sectors of South Australia. Based on the most recent recreational fishery survey, the relative contributions to total catch by the commercial and recreational sectors were 62% and 38%, respectively (Giri and Hall 2015, Fowler et al. 2016b in Fowler et al, 2019). Snapper stock assessment uses fishery independent and fishery dependent information (Fowler et al, 2019). Fishery-dependent data involved commercial fishery statistics; recreational fishery data; and population size and

102 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

age structures determined through market sampling. Fishery-independent data consist in estimates of spawning biomass for two regional populations (SG and GSV) using the daily egg production method (DEPM) that was undertaken in December 2018 (Fowler et al, 2019). Snapper stock from SG was assessed as being below PRI. SGPF’s catch of snapper is around 2t (estimated from %data from SARDI, 2015- excel file), compared to, for example, total catch 77.9 t in 2017 and 73.5 t in 2018. The SGPF incidentally catches much less than 30% of the total catch from snapper stock and cannot hinder its recovery (MSC, 2018b, p.60). In 2018 the SGPF has received a Ministerial exemption from fishing ban within the four snapper closures in Spencer gulf, under strict conditions, including cease fishing for the whole fleet in a closure area where a snapper was caught and reporting the number of any snapper interactions. Starting November 2019, PIRSA is taking additional measures to ensure the snapper stocks will recover, including Spencer Gulf, Gulf Saint Vincent and West Coast being closed for commercial snapper fishing until 2023 and reducing the number of licenses in MSF to 50% (https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/snapper_management_review_2019). In 2020, the SGPF has also trialed fish excluder devices (double fisheye with light, Hannah et al, 2015) with the aim to exclude snapper and other finfish from prawn catch, although the results are not yet available. The evidence qualitatively meets the probability requirement that the SGPF is ‘highly likely’ to not hinder recovery of snapper. SG100 is met.

References

Beckmann, C. L. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Blue Crab (Portunus armatus) Fishery 2017/18. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000729-15. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1015. 55pp. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/343092/Blue_Crab_Fishery_Assessment_Report_2017-18_- _12_June_2019.pdf Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Currie, D.R., Dixon, C.D., Roberts, S.D., Hooper, G.E., Sorokin, S.J. and Ward, T.M. 2009. Fishery- independent by-catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjg h9vPva3qAhXgxDgGHVWkBPEQFjAAegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpubli cation%2F284730626_Fishery-independent_by- catch_survey_to_inform_risk_assessment_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Trawl_Fishery&usg=AOvVaw3xB9t 1yIbAEDNvkRNzCk6L Fowler, A.J., Steer, M.A., McGarvey, R., Smart, J. (2019). Snapper (Chrysophrys auratus) Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. F2019/000331-1. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1031. 68pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/349269/Snapper_Fishery_Assessment_Report.pdf Hannah, R. W., Lomeli, M. J. M., & Jones, S. A. (2015). Tests of artificial light for bycatch reduction in an ocean shrimp (pandalus jordani) trawl: Strong but opposite effects at the footrope and near the bycatch reduction device. Fisheries Research, 170, 60-67. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2015.05.010 MSC (2018b). MSC guidance to fisheries standard, v.2.1, 31. August 2018. Marine Stewardship Council, London, 156 pp. Available at: https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for- business/program-documents/fisheries-program-documents/msc-fisheries-standard-v2- 01.pdf?sfvrsn=8ecb3272_11 SARDI, 2015. Spencer Gulf Bycatch. SGbycatch (version1).xlsb (Excel file) Steer, MA, AJ Fowler, PJ Rogers, F Bailleul, J Earl, D Matthews, M Drew and A Tsolos (2020). Assessment of the South Australian Marine Scalefish Fishery in 2018. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2017/000427-3. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1049. 214 pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/360589/Assessment_of_the_South_Australian_Marine_ Scalefish_Fishery_in_2018._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf

103 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Draft Scoring

2.1.1a 2.1.1b PI 2.1.1 Blue Swimmer Crab Main 100 NA 100 Southern Calamari Minor NA 100 100 Snapper Minor NA 100 100 King George Minor NA 100 100 Whiting Southern Garfish Minor NA 100 100 Overall Score Minor 100

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

104 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

There is a strategy in place that is designed to maintain or to not hinder PI 2.1.2 rebuilding of primary species, and the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

Management strategy in place There are measures in There is a partial strategy There is a strategy in place for the UoA, if in place for the UoA, if place for the UoA for necessary, that are necessary, that is expected managing main and minor expected to maintain or to to maintain or to not primary species. a Guide not hinder rebuilding of hinder rebuilding of the post the main primary species main primary species at/to at/to levels which are levels which are highly likely to be above the PRI. likely to be above the PRI.

Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale General operational measures, such as effort and gear limits, crab bag and hopper sorting system, BRD trials, permanent and temporal closures, footprint control, are limit the catch of primary species. For example, juvenile BSCs are protected within shallow habitats where fishing is not permitted. Also, spawning aggregations and juveniles from finfish primary species are protected in closed areas. In addition, species specific measures were implemented in the UoA for each of the primary species (see main text). There is an overall strategy that includes monitoring of the risk the UoA poses to all primary species, through regular ERAs, that are based on dependent and independent information from the UoA and from the overlapping fisheries that target these species. PIRSA undertakes these ERA workshops with the participation of scientists, Industry experts, NGOs and other stakeholders. Based on the risk ranks resulted for each species, the need changing management measures is discussed and recommendations for additional measures are made if required. Also, regular meetings of the Management Committee tasked with changing the management measures should it be shown that they are not effective are part of the strategy. Improved data collection on primary species catch will be adopted as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program that is to be implemented in 2020 specified in a MoU between PIRSA/SARDI and SGWCPFA (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). Overall, there is a strategy in place that is expected to maintain or not hinder rebuilding of all primary species. SG60, SG80 and SG100 are met.

Management strategy evaluation The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high considered likely to work, basis for confidence that confidence that the partial based on plausible the measures/partial strategy/strategy will B Guide argument (e.g., general strategy will work, based work, based on post experience, theory or on some information information directly about comparison with similar directly about the fishery the fishery and/or species fisheries/species). and/or species involved. involved. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale

Evidence that the strategy is working can be derived from the regular stock assessment of the primary species

105 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

that show the species stock are sustainable (BSC, southern calamari, King George whiting, SSG stock of garfish) or recovering (NSG stock of garfish) (Beckmann and Hooper, 2019, Steer et al, 2020) while for those below PRI, the catch is very low and the SGPF will not hinder recovery. The stock assessments for these species provide an objective basis of confidence that the strategy will work based on the species and stocks involved, even if testing takes place in overlapping fisheries. SG60, SG80 are met. Alternative gear testing has been undertaken to reduce the catch of crabs and finfish, although none of these were implemented. No other testing of the partial strategy for primary species took place in the UoA. SG100 is not met.

Management strategy implementation There is some evidence There is clear evidence that the measures/partial that the partial strategy is being strategy/strategy is being c Guide post implemented implemented successfully successfully. and is achieving its overall objective as set out in scoring issue (a). Met? Yes No Rationale The co-management arrangements for the SGPF are designed to achieve successful implementation of the partial strategy for non-target species management. Fishing strategies, including primary species management strategies, are developed, according to the management plan, by the SGWCPFA Management Committee (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). To ensure strategies are implemented successfully measurable performance indicators are specified in the SGPF management plan and the performance reported regularly to the Commonwealth Department of Environment (now the Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment -DAWE), as part of the ESD accreditation requirements. PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture also runs a compliance program that has dual objectives to: i) maximise voluntary compliance with fisheries rules and ii) create effective deterrence to breaching fisheries rules. Voluntary compliance is maximised through ensuring that fishers are aware of and understand the rules that apply to their fishing activities, such as the share allocation for southern calamari, closure areas, permitted gear, etc., they understand the purpose of the rules, and that they operate in a culture of compliance. Effective deterrence is created through the presence of fisheries officers and compliance operations, as well as through the detection and prosecution of illegal activity (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). Annual compliance reports presenting compliance outcomes related to closures, retention of non-permitted species, gear inspections, etc. are produced by PIRSA (PIRSA, 2019c). Compliance outcomes reported include intelligence, education and awareness, deterrence, monitoring and surveillance, and enforcement (PIRSA, 2019c). Evidence from the compliance program shows that the strategy for primary species is being implemented successfully, while evidence from stock assessments and from bycatch surveys shows that the strategy is achieving its overall objective, i.e. maintaining primary species stocks at sustainable levels or not hindering recovery of the stocks. SG80 is met. This scoring issue will be assessed at SG100 only if all scoring issues meet SG80.

Shark finning It is likely that shark It is highly likely that There is a high degree of d Guide finning is not taking place. shark finning is not taking that shark post certainty place. finning is not taking place. Met? NA NA NA

Rationale

No shark species are primary species in SGPF and this scoring issue is not applicable.

106 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Review of alternative measures There is a review of the There is a regular review There is a biennial review potential effectiveness and of the potential of the potential practicality of alternative effectiveness and effectiveness and measures to minimise practicality of alternative practicality of alternative e Guide UoA-related mortality of measures to minimise measures to minimise post unwanted catch of main UoA-related mortality of UoA-related mortality of primary species. unwanted catch of main unwanted catch of all primary species and they primary species, and they are implemented as are implemented, as appropriate. appropriate. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale The concepts of ‘unwanted catch’ and alternative measures are defined in the main text of the report. The SGPF make continuous efforts to reduce BSC incidental catch in order to decrease mortality of this important commercial species targeted in the BCF, but also to increase the quality of the western king prawn product. The crabs being retained by the crab bag suffer low physical damage, although they can still inflict damage to the prawns that have to pass through the crab bag to reach the codend (Noell et al, 2018). The adoption of the ‘crab bag’ as alternative measure is the result of detailed investigation and trial in the fishery (Banks et al, 2011). Alternative gear configurations and BRDs have been periodically trialled in the fishery. Within the current MSC certification period Nordmøre grid trials have been extended to commercial fishing conditions after experimental trials in 2015-16 have shown promising results. In experimental trials, incremental refinements were made to a generic Nordmøre-grid to minimise bycatches of BSC and giant cuttlefish Sepia apama, while maintaining catches of western king prawns (Noell et al, 2018). These refinements involved varying bar spaces, escape-exit areas and guiding-panel lengths, and were compared against a conventional trawl. Catches of teleosts and western king prawn were not significantly affected by the changes, while some gear configurations have led to up to ~90% reductions in BSCs and giant cuttlefish catches. It was concluded that, while there were some unresolved operational concerns, the results demonstrated the potential improvements in selectivity in the SGPF using a Nordmøre-grid (Noell et al, 2018). In order to review and implement this alternative measure, the successful Nordmøre grid configuration was used in one SGPF vessel during May 2018 and November 2018 fishing periods. During the May 2018, the Nordmøre grid was used in one net while the other net was used as control (operating as normal). The grid side experienced an average 10% reduction in prawn volume. It was also observed there was no significant reduction in soft and broken product between the grid and non-grid side. Consistent with the experiential outcomes the grid reduced the number of crabs. It was also noted holes were chaffed in the net around the corners of the grid. Some of the prawn loss could have been due to the holes. It was concluded that a modification will be required for any future trial. The grids were easily caught by the wind, which influenced their management and operation of the cod ends on deck. Also, the grid required cleaning between each shot, which took additional time. During the November trial, the goal was to target high volumes of weed as experienced in the previous season, however only small weed loads were recorded. The grid side produced less prawns, and it was assumed the grid excluded them as the prawns may have fallen out with the weed, along with other by-catch. As with the previous research results the grid excluded larger volumes of crabs and weed/sponges. The grid caught on average 12.6% less prawns than the control side. Prawn loss was more noticeable when there was a greater volume of weed recorded in the catch. A value analysis indicated that the loss of prawns would equate to nearly $3,000 less revenue in a commercial night (Clark and Lukin, 2019). The parameter set for previous grid trials as a measure of success was that a loss of prawns > 5% should not be acceptable. The partial implementation of the alternative measure indicated that an unacceptable loss of prawns was experienced. The management committee of the SGWCPFA has decided that the grid will not be suitable in all fishing conditions experienced in the SG and it should only be offered as an alternative voluntary tool to skippers, to be used when they determine the conditions are right (SGWCPFA, 2019).

107 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

There is evidence that alternative measures to reduce mortality of BSC were reviewed within the current certification period. The measures were not considered appropriate to be implemented across the fishery at all times (the implementation was not compulsory because the trials have shown unacceptable loss of target catch). The SGPF Research Plan 2019 makes provision for reviews of alternative measures to reduce the impact on the ecosystem components, including BSC within the lifetime of the plan (2-3 years) (SGWCPFA, 2019b). There is evidence for regular alternative measures (at least every five years) to reduce mortality of main primary species. The measures were implemented as appropriate (the implementation was not compulsory because the trials have shown unacceptable loss of target catch). SG60 and SG80 are met. Alternative measures to minimise mortality of minor primary species meet SG60 and SG80 because there are no requirements at these levels. Review of alternative measures does not seem to occur biennially. SG100 is not met.

References

Beckmann, C. L. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Blue Crab (Portunus armatus) Fishery 2017/18. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000729-15. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1015. 55pp. Retrieved from https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/343092/Blue_Crab_Fishery_Assessment_Report_2017-18_- _12_June_2019.pdf Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Clark, S. and Lukin, A. (2019). Nordmøre grid industry extension trial report. Provided by client. Currie, D.R., Dixon, C.D., Roberts, S.D., Hooper, G.E., Sorokin, S.J. and Ward, T.M. 2009. Fishery- independent by-catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjgh 9vPva3qAhXgxDgGHVWkBPEQFjAAegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublicat ion%2F284730626_Fishery-independent_by- catch_survey_to_inform_risk_assessment_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Trawl_Fishery&usg=AOvVaw3xB9t1 yIbAEDNvkRNzCk6L Hannah, R. W., Lomeli, M. J. M., & Jones, S. A. (2015). Tests of artificial light for bycatch reduction in an ocean shrimp (pandalus jordani) trawl: Strong but opposite effects at the footrope and near the bycatch reduction device. Fisheries Research, 170, 60-67. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2015.05.010 Hobday, A.J., Smith, A.D.M., Webb, H., Daley, R., Wayte, S., Bulman, C., Dowdney, J., Williams, A., Sporcic, M., Dambacher, J., Fuller, M., Walker, T., (2007). Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing: Methodology. Report R04/1072 for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra. Mayfield, S., Ferguson, G.J., Chick R.C., Dixon, C.D. and Noell, C. (2014) A reporting framework for ecosystem-based assessment for Australian prawn trawl fisheries: A Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery case study. Final report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Prepared by the South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Science), Adelaide. FRDC Project No 2011/063 https://www.frdc.com.au/project/2011-062 Noell C (SARDI Aquatic Sciences) 2019. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Recommendations for an Ecological Monitoring Program. Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Noell CJ, Broadhurst MK, Kennelly SJ (2018) Refining a Nordmøre-grid bycatch reduction device for the Spencer Gulf penaeid-trawl fishery. PLOS ONE 13(11): e0207117. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207117 PIRSA, 2019a. Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Prawn Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public- consultation_19.pdf

108 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

PIRSA, 2019c. Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishery 18/19 Compliance Report. 01 July 2018 to 30 June 2019. Provided by client. PIRSA, 2014a. Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf Roberts, S. and Steer, M. (2010). By-products assessment in Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery with an emphasis on developing management options for Balmain Bug. SARDI Report 439. https://fish.gov.au/Archived- Reports/2014/Documents/2014_refs/Roberts%20and%20Steer%202010.pdf SGWCPFA, 2020. Management Committee Circular from 13 January 2020. Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Assoc. Inc. Provided by client. SGWCPFA, 2017. Self-imposed permanent closure policy. Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Assoc. Inc. Provided by client. Steer, MA, AJ Fowler, PJ Rogers, F Bailleul, J Earl, D Matthews, M Drew and A Tsolos (2020). Assessment of the South Australian Marine Scalefish Fishery in 2018. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2017/000427-3. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1049. 214 pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/360589/Assessment_of_the_South_Australian_Marine_S calefish_Fishery_in_2018._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf

Draft Scoring

2.1.2a 2.1.2b 2.1.2c 2.1.2d 2.1.2e PI 2.1.1 Blue Swimmer 100 80 80 NA 80 85 Crab Southern 100 80 80 NA 80 85 Calamari Snapper 100 80 80 NA 80 85 King George 100 80 80 NA 80 85 Whiting Southern 100 80 80 NA 80 85 Garfish Overall Score 85

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

109 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Information on the nature and extent of primary species is adequate to determine PI 2.1.3 the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage primary species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Information adequacy for assessment of impact on main primary species Qualitative information is Some quantitative Quantitative information is adequate to estimate the information is available available and is adequate impact of the UoA on the and is adequate to assess to assess with a high main primary species with the impact of the UoA on degree of certainty the respect to status. the main primary species impact of the UoA on main with respect to status. primary species with OR respect to status. a Guide OR post If RBF is used to score PI 2.1.1 for the UoA: If RBF is used to score PI Qualitative information is 2.1.1 for the UoA: adequate to estimate Some quantitative productivity and information is adequate to susceptibility attributes for assess productivity and main primary species. susceptibility attributes for main primary species. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale

The most recent quantitative information on the SGPF’s catch of primary species is available from the 2013 fishery independent bycatch survey. The survey’s methods for sampling, processing and analyses were compatible to the previous survey (2007) so as to allow comparison, although with a reduced number of sites (Burnell et al, 2015). In 2013, the survey design was reduced in size for efficiency reasons. with a number of sites located in areas of low trawl intensity being removed from the design (Burnell et al., 2015). The survey was designed to reflect the abundance and distribution of the species caught in the SGPF and not their relative abundance in the commercial catch. Because about 90% of the commercial catch is taken from moderate and high intensity areas (Table 14) the information on catch composition from these areas was considered to be representative of the commercial catch, verifiable and low bias. In addition, the bycatch survey studies offer reliable information on spatial distribution and abundance of the non-target species relative to trawl intensity and other environmental factors. By comparing the results from the most recent survey with those from the 2007 survey and previous bycatch surveys (undertaken since 1993), changes in the relative abundance of BSC and in the level of risk over time can be inferred. However, there is no recent quantitative information available. Primary species catches in the UoA are not required to be reported, except for the landed catch of calamari. Since 2018, the UoA is also required to report catches of snapper as a condition to be allowed to fish within the four snapper closures in Spencer Gulf. Information on the risks the UoA poses to primary species is also available from the ERAs that show no increase in risk. There is a commitment to improve fishery-independent data collection on all primary species during the three annual stock assessment surveys. In a MoU between PIRSA/SARDI and SGWCPFA primary species monitoring has been agreed to be adopted as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program (EMP) that was implemented starting with 2019/20 season (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). The details of the Combined with information from a robust BSC stock assessment and BSC catch in overlapping fisheries, some quantitative information is available and is adequate to assess the impact of the UoA on the main primary species with respect to status. SG60 and SG80 are met. Because there is no recent quantitative

110 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

information from the UoA available, information is not adequate to assess with a high degree of certainty the impact of the UoA on main primary species with respect to status. SG 100 is not met.

Information adequacy for assessment of impact on minor primary species Some quantitative information is adequate to b Guide estimate the impact of the post UoA on minor primary species with respect to status. Met? Yes

Rationale

The same level of information is available for minor primary species as for main primary species, i.e. from the bycatch surveys, stock assessments, SGPF’s ERAs. Some quantitative information is adequate to estimate the impact of the UoA on minor primary species with respect to status. SG 100 is met

Information adequacy for management strategy Information is adequate to Information is adequate to Information is adequate to support measures to support a partial strategy support a strategy to c manage main primary to manage main primary manage all primary Guide species. species. species, and evaluate with post a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale

ERA workshops with stakeholder and experts’ participation are undertaken regularly in order to assess the risk the UoA poses to primary species and the information is used to support management strategies (PIRSA 2014a, 2019a). Although the discarded catches of primary species in the UoA are not quantified, empirical evidence from fishery’s regular operations is also used in the decision-making process to adjust or change strategies, e.g. to close areas that are proven to be important for primary species’ sustainability (SGWCPFA, 2017). Information is adequate to support a strategy to manage all primary species. Even though there is no recent (last five years) quantitative information on the UoA’s catch of primary species, the information from primary species stock assessments in overlapping fisheries (Steer et al, 2020, Beckmann and Hooper, 2019, Fowler et al, 2019) is adequate to support a partial strategy to manage primary species. SG60, SG80 are met. Because there is no recent quantitative information and fishers in the UoA are not required to record catches of discarded primary species SG100 is not met.

References

Beckmann, C. L. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Blue Crab (Portunus armatus) Fishery 2017/18. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000729-15. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1015. 55pp. Retrieved from Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf

111 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Fowler, A.J., Steer, M.A., McGarvey, R., Smart, J. (2019). Snapper (Chrysophrys auratus) Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. F2019/000331-1. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1031. 68pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/349269/Snapper_Fishery_Assessment_Report.pdf PIRSA, 2019a. Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Prawn Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public- consultation_19.pdf PIRSA, 2014a. Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf Steer, MA, AJ Fowler, PJ Rogers, F Bailleul, J Earl, D Matthews, M Drew and A Tsolos (2020). Assessment of the South Australian Marine Scalefish Fishery in 2018. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2017/000427-3. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1049. 214 pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/360589/Assessment_of_the_South_Australian_Marine_S calefish_Fishery_in_2018._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Draft Scoring

2.1.3a 2.1.2b 2.1.2c PI 2.1.1 Blue Swimmer 80 NA 80 80 Crab Southern NA 100 80 90 Calamari Snapper NA 100 80 90 King George NA 100 80 90 Whiting Southern NA 100 80 90 Garfish Overall Score 85 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80 More information sought / Information sufficient to Information gap indicator score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

112 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The UoA aims to maintain secondary species above a biologically based limit and PI 2.2.1 does not hinder recovery of secondary species if they are below a biological based limit Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Main secondary species stock status Main secondary species Main secondary species There is a high degree of are likely to be above are highly likely to be certainty that main biologically based limits. above biologically based secondary species are limits. above biologically based OR limits. OR If below biologically based limits, there are measures If below biologically based in place expected to ensure limits, there is either that the UoA does not evidence of recovery or a hinder recovery and demonstrably effective rebuilding. partial strategy in place such that the UoA does not hinder recovery and a Guide rebuilding. Post AND Where catches of a main secondary species outside of biological limits are considerable, there is either evidence of recovery or a, demonstrably effective strategy in place between those MSC UoAs that have considerable catches of the species, to ensure that they collectively do not hinder recovery and rebuilding. Met? NA NA NA

Rationale

No main secondary species could be identified (SARDI, 2015, Excel file, Burnell et al, 2015).

Minor secondary species stock status b Minor secondary species Guide are highly likely to be post above biologically based limits.

113 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

OR

If below biologically based limits’, there is evidence that the UoA does not hinder the recovery and rebuilding of secondary species Met? No Rationale

The information that is available does not allow an assessment of minor secondary species outcome at SG100. In this case, a score of 80 is given by default.

References Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf SARDI, 2015. Spencer Gulf Bycatch. SGbycatch (version1).xlsb (Excel file) Draft Scoring

Overall draft score: 80

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

114 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

There is a strategy in place for managing secondary species that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of secondary species and the UoA regularly PI 2.2.2 reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Management strategy in place There are measures in There is a partial strategy There is a strategy in place, if necessary, which in place, if necessary, for place for the UoA for are expected to maintain or the UoA that is expected to managing main and minor not hinder rebuilding of maintain or not hinder secondary species. main secondary species rebuilding of main a Guide at/to levels which are secondary species at/to post highly likely to be above levels which are highly biologically based limits or likely to be above to ensure that the UoA biologically based limits or does not hinder their to ensure that the UoA recovery. does not hinder their recovery. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale A strategy for ‘main’ secondary species is not necessary because no main secondary species were identified. SG 60 and SG80 are met. To be noted that there is no recent quantitative information on secondary species catch by the UoA and it is recognised the possibility that the catch of some species, such as skipjack trevally or leatherjacket species may be above the ‘main’ thresholds in some years. These species are not assessed as ‘main’ here, although there is a strategy to manage these species. The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing, such as move- on rules due to a high concentration of a transient bycatch species such as leatherjackets (Simon Clarke pers comm) or even temporary closures. These decisions require authorisation of the SGWCPFA Coordinator-at-Sea. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). Such measures could be considered specific measures for the most abundant secondary species, although it might not benefit all secondary species caught by the UoA. It is not clear if this measure will benefit all minor secondary species. There is a commitment to improve fishery-independent data collection on incidentally caught species during the three annual stock assessment surveys. In a MoU between PIRSA/SARDI and SGWCPFA monitoring of indicator bycatch species has been agreed to be adopted as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program (EMP) that was implemented starting with 2019/20 season (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). These species include skipjack trevally, leatherjackets, Port Jackson shark, blue spotted goatfish and Balmain bug. Crab bag and the hopper sorting system allow rapid handling and discarding of secondary species, increasing their chances of survival. However, it seems that this sorting system was implemented primarily to increase the quality of the product and fishing efficiency, thus they cannot be considered measures specifically designed to reduce impact on secondary species. As there are no measures specifically designed to reduce the impact on all minor secondary species, SG100 is not met.

B Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high post considered likely to work, basis for confidence that confidence that the partial

115 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

based on plausible the measures/partial strategy/strategy will work, argument (e.g. general strategy will work, based based on information experience, theory or on some information directly about the UoA comparison with similar directly about the UoA and/or species involved. UoAs/species). and/or species involved. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale The requirement at SG60 and SG80 although not explicitly, refers to main secondary species (MSC Interpretation Log). Because there are no main secondary species, SG60 and SG80 are achieved. Although a strategy for main secondary species is not necessary, there is a strategy to minimise impact on the most abundant secondary species and a partial strategy for all secondary species, the SGPF being managed under an EBFM framework (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). There is some objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy will work if any of the most abundant secondary species becomes ‘main’ in some years. This is based on information from the two most recent bycatch surveys, where no significant differences between the patterns of abundance and distribution of secondary species were found. Also, the results of the 2019 ERA show no increases in the risks the UoA poses to secondary species (PIRSA, 2014, Noell and Beckmann, 2019). No testing is available to support high confidence that the strategy / partial strategy will work and SG100 is not met.

Management strategy implementation There is some evidence There is clear evidence that the measures/partial that the partial strategy is being strategy/strategy is being c Guide post implemented implemented successfully successfully. and is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a). Met? Yes No Rationale SG80 requirement refers to main species only, as above, and SG80 is met because no main species were identified. Evidence that the partial strategy for minor secondary species is successfully implemented is available from annual compliance reports presenting compliance outcomes related to closures, retention of non-permitted species, gear inspections, etc. are produced by PIRSA (PIRSA, 2019c). However, because there is no recent (from the last five years) quantitative information on minor secondary species, clear evidence that the partial strategy is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a) (i.e. minor secondary species are highly likely above biologically based limits) cannot be demonstrated. SG100 is not met Shark finning It is likely that shark It is highly likely that There is a high degree of d Guide finning is not taking place. shark finning is not taking that shark finning post certainty place. is not taking place. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale Regulation 9ZO from Fisheries Management Regulations 1992 (Australian Government, 1992) prohibits shark finning and requires that sharks are landed with fins attached.

116 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

No shark species are permitted to be retained in SGPF (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). Sharks are retained by the crab bag and immediately discarded when brought on board. PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture runs an effective compliance program. Effective deterrence is created through the presence of fisheries officers and compliance operations, as well as through the detection and prosecution of illegal activity (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). Annual compliance reports presenting compliance outcomes related to, among other issues, the retention of non-permitted species, are produced by PIRSA (PIRSA, 2019c). Evidence from the compliance program shows that shark finning has not been raised as a compliance issue in SBPMF. SG60, 80 and 100 are met

Review of alternative measures to minimise mortality of unwanted catch There is a review of the There is a regular review There is a biennial review potential effectiveness and of the potential of the potential practicality of alternative effectiveness and effectiveness and measures to minimise practicality of alternative practicality of alternative E Guide UoA-related mortality of measures to minimise measures to minimise post unwanted catch of main UoA-related mortality of UoA-related mortality of secondary species. unwanted catch of main unwanted catch of all secondary species and they secondary species, and are implemented as they are implemented, as appropriate. appropriate. Met? NA NA No

Rationale

The requirements at SG60 and SG80 refer to main secondary species. There are no main secondary species, thus regular reviews of alternative measures are not required at SG60 and SG80. However, the SG 100 requires biennial review of potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of all secondary species, and they are implemented, as appropriate. No evidence was provided for such reviews and SG100 is not met.

References

MSC (2018a). MSC fisheries standard, v.2.1, 31 August 2018. Marine Stewardship Council, London, 133 pp. Available at: https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program- documents/fisheries-program-documents/msc-fisheries-standard-v2-01.pdf?sfvrsn=8ecb3272_11 PIRSA, 2019a. Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Prawn Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public- consultation_19.pdf PIRSA, 2014a. Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf

Draft Scoring

2.2.2a 2.2.2b 2.2.2c 2.2.2d 2.2.2e PI 2.2.1 All minor secondary 80 80 80 100 80 85 species Overall Score 85 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

117 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

118 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Information on the nature and amount of secondary species taken is adequate to PI 2.2.3 determine the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage secondary species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Information adequacy for assessment of impacts on main secondary species Qualitative information is Some quantitative Quantitative information is adequate to estimate the information is available available and adequate to impact of the UoA on the and adequate to assess the assess with a high degree main secondary species impact of the UoA on main of certainty the impact of with respect to status. secondary species with the UoA on main respect to status. secondary species with OR respect to status. OR a Guide post If RBF is used to score PI 2.2.1 for the UoA: If RBF is used to score PI 2.2.1 for the UoA: Qualitative information is adequate to estimate Some quantitative productivity and information is adequate to susceptibility attributes for assess productivity and main secondary species. susceptibility attributes for main secondary species. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale As discussed in the Principle 2 Background section, quantitative information that is available from the more recent (Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015), and historical independent bycatch surveys and studies (e.g. Carrick, 1997) is adequate to classify secondary species in ‘main’ and ‘minor’ (i.e. that all secondary species are ‘minor’). The similarity in the findings from more recent surveys and historical surveys gives confidence that the same species continue to be dominant in the catch (king prawn and BSC) and it is unlikely that any other species have become ‘main’ in the last five years. The information is considered adequate to determine that there are no ‘main’ secondary species in the SGPF’s catch and thus, there is no impact on such species. SG60 and SG80 are met. However, the information might be outdated, and it cannot be considered adequate to assess with a high degree of certainty the impact of the UoA on main secondary species with respect to status because, there is a possibility that some species could become ‘main’ in some years. SG100 is not met.

Information adequacy for assessment of impacts on minor secondary species Some quantitative information is adequate to b Guide estimate the impact of the post UoA on minor secondary species with respect to status. Met? No

Rationale

119 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Some quantitative information on minor secondary species is available from the 2007 and 2013 bycatch surveys, although information on minor secondary species stock and their biologically based limits is lacking. The available information is not adequate to estimate the impact of the UoA on minor secondary species with respect to status. SG 100 is not met. Information adequacy for management strategy Information is adequate to Information is adequate to Information is adequate to support measures to support a partial strategy support a strategy to manage main secondary to manage main secondary manage all secondary Guide c species. species. species, and with post evaluate a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective. Met? NA NA No

Rationale No ‘main’ secondary species were identified and SG60 and SG80 do not apply. Regular ERAs of the SGPF are in place to monitor the risk to each component of the ecosystem. All species that were identified in independent bycatch surveys were assessed at level 2 (PSA) of the ERAEF framework (Hobday et al, 2007). The results of the ERAs are used to inform management strategies (additional measures for species ranked at high risk might be applied if deemed necessary). Empirical evidence from fishery’s regular operations (At-Sea) is also used in the decision-making process to adjust or change strategies, e.g. to close areas that are proven to be important for non-target species’ sustainability. Overall, the information is adequate to support a partial strategy for secondary species if any of these species would become ‘main’. There is no recent quantitative information on minor secondary species available thus, the information is not adequate to evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective. SG100 is not met.

References

Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Carrick, N. (1997). A preliminary assessment of by-catch from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Assessment Series 97/02. 57 pp. Find the hard copy at: http://www.worldcat.org/title/preliminary-assessment-of-the-by-catch-from-spencer-gulf- prawn- fishery/oclc/224840692&referer=brief_result Currie, D.R., Dixon, C.D., Roberts, S.D., Hooper, G.E., Sorokin, S.J. and Ward, T.M. 2009. Fishery- independent by-catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjg h9vPva3qAhXgxDgGHVWkBPEQFjAAegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpubli cation%2F284730626_Fishery-independent_by- catch_survey_to_inform_risk_assessment_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Trawl_Fishery&usg=AOvVaw3xB9t 1yIbAEDNvkRNzCk6L Draft Scoring 2.1.3a 2.1.2b 2.1.2c PI 2.1.1 main secondary 80 NA NA 80 minor NA 80 80 80 secondary Overall Score 80

120 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

121 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The UoA meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP PI 2.3.1 species The UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Effects of the UoA on population/stock within national or international limits, where applicable Where national and/or Where national and/or Where national and/or international requirements international requirements international requirements set limits for ETP species, set limits for ETP species, set limits for ETP species, a Guide the effects of the UoA on the combined effects of there is a high degree of post the population/ stock are the MSC UoAs on the certainty that the known and likely to be population /stock are combined effects of the within these limits. known and highly likely to MSC UoAs are within be within these limits. these limits. Met? NA NA NA Rationale There are no national or international requirements that set limits on ETP species in Australia.

Direct effects Known direct effects of the Direct effects of the UoA There is a high degree of UoA are likely to not are highly likely to not confidence that there are Guide of ETP of ETP no post hinder recovery hinder recovery significant detrimental species. species. direct effects of the UoA b on ETP species. Syngnathids (8 scoring Syngnathids (8 scoring elements) – Yes elements) – No White shark - Yes White shark - Yes Met? Yes Dolphins (1 se) -Yes Dolphins (1 se) -Yes Pinnipeds (1 se) – Yes Pinnipeds (1 se) – Yes Turtles (1 se) – Yes Turtles (1 se) – Yes Birds (1 se) - Yes Birds (1 se) - Yes Rationale The key ETP interactions for the UoA are interactions with species belonging to the Family Syngnathidae. Other ETP species that occur in Spencer Gulf and can potentially interact with the fishing gear of the UoA are protected sharks, marine mammals (cetaceans and pinnipeds), sea turtles and birds. In the SGPF’s history, the fishery reported interactions with one seal (species not specified, released alive) in 2010/11, one great white shark (released alive) in 2011/12 and one dolphin (species not specified, killed) in 2016/17 (Mackay, 2018, Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). This information is not verified through a dedicated observer program, although ETP information is collected also during the fishery-independent surveys undertaken three time per year for the king prawn stock assessment. Eight syngnathid species were identified as being caught in the SGPF (Table 19). Although all these species are protected under the EPBC Act, none is not listed as vulnerable or endangered. All these species were assessed for the IUCN Red Least as ‘least concern’. Data on the distribution and abundance of syngnathids is available from the gulf-wide bycatch surveys (2007 and 2013) as well as from SAS (Mayfield et al, 2014). Bycatch surveys showed a pattern of syngnathids captured in relation to trawl intensity that was consistent between the 2007 and 2013 (Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019).

122 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

All syngnathid species identified were assessed at ERA, PSA, in 2013 and 2019. The risk to tiger pipefish was ranked as ‘medium’ because of the higher ‘availability’ score (due to habitat preference) while the risk to all the other species of syngnathids was ranked as low (Noell and Beckmann, 2019). The same results were obtained from the previous ERA (PIRSA, 2014b). While fishers do not record pipefish to species level in logbooks, data from fishery independent surveys have shown that less than 10% of pipefish caught were tiger pipefish. According to Mackay (2018), between 2007/08 and 2016/17, 14.5% of the number of syngnathids reported in the SGPF logbooks were recorded as dead. Of these, 79% were pipefish, 16% were seahorse and 5% were common seadragon. No mortalities were reported for leafy seadragons (Phycodurus eques), pipehorse or potbelly seahorse (Hippocampus abdominalis). Goldsworthy and Boyle (2019), the latest Wildlife Interactions in SA Managed Fisheries report, does not provide a breakdown by species/group for each fishery but only amalgamated data. Table 18 provides information on the status of the syngnathids that interacted with the SGPF since 2010 (provided by SARDI). To be noted that ‘unknown status’ is mainly due to the cryptic, immobile nature of these ETPs, making it difficult to assess ‘alive’ status (Simon Clark, pers com, July 2020). It is acknowledged that there is uncertainty about the actual mortality rate of syngnathids due to the SGPF, nevertheless, there is no evidence of significant increases or decreases in the number of interactions over the years and the number of individuals caught remained relatively consistent. As no sygnificant differences between the patterns of abundance and distribution of syngnathids were found between the two gulf-wide surveys, these patterns are expected to have remained similar. There is a commitment to improve fishery-independent data collection on incidentally caught species during the three annual stock assessment surveys. In a MoU between PIRSA/SARDI and SGWCPFA resolved to adopt an independent monitoring program of ETP interactions with the UoA as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program (EMP) that was implemented starting with 2019/20 season (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). The details of the EMP samplings were proposed by SARDI (Noell, 2019), although it is not clear if any sampling has occurred yet. In addition to fishery independent monitoring, research on post-capture survival of syngnathids has been proposed (Noell, 2019). If the EMP will be implemented and the research undertaken, it is likely that the information on, and the understanding of direct effects on ETP will be strengthened. This information cannot be used in scoring the ETP Outcome PI in this assessment but will be used in future assessments, if implemented. Combined information from the bycatch surveys, recent ERA, and recent and earlier interaction reports from the fishers’ logbooks and fishery-independent surveys, direct effects on syngnathids are highly likely to not hinder recovery of these species (after a qualitative assessment of probability, CAB considers an 80% probability that this statement is true, achieved). SG60 and SG80 are achieved. Due to their cryptic nature, syngnathid species are difficult to be seen and identified in commercial catch and the interactions might be underreported (although data from the independent surveys partially compensate for this limitation). SG 100 is not met. Considering that isolated interactions with other ETP species (white shark, seals and dolphins) were exceptional events, and no reported interactions with turtles and birds, direct effects of the UoA are highly likely to not hinder recovery of ETP species and SG80 is met. It can also be concluded that there is a high degree of confidence that that there are no significant detrimental direct effects of the UoA on these ETP species and species groups and SG100 is met.

Indirect effects Indirect effects have been There is a high degree of considered for the UoA confidence that there are Guide c and are thought to be no post significant detrimental highly likely to not create indirect effects of the unacceptable impacts. UoA on ETP species. Met? Yes (all scoring elements) No (all scoring elements)

Rationale The MSC vocabulary does not clearly define “indirect effects” to ETP populations, although these can be interpreted as effects other than from direct contact with fishing gear or fishing activities. These can occur as entanglements in lost gear, effects of pollution, behaviour modification of predators that feed on discards (e.g.

123 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

dolphins and birds), trophic effects, e.g. the fishery acting as a competitor for the ETP species preferred food, selective catch of certain sizes and life stages of a species, ETP species habitat degradation etc. Indirect effects of lost gear, water quality, discarding of debris, oil discharge, sewage, as well as discarding bycatch are considered and assessed at ESD ERAs. A full report with the results from the 2019 ESD ERA was not available at the time of writing the ACDR. At the previous ESD assessment all except discarding bycatch were ranked as negligible (PIRSA, 2014b). It is not expected that these risks have increased. The risk of discarding bycatch was ranked as moderate due to possible changes in the trophic structure, with more scavenger species such as prawn, crabs, opportunistic fish species moving in areas that are trawled (PIRSA, 2014b). Although the SGPF is yet to find an appropriate alternative measure that can be implemented to minimise discarded bycatch, efforts are made through BRD trials to reduce BSC catch (the most abundant discarded species). Nevertheless, most BSC are expected to survive prawn trawl capture, while discard mortalities are much lower quantitatively compared to total discards (Table 15). Indirect effects trophic on ETP species can also be inferred from studies of the fate of discards and population effects. For example, Svane (2005) estimated that only 0.3 -2.6% of all discards is consumed by dolphins that follow prawn trawlers in the SGPF. There is no evidence that this this would be harmful for dolphin populations (Svane, 2005, Chilvers and Corkeron, 2001, Ansman et al., 2012). Chilvers and Corkeron, 2001, show that bottlenose dolphins may form different social structures, with certain groups following trawls and others foraging in seagrass. This suggests that trawling could have a different impact on different groups of dolphins. In this way, seasonal closures would affect trawler foragers by food depletion. Ansman et al. (2012) however notice that: “The previously described partitioning into two communities has disappeared, with former ‘trawler’ and ‘non-trawler dolphins’ now dispersed over the entire social network and associating with each other. This restructuring suggests that although fisheries can influence the social behaviour of bottlenose dolphins, their social structure represents a complex adaptive system that is resilient to disturbance”. Svane (2005) also found that up to 165kg per year, or less than 0.03% of the discards from the SGPF, might be consumed by seabirds, quantity that cannot significantly affect seabird feeding behaviour. Other trophic effects that might indirectly affect ETP species will be assessed under PI 2.5.1 Ecosystem Outcome. For all scoring elements, SG80 is met because indirect effects have been considered for the UoA and are thought to be highly likely (80% probability qualitatively assessed) to not create unacceptable impacts on these species’ populations. There is no high degree of confidence that there are no significant detrimental indirect effects of the UoA on ETPs. Dolphins, seals and sharks might be attracted by prawn trawl catch and discards (possible behaviour modification) and prawn trawling might change benthic community structure on trawled areas and some trophic relations might be affected. Although syngnathids are not attracted by discards, prawn trawling might impact on their habitat (noting that some areas were closed to protect syngnathids’ habitat). SG100 not met.

References

Ansmann IC., Parra GJ., B. Chilvers L., Lanyon JM.(2012). Dolphins restructure social system after reduction of commercial fisheries. Animal BehaviourAnimal Behaviour, 84:575-581. Browne, R.K., Baker, J.L., Connolly, R.M. (2008). Syngnathids: sea dragons, seahorses, and pipefish of Gulf St. Vincent, in: Shepherd, S., Bryars, S., Kirkegaard, I., Harbison, P., and J.T. Jennings, (Eds.) Natural History of Gulf St. Vincent. Royal Society of South Australia, Inc., South Australia, pp.281-305. Goldsworthy, S.D. and Boyle, M. (2019). Operational interactions with Threatened, Endangered or Protected Species in South Australian Managed Fisheries: 2017/18. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2009/000544-9. SARDI Research Report Series No.1032. 39pp Mackay, A.I. (2018) Operational Interactions with Threatened, Endangered or Protected Species in South Australian Managed, ARDI Publication No. F2009/000544-8 SARDI Research Report Series No. 981isheries Data Summary: 2007/08 – 2016/17 Mayfield, S., Ferguson, G.J., Chick R.C., Dixon, C.D. and Noell, C. (2014) A reporting framework for ecosystem-based assessment for Australian prawn trawl fisheries: A Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery case study. Final report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Prepared by the South Australian

124 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Science), Adelaide. FRDC Project No 2011/063 https://www.frdc.com.au/project/2011-062 Noell, C.J. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Recommendations for an Ecological Monitoring Program. SARDI Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Provided by client. Noell CJ and Beckmann, CL (SARDI Aquatic Sciences). (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (Revised). Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. 22pp. PIRSA (2014a). Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf PIRSA (2014a). Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf SGWCPFA and PIRSA (2019). Implementation of Industry-Based Research in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Memorandum of Understanding between Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc (“SGWCPFA”) and Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, acting through the South Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences (“SARDI”). Provided by the client. Svane, I. (2005). Occurrence of dolphins and seabirds and their consumption of by-catch during trawling in Spencer Gulf, South Australia. Fisheries Research. 76: 317-327. Draft Scoring

2.3.1a 2.3.1b 2.3.1c PI 2.3.1 Tiger Pipefish NA 80 80 80 Rhino Pipefish NA 80 80 80 Brushtail Pipefish NA 80 80 80 Leafy Seadragon NA 80 80 80 Common Seadragon NA 80 80 80 Spotted Pipefish NA 80 80 80 Knifesnout Pipefish NA 80 80 80 Bigbelly Seahorse NA 80 80 80 White Shark NA 100 80 90 Dolphins NA 100 80 90 Seal NA 100 80 90 Turtles NA 100 80 90 Birds NA 100 80 90 Overall Score 85

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score ≥80

Condition number (if relevant) Information sufficient to score PI

125 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: - meet national and international requirements; - ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species. PI 2.3.2 Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Management strategy in place (national and international requirements) There are measures in There is a strategy in There is a comprehensive place that minimise the place for managing the strategy in place for UoA-related mortality of UoA’s impact on ETP managing the UoA’s ETP species, and are species, including impact on ETP species, expected to be highly measures to minimise including measures to a Guide national mortality, which is minimise mortality, which post likely to achieve and international designed to be highly is designed to achieve requirements for the likely to achieve national above national and protection of ETP species. and international international requirements requirements for the for the protection of ETP protection of ETP species. species. Met? NA NA NA

Rationale

There are no specified requirements for protection or rebuilding provided through national ETP legislation or international agreements.

Management strategy in place (alternative) There are measures in There is a strategy in There is a comprehensive place that are expected to place that is expected to strategy in place for b Guide ensure the UoA does not ensure the UoA does not managing ETP species, to post hinder the recovery of ETP hinder the recovery of ETP ensure the UoA does not species. species. hinder the recovery of ETP species. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale

General operational measures such as effort and gear limits, crab bag and hopper sorting system, permanent and temporal closures, monitoring and data collection (independent surveys, peer reviewed, published research studies e.g. Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015) are likely to minimise direct and indirect impact on ETP species populations. In SG, less than 18 % of the allowable trawling area is moderately to highly trawled (Mayfield et al., 2014). The limited spatial extent of fishing activities allows for adequate areas of refuge for ETP species throughout the gulf. Additionally, as trawling occurs over sand / mud substrates, the trawl gear does not impact on syngnathids’ prefered habitats, such as seagrass meadows and rocky reefs. Habitats that support ETP species are also protected in permanent fishery closures that were implemented specifically for syngnathids’ protection or to protect nursery habitat for prawns or other commercially important species (Mayfield et al., 2014).

126 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Spencer Gulf has also a system of marine parks with no trawl zones that support representative fauna, flora and habitats, which contribute to maintaining biodiversity in SG and in wider SA marine waters (www.marineparks.sa.gov.au). The hopper system enables the total catch to be maintained in a ‘wet well’ with continuous water flow that efficiently separates by-catch from prawns. This system is supported by the use of ‘crab bags’, which contain the macro faunal bycatch. These prevent small ETP bycatch species such as syngnathids, to be crushed and allows rapid return to the marine environment, thereby likely improving the survival rates (Mayfield et al., 2014). Larger ETPs are unlikely to be caught in the net, because of the low opening of the net. If capture occurs, they are retained in the large mesh ‘crab bag’ and returned immediately to water. The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing (such as move-on rules, or temporary closures due to a high concentration of a species (Simon Clarke pers com, July 2020). These decisions require authorisation of the SGWCPFA Coordinator-at-Sea. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). The SGWCPFA has voluntarily closed areas known to be abundant or indicating likely habitat for syngnathids, e.g. Wardang Island (established 2002) and Port Broughton (established 1981). Both were established to protect the benthic environment, with the former also providing substantial protection to syngnathids (Mayfield et al., 2014). In 2010, the Wardang closure was further increased in size, voluntarily, for the protection of seahorse, pipefish and seadragon (Banks et al, 2011). Two additional closures have been implemented seasonally since 1981 (Point Lowly and Cowell). These areas support sensitive benthic and syngnathid populations, along with typically being dominated by small prawns (Mayfield et al., 2014). Occasional interactions with other ETP species did not warrant implementation of spatial or temporal closures, although the existent self-imposed closures are likely to also protect other ETP species. Information on ETP interactions as well as the time and location of the interactions during commercial fishing operations is collected through the ‘Wildlife Interaction Identification Guide and Logbook’ since July 2007. Wildlife interaction forms are completed every time when interactions are identified and the forms are returned to SARDI Aquatic Sciences on a monthly basis (Mayfied et al., 2014). Wildlife Identification Guide helps fishers identify ETP species or species types and also offers instructions on how to fill in the forms and report ETPs. Fishery-dependent data are independently checked and aggregated in publicly available reports (e.g. Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). Additional data are also available from earlier research studies on bycatch (e.g. Svane, 2003), the gulf-wide by-catch surveys in 2007 and 2013 (Currie et al. 2009 and Burnell et al., 2015) and fishery-independent SAS that are undertaken three times per year (Simon Clark, pers com, July 2020). Crew members are encouraged to identify syngnathids and other ETPs through crew survey observer training and other port type meetings, although due to the cryptic nature of these fish some interactions may go unnoticed. The crew survey observers participate in SAS surveys, when detailed and reliable ETP information is collected (Simon Clark, pers com, July 2020). The risk to ETP species is also assessed through ERAs and any increases in risk will prompt to an evaluation of the management measures and additional measures are implemented if necessary (Noell and Beckmann, 2019). If the EMP will be implemented and the research undertaken on syngnathids post-capture survival, it is likely that the information collected will be able to support a comprehensive strategy (Noell, 2019). Currently, general and specific measures in place constitute a strategy and work together to minimize the direct and indirect impact on all ETP species. SG60 and SG80 are met. Because it is difficult to identify trends in ETP interactions and limited information on ETP populations in SG exists, the strategy cannot be considered fully tested and comprehensive. SG100 is not met.

Management strategy evaluation The measures are There is an objective basis The considered likely to work, for confidence that the strategy/comprehensive c based on plausible measures/strategy will strategy is mainly based on Guide (e.g., general work, based on information directly about post argument experience, theory or information directly about the fishery and/or species comparison with similar the fishery and/or the involved, and a fisheries/species). species involved. quantitative analysis

127 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

supports high confidence that the strategy will work. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale Evidence that the strategy is working can be derived from the results of the two gulf-wide independent bycatch surveys (Currie et al 2009 and Burnell et al, 2015) and ERAs (PIRSA, 2014b, Noell and Beckmann, 2019), as well as from the wildlife interaction reports for the SA managed fisheries (e.g. Mackay, 2018, Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). Burnell et al (2015) suggest that the distribution of syngnathid capture has remained relatively stable in relation to trawl intensity between 2007 and 2013 thus, the bycatch surveys have shown no indication of syngnathid populations depletion. Despite the limitations to performing statistical analyses due to low interaction rate, and possible fishery-dependent underreporting (due to the cryptic nature of the syngnathids) there is no evidence of increase in risk over time (no significant differences in reported interactions, see Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). The ERAs have also shown that the risk to ETP species did not increase. The available information constitutes an objective basis of confidence that the strategy works and will continue to work to ensure the risk to ETPs is minimised. SG60 and SG80 are met. The available information does not allow for a quantitative analysis that supports high confidence that the strategy will work. This will probably be possible after collecting data through the proposed EMP. SG100 is not met.

Management strategy implementation There is some evidence There is clear evidence that the measures/strategy that the is being implemented strategy/comprehensive d Guide successfully. strategy is being post implemented successfully and is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a) or (b). Met? Yes No

Rationale The co-management arrangements for the SGPF are designed to achieve successful implementation of the strategies for non-target species management, including ETPs. Fishing strategies, including ETP management strategies, are developed, according to the management plan, by the SGWCPFA Management Committee (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). The Committee-at-Sea makes real-time decisions about fishing, in accordance with the fishing strategy established by the Management Committee, such as move-on rules or closures when high catches of species of interest are recorded. The decisions are communicated through gazetted notices (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture runs a compliance program that has dual objectives to: i) maximise voluntary compliance with fisheries rules and ii) create effective deterrence to breaching fisheries rules. Voluntary compliance is maximised through ensuring that fishers are aware of and understand the rules that apply to their fishing activities, that they understand the purpose of the rules, and that they operate in a culture of compliance. Effective deterrence is created through the presence of fisheries officers and compliance operations, as well as through the detection and prosecution of illegal activity (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). There is some evidence that the measures/strategy is being implemented successfully and SG80 is achieved. There is not enough information for trend analyses to assess if the strategy is achieving its objective as set out at scoring issue b. SG100 is not met.

Review of alternative measures to minimize mortality of ETP species There is a review of the There is a regular review There is a biennial review e potential effectiveness and of the potential of the potential Guide practicality of alternative effectiveness and effectiveness and post measures to minimise practicality of alternative practicality of alternative measures to minimise measures to minimise

128 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

UoA-related mortality of UoA-related mortality of UoA-related mortality ETP ETP species. ETP species and they are species, and they are implemented as implemented, as appropriate. appropriate. Met? NA NA NA Rationale Syngnathid catch is unavoidable and gear modification measures are not likely to work because of the size of the syngnathids that is similar to the size of the target species and syngnathids’ immobile behaviour. Current measures that were implemented to minimise syngnathid mortality are based on self-imposed permanent and temporary closure of areas with high abundance of this group (through an Industry code of practice) and rapid on-board handling to increase chances of post-capture survival. In 2010, the Wardang closure was increased in size specifically for the protection of high abundance of syngnathids. In addition, skippers were provided with training including identification and handling techniques expected to reduce mortality of ETPs (Simon Clark, July 2020). There are no other measures that are expected or known to minimise mortality of syngnathids from trawl catch that can be reviewed. The review of the appropriateness of the existing closures is ongoing through the Committee-at-Sea decision- making process. A review of alternative measures to reduce syngnathids’ mortality can be considered ‘not applicable’ because there are no known alternative measures that would reduce mortality of these specie. Review of alternative measures for other ETP species is also not applicable because interactions do not occur regularly and unwanted catch is considered negligible.

References Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Currie, D.R., Dixon, C.D., Roberts, S.D., Hooper, G.E., Sorokin, S.J. and Ward, T.M. 2009. Fishery- independent by-catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjg h9vPva3qAhXgxDgGHVWkBPEQFjAAegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpubli cation%2F284730626_Fishery-independent_by- catch_survey_to_inform_risk_assessment_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Trawl_Fishery&usg=AOvVaw3xB9t 1yIbAEDNvkRNzCk6L Mayfield, S., Ferguson, G.J., Chick R.C., Dixon, C.D. and Noell, C. (2014) A reporting framework for ecosystem-based assessment for Australian prawn trawl fisheries: A Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery case study. Final report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Prepared by the South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Science), Adelaide. FRDC Project No 2011/063 https://www.frdc.com.au/project/2011-062 Noell CJ and Beckmann, CL (SARDI Aquatic Sciences). (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (Revised). Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. 22pp. Noell CJ and Beckmann, CL (SARDI Aquatic Sciences). (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (Revised). Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. 22pp. PIRSA (2014a). Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf PIRSA (2019a). Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Prawn Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public- consultation_19.pdf SGWCPFA (2019b). Research Plan 2019. Provided by the client.

129 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Draft score: 80 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

130 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Relevant information is collected to support the management of UoA impacts on ETP species, including: PI 2.3.3 - Information for the development of the management strategy; - Information to assess the effectiveness of the management strategy; and - Information to determine the outcome status of ETP species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Information adequacy for assessment of impacts Qualitative information is Some quantitative Quantitative information is adequate to estimate the information is adequate to available to assess with a UoA related mortality on assess the UoA related high degree of certainty ETP species. mortality and impact and the magnitude of UoA- to determine whether the related impacts, OR UoA may be a threat to mortalities and injuries protection and recovery of and the consequences for If RBF is used to score PI the ETP species. the status of ETP species. a Guide 2.3.1 for the UoA: post Qualitative information is OR adequate to estimate productivity and If RBF is used to score PI susceptibility attributes 2.3.1 for the UoA: for ETP species. Some quantitative information is adequate to assess productivity and susceptibility attributes for ETP species. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale Some information on the spatial distribution and status of ETP populations in Spencer Gulf is available from various sources. For syngnathids, such information is available from two gulf-wide fishery independent bycatch surveys (Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015, Sorokin et al, 2009) and from the South Australian Museum records. Data from the 2007 bycatch survey (Currie et al., 2009) provided the basis for an opportunistic study of morphometrics and stable isotope signatures of syngnathids in Spencer Gulf, contributing with insights for understanding of these species’ biology, mesoscale distribution and habitat use (Sorokin et al., 2009). For other ETP species, some information on the distribution and migration patterns of iconic species and apex predators in the Eastern Great Australian Bight (EGAB), including dolphins, seals, sharks and birds, is available from The Great Australian Bight Research Program 2013-2017, a collaborative project BP, CSIRO, SARDI, University of Adelaide and Flinders University (Evans et al, 2017). These sources of information can be considered low bias and high verifiability, some being published peer reviewed information. Quantitative information on the level of impact with ETPs is available from fishery-dependent and fishery- independent monitoring. Mandatory reporting of commercial fishery interactions with ETP species was introduced in 2007/08. Due to the cryptic nature of the syngnathids (the only group with significant interactions) some interactions during commercial fishery operations might go unnoticed, the crew being focused primarily of sorting prawn catch. An independent observer program to verify fishery -dependent data has not been implemented in the SGPF. To compensate for this limitation, fishery-independent observers from SARDI Aquatic Sciences have been recording ETP interactions in Spencer Gulf during stock assessment surveys for the target prawn species which are undertaken three times per year (Mayfield et al., 2014, Simon Clark, pers com July 2020). Information from the two gulf-wide fishery-independent bycatch surveys has also

131 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

shown that the distribution of syngnathid capture has remained relatively stable in relation to trawl intensity between 2007 and 2013 (Burnell et al., 2015). However, no statistical analyses are available to compare fishery-dependent with fishery independent data. Also, no extrapolations were possible to estimate fishery’s interactions based on fishery-independent data. This is due to the increased uncertainty associated with scaling infrequently captured species (Burnell et al., 2015). The information that is available and continue to be collected on ETPs from a combination of sources of higher and lower bias and verifiability ((Table 16) is adequate to assess the UoA related mortality and impact and to determine whether the UoA may be a threat to protection and recovery of the ETP species.

Information adequacy for management strategy Information is adequate to Information is adequate to Information is adequate to support measures to measure trends and support a comprehensive manage the impacts on support a strategy to strategy to manage ETP species. manage impacts on ETP impacts, minimize b Guide species. mortality and injury of post ETP species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving its objectives. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale Since the initial MSC certification of the UoA, the data and information available on ETPs have increased substantially. Licence holders report interactions with ETPs through the ‘Wildlife Interaction Identification and Logbook’ form returned to SARDI Aquatic Sciences where logbook data are regularly aggregated to a data summary in publically available reports (e.g. Goldsworthy and Boyle, 2019). Additional data are also available from Svane (2003), the gulf-wide by-catch surveys in 2007 and 2013 (Currie et al. 2009 and Burnell et al., 2015) and fishery-independent surveys since November 2009 (collated and analysed in Mayfied et al., 2014). Mayfied et al., (2014) aggregated logbook data on syngnathid interactions by fishing season to determine the total annual ETPs interactions, and the interaction locations were overlaid onto the 10-year map of trawl intensity with the medium and high trawl intensity areas combined, to provide a visual representation of the spatial overlap between prawn trawl intensity and ETPs interactions. The fishery-independent survey data were used to quantify syngnathid catch rates spatially (i.e. by fishing region) and temporally. Data from the regular SGPF fishery-independent stock assessment surveys on the abundance and biomass of syngnathids (not identified to species level) caught and released from 2009 to 2012 have also been collated and presented in Mayfield et al. (2014). This information was used measured trends in syngnathids catch relative to fishing intensity and to support and evaluate ETP species management strategy. SG60 and SG80 are met. Information from the two gulf-wide fishery-independent bycatch surveys has also shown that the distribution of syngnathid capture has remained relatively stable in relation to trawl intensity between 2007 and 2013 (Burnell et al., 2015). However, no statistical analyses of trends are available to compare fishery-dependent with fishery independent data. Also, no extrapolations were possible to estimate fishery’s interactions based on fishery-independent data. This is due to the increased uncertainty associated with scaling infrequently captured species (Burnell et al., 2015). Information is not yet adequate to support a comprehensive strategy to manage impacts, minimize mortality and injury of ETP species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving its objectives. SG100 is not met. There is a commitment to improve fishery-independent data collection on ETP species, more specifically on syngnathids, during the three annual stock assessment surve as part of an Ecological Monitoring Program (EMP). In addition, research on post-capture survival of syngnathids has been proposed (Noell, 2019). The SGPF Research Plan also makes provisions for reviews of alternative measures to be undertaken although a schedule for such reviews is not yet available (SGWCPFA, 2019b). The proposed fishery-independent monitoring of ETPs and research are likely to strengthen the information on the status of ETP species and the impact from the SGPF and support a comprehensive strategy in the future.

132 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

References

Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Currie, D.R., Dixon, C.D., Roberts, S.D., Hooper, G.E., Sorokin, S.J. and Ward, T.M. 2009. Fishery- independent by-catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjg h9vPva3qAhXgxDgGHVWkBPEQFjAAegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpubli cation%2F284730626_Fishery-independent_by- catch_survey_to_inform_risk_assessment_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Trawl_Fishery&usg=AOvVaw3xB9t 1yIbAEDNvkRNzCk6L Mayfield, S., Ferguson, G.J., Chick R.C., Dixon, C.D. and Noell, C. (2014) A reporting framework for ecosystem-based assessment for Australian prawn trawl fisheries: A Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery case study. Final report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Prepared by the South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Science), Adelaide. FRDC Project No 2011/063 https://www.frdc.com.au/project/2011-062 Draft score: 80 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

133 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure and PI 2.4.1 function, considered on the basis of the area covered by the governance body(s) responsible for fisheries management in the area(s) where the UoA operates Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Commonly encountered habitat status The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly There is evidence that the reduce structure and unlikely to reduce UoA is highly unlikely to function of the commonly structure and function of reduce structure and a Guide encountered habitats to a the commonly encountered function of the commonly post point where there would be habitats to a point where encountered habitats to a serious or irreversible there would be serious or point where there would be harm. irreversible harm. serious or irreversible harm. Rhodolith Habitat - Yes Rhodolith Habitat - Yes Met? No Open Sand Habitat – Yes Open Sand Habitat - Yes Rationale

Rhodolith Habitat Rhodoliths occur throughout 70% of Australia’s coastline. In SA, rhodoliths occur in Spencer Gulf, Gulf St Vincent and Kangaroo Island (Figure 20). Their distribution is extensive from the intertidal zone down to 10-m depth, frequently co- dominant with seagrass and brown algae species; common at 20-m depth in Spencer Gulf, isolated in the shallows in Gulf of St Vincent (Harvey et al, 2017). Although rhodolith habitats are protected elsewhere (e.g New Zealand, SWG, 2011) due to their high productivity and species richness, they are not protected in Australia. Svane did not find the same characteristics of productivity for Spencer Gulf’s rhodolith habitat. The distribution of rhodoliths in Spencer Gulf seems to be patchy and does not support a high biodiversity according to Svane et al. (2009), and this may be due to historical exposure to considerable trawling effort. However, the unimpacted status and distribution of rhodolith habitat in Spencer Gulf is not known. Considering the dynamic life-history of these biogenic structures and tidal movement and wind-driven waves that seem to control the rhodolith distribution in bays and gulfs (SWG, 2011), change in the distribution of this type of habitat over time are expected but cannot be attributed with any certainty to trawling. Two main regions with rhodolith habitat, which may differ as structure and service to ecosystem, seem to occur in Spencer Gulf, one in the north region of SGPF area and the second in the southwest (Figure 16) (O’Connell et al., 2016). High and medium intensity trawling occurs on the gravelly sand rhodolith sedimentary facies from the NSG. The exact percentage overlap of rhodolith habitat from ‘managed area’ with the SGPF trawl footprint is not known, although at visual inspection of the distribution maps in Spencer Gulf and South Australia, probably this is less than 20% of the habitat range. Rhodoliths are known to be slow to recover, although they were found to be highly resilient following the Deep Horizon oil spill (Harvey et al, 2017). Rhodolith beds have withstood over 40 years of prawn trawling history and continue to be caught in significant quantities in trawl nets (2.5% of the catch biomass from high intensity sites and 0.8% of the catch from high and medium sites combined, SARDI, 2015 excel file). The consistent presence of rhodoliths in high trawl intensity areas demonstrates that this habitat regenerates at a sufficient rate to maintain its presence, even if perhaps at lower densities. Pitcher et al (2018) have estimated Relative Benthic Status, compared to unimpacted status, higher than 90 for SA habitats. After a qualitative assessment of probabilities, a lower than 30% chance that the UoA will reduce structure and function of rhodolith habitat to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm is considered to be met. SG60 and SG80 are met. The actual percentage overlap with the trawl footprint is not known, thus SG100 is not met.

134 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Open Sand Habitat with filter feeders This habitat was categorised as ‘bare sand’ in the NSG (EPA, 2018), although considering habitat forming species mapping (Mayfield et al, 2014), this habitat type may support filter feeder organisms with low coverage (maximum catch rate for sponges on trawl grounds seems to be 5g/ha, Figure 17). The low sponge coverage on trawl grounds has been correlated with high intensity trawling area, although it is possible that low coverage is also due to the high bottom shear stress (Figure 21) coinciding with high prawn fishing intensity areas. By controlling trawl footprint and maintaining fishing effort at the current level, Spencer Gulf adopts a precautionary management to not increase the risk to filter feeder communities (PIRSA, 2015). Also, real time management includes decision to move on when sponge bycatch is high (Clark, 2015, pers. comm.). The percentage overlap of the range of habitat with open sand with filter feeder assemblages is not known exactly. MPA Technical Report mentions abundant sponge habitat for Gulf St Vincent and Otway bioregions, but not for Spencer Gulf (DEH, 2009). In addition, bare sand habitat occurs in all bioregions and possibly supporting filter feeder organisms. It is highly unlikely that the SGPF impacts more than 20% of this habitat type. While the fishery probably had some impact over the 50 years of activity, it is highly unlikely for the SGPF to further reduce habitat structure and function to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm. As the trawl footprint and the sponge distribution maps show, most of the sponge and other filter feeder communities occur in no or low trawling areas (Figure 16 and Figure 17). Pitcher et al (2018) have estimated Relative Benthic Status (RBS), compared to unimpacted status, as being higher than 90 for SA habitats. After a qualitative assessment of probabilities, a lower than 30% chance that the UoA will reduce structure and function of open sand habitat to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm is considered to be met. SG60 and SG80 are met. The actual percentage overlap with the trawl footprint is not known, thus SG100 is not met.

VME habitat status The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly There is evidence that the reduce structure and unlikely to reduce UoA is highly unlikely to function of the VME structure and function of reduce structure and b Guide habitats to a point where the VME habitats to a function of the VME post there would be serious or point where there would be habitats to a point where irreversible harm. serious or irreversible there would be serious or harm. irreversible harm. Met? NA NA NA Rationale

No VME habitat has been identified within the ‘managed area’

Minor habitat status There is evidence that the UoA is highly unlikely to reduce structure and Guide c function of the minor post habitats to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm. Seagrass Habitat – Yes Met? Subtidal Rocky - Yes Rationale

Seagrass habitat is the only minor habitat that overlaps with the fishing grounds. Most dense seagrass meadows occur in closed areas under 10m depth and Lowly and Wardang closures. Low to high intensity trawling has

135 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

occurred on approximately 12% of the total seagrass habitat in Spencer Gulf (5,512 km2, EPA, 2018). The highest abundance of seagrass in SA occurs in Spencer Gulf (EPA, 2018), although if all seagrass habitat within the ‘managed area’ is considered, the percentage overlap will be lower. The SGPF is highly unlikely to reduce the structure and function of the minor habitat to a point of serious or irreversible harm (to less than 80% of the unimpacted structure and function). The percentage overlap of seagrass habitat less than 20% and stable trawl footprint that is not going to increase in the future are evidence that the UoA is highly unlikely to reduce structure and function of the minor habitat to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm. SG100 is met. Subtidal rocky habitat is avoided because it can damage trawl gear, although trawl footprint suggests a slight overlap. The percentage overlap is not known although heavy limestone or calcarenite reef occurs in every SA bioregion, except for NSG (Table 21) and it is unlikely that the overlap with SGPF is higher than 20% of the unimpacted level. After a qualitative assessment of the evidence, less than 20% chance that UoA will reduce structure and function of the minor habitat to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm is considered met. SG100 is achieved.

References

DEH (2009). A technical report on the outer boundaries of South Australia’s marine parks network. Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia. https://www.environment.sa.gov.au/files/sharedassets/public/marine_parks/tech_report_lowres.pdf Harvey A. S., Harvey R. M., Merton E. (2016) The distribution, significance and vulnerability of Australian rhodolith beds: a review. Marine and Freshwater Research 68, 411-428. https://doi- org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/10.1071/MF15434 O'Connell, L. G., James, N. P., Doubell, M., Middleton, J. F., Luick, J., Currie, D. R., . . . Della Porta, G. (2016). Oceanographic controls on shallow‐water temperate carbonate sedimentation: Spencer gulf,south australia. Sedimentology, 63(1), 105-135. doi:10.1111/sed.12226 Pitcher, C.R., Rochester, W., Dunning, M., Courtney, T., Broadhurst, M., Noell, C., Tanner, J., Kangas, M., Newman, S., Semmens, J., Rigby, C., Saunders T., Martin, J., Lussier, W. (2018) Putting potential environmental risk of Australia's trawl fisheries in landscape perspective: exposure of seabed assemblages to trawling, and inclusion in closures and reserves — FRDC Project No 2016‐039. CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Brisbane, 71 pages. Retrieved from: http://www.frdc.com.au/Archived- Reports/FRDC%20Projects/2016-039-DLD.pdf Svane, I., Hammett, Z. and Lauer, P. (2009). Impacts of trawling on benthic macro-fauna and – flora of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishing grounds. Fisheries Research. 90: 158-169. (SWG) Scientific Working Group, 2011. The vulnerability of coastal and marine habitats in South Australia. Marine Parks, Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources South Australia.

2.4.1a 2.4.1b 2.4.1c PI 2.4.1 Rhodolith Habitat 80 NA NA 80 Open Sand Habitat 80 NA NA 80 Seagrass Habitat NA NA 100 100 Subtidal Rocky NA 100 100 NA Habitat Overall Score 90 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

136 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

137 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the UoA does not pose a risk PI 2.4.2 of serious or irreversible harm to the habitats Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Management strategy in place There are measures in There is a partial strategy There is a strategy in place place, if necessary, that are in place, if necessary, that for managing the impact of a Guide expected to achieve the is expected to achieve the all MSC UoAs/non-MSC post Habitat Outcome 80 level Habitat Outcome 80 level fisheries on habitats. of performance. of performance or above. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale PIRSA together with the Government of South Australia Department of Environment and Water (DEW) manage and conserve the aquatic habitats of South Australia. Habitat management is based around a bioregional marine planning framework, and an ecosystem-based fisheries management approach, involving ecological risk assessments. Management takes a precautionary approach to risks identified for habitats and includes areas that are permanently closed to trawling and other gears and a system of representative marine protected areas that offering permanent protection from any bottom-contacting gears. All commercial fisheries and recreational fisheries are managed by PIRSA and a comprehensive set of spatial management closures within the SA bioregions, including in Spencer Gulf, has established. Trawl closures include all waters shallower than 10m (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). In addition, extensive Industry self-imposed closures protect habitats that are important for the biology and sustainability of commercial species targeted in overlapping fisheries and ETPs. Goal 3 of the SGPF Management Plan aims to protect and conserve aquatic resources, habitats and ecosystems. Measures to achieve these objectives are: i) controls on fishing effort through: restriction on the number of licences, mesh size and head line length restrictions, limits on the amount of gear used in the fishery; ii) restriction to areas and times in line with fishing strategy, iii) closed areas maintained e.g. waters <10m, iv) technology to reduce impacts of fishing activity on habitats developed and promoted where appropriate, v) impacts on habitat and associated species communities continue to be monitored. These measures are supported by defined and measurable performance indicators, management reference levels, and control rules (see Table 24) (PIRSA, 2014a). Habitats within the managed area have been partially mapped while the unmapped habitats can be inferred from information on sediments and biota. Strategic research is undertaken to addressing the remaining gaps and develop performance indicators for habitat strategy evaluation. Means to modify the management measures in place if proven inefficient are available through the SWCSGPA’s research and management committees. A key part of the management strategy is to limit fishing to the existing trawl area and not allow any expansion into other areas. As a reference point, management measures will be triggered if fishing annual footprint changes more than 2% over the historic maximum annual fishing footprint (PIRSA, 2014a). These precautionary reference points are likely to change when, based on more research, appropriate performance indicators are going to be developed and included in an ecological management program (PIRSA, 2019b, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). Overall, there is a precautionary strategy in place for managing the impact of all MSC UoAs/non-MSC fisheries on habitats. SG60, 80 and 100 are met.

Management strategy evaluation The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high b considered likely to work, basis for confidence that confidence that the partial Guide based on plausible the measures/partial strategy/strategy will work, post argument (e.g. general strategy will work, based based on information experience, theory or on information directly

138 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

comparison with similar about the UoA and/or directly about the UoA UoAs/habitats). habitats involved. and/or habitats involved. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale

Evidence that the strategy works can be drawn from the two gulf-wide bycatch surveys which show that variations in benthic communities were not significant over time and are related to other physical and environmental factors rather than trawling. To support the strategy for mitigating impacts on benthic habitat, in the absence of accurate information on composition and distribution of habitat types across Spencer Gulf in waters >10m depth, historic trawl footprint was mapped using location and intensity of fishing effort as an index of potential impact. This indicator is likely to be further developed and used for strategy evaluation based on new research the SGWCPFA and PIRSA agreed on (SGWCPFA and PIRSA 2019). There is some objective basis for confidence that the measures/partial strategy will work, based on information directly about the UoA and/or habitats involved. SG60 and SG80 are met. However, there is no recent quantitative data on the abundance and distribution of benthic assemblages and there is no testing that testing supports high confidence that the partial strategy/strategy will work, based on information directly about the UoA and/or habitats involved. SG100 is not met.

Management strategy implementation There is some There is clear quantitative quantitative evidence that evidence that the partial the measures/partial strategy/strategy is being c Guide strategy is being implemented successfully post implemented successfully. and is achieving its objective, as outlined in scoring issue (a). Met? Yes Yes

Rationale The co-management arrangements for the SGPF are designed to achieve successful implementation of the strategy for managing impact on all ecosystem components. Fishing strategies, including habitat impact management strategies, are developed, according to the management plan, by the SGWCPFA Management Committee (PIRSA, 2014a). The Committee-at-Sea, makes real-time decisions about fishing, in accordance with the fishing strategy established by the Management Committee (such as move-on rules when a high catch rate of sponges is recorded, although there is no set rule on the quantity of sponges that would trigger a move- on). To ensure strategies are implemented successfully PIRSA Fisheries runs a compliance program that has dual objectives. Voluntary compliance is maximised through the co-management system and ensures that fishers are aware of and understand the rules that apply to their fishing activities, such as maintaining historical footprint; that they understand the purpose of the rules; and that they operate in a culture of compliance. Effective deterrence is created by peer pressure as applied by the Committee at Sea, along with the occasional presence of fisheries officers and compliance operations. Trawl Track monitoring of the fishing activity ensures that trawl footprint is maintained. Trawl footprint ant compliance outcomes reported in the annual Compliance Report are clear quantitative evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully and is achieving its objective to ensure no serious or irreversible harm to habitats. SG 100 is met. Compliance with management requirements and other MSC UoAs’/non-MSC fisheries’ measures to protect VMEs There is qualitative There is some There is clear quantitative D evidence that the UoA quantitative evidence evidence that the UoA

Guide complies with its that the UoA complies complies with both its

post management requirements with both its management management requirements to protect VMEs. requirements and with and with protection protection measures measures afforded to VMEs

139 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

afforded to VMEs by by other MSC UoAs/non- other MSC UoAs/non- MSC fisheries, where MSC fisheries, where relevant. relevant. Met? NA NA NA

Rationale No VMEs have been identified within the managed area. References

PIRSA (2014a). Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf PIRSA (2019a). Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Prawn Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public- consultation_19.pdf SGWCPFA and PIRSA (2019). Implementation of Industry-Based Research in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Memorandum of Understanding between Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc (“SGWCPFA”) and Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, acting through the South Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences (“SARDI”). Provided by the client. SGWCPFA (2019b). Research Plan 2019. Provided by the client.

Draft score: 95 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

140 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to the habitat by the UoA PI 2.4.3 and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on the habitat Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Information quality The types and distribution The nature, distribution The distribution of all of the main habitats are and vulnerability of the habitats is known over broadly understood. main habitats in the UoA their range, with particular area are known at a level of attention to the occurrence OR detail relevant to the scale of vulnerable habitats. and intensity of the UoA. If CSA is used to score PI a Guide 2.4.1 for the UoA: OR post Qualitative information is adequate to estimate the If CSA is used to score PI types and distribution of 2.4.1 for the UoA: the main habitats. Some quantitative information is available and is adequate to estimate the types and distribution of the main habitats. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale Although not all the habitats over the ‘managed area’ have been mapped, at least for Spencer Gulf, habitat types and their ranges could be inferred from information on sedimentology, geomorphology and biota. This information was used by PIRSA to determine and assess the risk the SGPF poses to commonly encountered habitat. In doing so, the extent of the overlap of the trawl footprint and habitat was estimated, although it is not known what percentage of each habitat range is impacted by the fishery. Only for seagrass habitat in Spencer Gulf habitat overlap could be estimated because information on total seagrass area is available (EPA, 2018). Nevertheless, habitats that were identified in Spencer Gulf occur across the managed area, while the SGPF’s impact is very localised. The nature, distribution and vulnerability of the main habitats in the UoA area are known at a level of detail relevant to the scale and intensity of the UoA. SG60 and SG80 are met. Spencer Gulf’s habitat types and their distribution can be inferred from the from the existing information on sediments and biota. There is still high uncertainty about the distribution of all habitats within Spencer Gulf (Jones et al, 2018). SG100 is not met.

Information adequacy for assessment of impacts Information is adequate to Information is adequate to The physical impacts of the broadly understand the allow for identification of gear on all habitats have nature of the main impacts the main impacts of the been quantified fully. of gear use on the main UoA on the main habitats, b habitats, including spatial and there is reliable Guide overlap of habitat with information on the spatial post fishing gear. extent of interaction and on the timing and location of OR use of the fishing gear.

OR

141 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

If CSA is used to score PI 2.4.1 for the UoA: If CSA is used to score PI Qualitative information is 2.4.1 for the UoA: adequate to estimate the Some quantitative consequence and spatial information is available attributes of the main and is adequate to estimate habitats. the consequence and spatial attributes of the main habitats. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale Fishers provide information on the formation on the spatial extent of interaction and on the timing and location of use of the fishing gear in their statutory logbooks. Data provided in the logbook includes licence information, date(s), number of shots, fishing location (i.e. block number), trawl start and end time (providing trawl duration), trawl depth, GPS location of the mid-point of three trawl shots per night (first, middle (approximately 4th), last), trawl speed, a count of the number of prawns. Using this information, trawl footprint is estimated by SARDI to allow identification of the extent of the impact on habitat. Footprint data was used also in Pitcher project which aimed to estimate a national level of impact from trawl fisheries on benthic habitats (Pitcher et al. 2018). This project estimated RBS indices for soft sediment habitats higher than 0.90 suggesting that fishery’s impact did not reduce the structure and function of the habitat to levels lower than 80% from the unimpacted level. Physical impact on all other habitats have been quantified through trawl footprint area overlap, although for the commonly encountered habitats, it is not clear what percentage of the habitat range is impacted. Jones et all assessed cumulative anthropological impact on Spencer Gulf habitats and found that prawn trawl fishery did not significantly contribute. All physical impacts of the gear on all habitats have not been quantified fully. SG60 and 80 are met but not SG100.

Monitoring Adequate information Changes in all habitat c Guide continues to be collected to distributions over time are post detect any increase in risk measured. to the main habitats. Met? Yes No Rationale Currently adequate information continues to be collected to detect any increase in risk to the main habitats. There is commitment from the SGWCPFA and PIRSA for research and implementation of an ecological monitoring program (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). SGPF Research Plan 2019 makes provisions for an assessment of habitat types to be conducted in trawled and untrawled areas, to provide information on the fishery’s overlap with the various habitats, and to assess potential habitat recovery. This will be incorporated as a component of the ecological monitoring program (SGWCPFA, 2019b). However, changes in all habitat distribution over time are not yet measured. SG80 is met but not SG 100. References

EPA (2018). Nearshore marine aquatic ecosystem condition reports: Northern Spencer Gulf bioregional assessment report. Environmental Protection Agency. 55pp. https://www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/13333_marine_nsg2012.pdf Jones, A.R., Ward, T., Prowse, T.A.A., Doubleday,! Z.A., Deveney, M.R., Scrivens, S.L., Gillanders, B.M., O’Connell, L.G.,Wiltshire, K.H., Cassey, P., 2018. Capturing expert uncertainty in spatial cumulative impact assessments. Sci. Rep. 8, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598`018`19354`6 Noell, C.J. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Recommendations for an Ecological Monitoring Program. SARDI Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Prvoided by client.

142 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

SGWCPFA and PIRSA (2019). Implementation of Industry-Based Research in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Memorandum of Understanding between Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc (“SGWCPFA”) and Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, acting through the South Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences (“SARDI”). Provided by the client. SGWCPFA (2019b). Research Plan 2019. Provided by the client. Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

143 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to the key elements of PI 2.5.1 ecosystem structure and function Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Ecosystem status The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly There is evidence that the disrupt the key elements unlikely to disrupt the key UoA is highly unlikely to underlying ecosystem elements underlying disrupt the key elements A Guide structure and function to a ecosystem structure and underlying ecosystem post point where there would be function to a point where structure and function to a a serious or irreversible there would be a serious or point where there would be harm. irreversible harm. a serious or irreversible harm. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale

The 2011 ERA workshop panel ranked the impact of fishing on the overall ecosystem as moderate and identified knowledge gaps in trophic level analyses and food web information. The stakeholder panel agreed that the impact of fishing is sustainable as long as effort controls are in place and fishing does not extend to new areas. It was considered that because the fishery operates within a small area (less than 20% of the area allowed for trawling, or <15% of the gulf, Noell and Hooper, 2019) that the integrity of the community overall is maintained even if there are some localised changes (PIRSA, 2014b). To reduce the identified knowledge gaps, Gillanders et al. (2015) undertook a FRDC funded project to develop an Ecosystem Model for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Spencer Gulf. Results from this project indicated that the trawling activities in Spencer Gulf over 20 years did not affect the overall biodiversity and cannot be distinguished from other sources of variations in community structure (Gillanders et al 2015). The authors, however, advise that an increase in fishing effort would negatively impact various trophic levels. Scenario testing suggested that the ecological impacts of increased bycatch were more significant than an increase in targeted catch, the western king prawn (Gillanders et al., 2015). The ecosystem modelling study did not identify western king prawn as a key element of the ecosystem, such key elements were rather cephalopods and some pelagic fish. The only species bottom-up controlled by prawns were the gummy sharks. There were no significant top-down controls from prawns to other species. Gummy sharks are incidentally caught in the MSF and other fisheries in Spencer Gulf, under strict license conditions (PIRSA, 2017). The species is targeted by a Commonwealth fishery within Commonwealth waters and the stock of gummy sharks was assessed as sustainable in 2018 (Emery et al, 2019). Current levels of discarding were not found to have significant effects on the ecosystem overall or its components. Svane et al., (2003) studied the fate of prawn trawl discards. The authors calculated that a discarding rate of 53mg/m2 per year would be available to scavengers, assuming an even distribution of discards. This was calculated using the low bycatch ratio found by Carrick (1997). Using the discard ratio found at the 2013 gulf-wide bycatch survey, this quantity would probably be about 10 times higher, although still less than 1 gram per square meter. Considering that fishing effort is not evenly distributed over the allowable fishing area, but concentrated on < 30% of this area (based on cumulative trawl footprint, Noell, 2017) the discarded bycatch would be concentrated in this area. Also, discarded bycatch is not distributed evenly in time, fishing being open for only about 60 days per year. In Gillanders et al. (2015), models of increases in prawn catch showed impacts mainly on the target species and its predators. However, models that took discards into consideration when modelling the increase in fishing effort, showed impacts on several trophic levels. The ecosystem modelling study suggested that the ecological impacts of increased bycatch will be more significant than increases in target catches of western king prawn, therefore efforts to reduce bycatch in SGPF should be continued to mitigate the ecological impacts of this fishery on the Spencer Gulf ecosystem or the effort should not increase (Gillanders et al. 2015).

144 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

More information to support that the structure and function of the Spencer Gulf ecosystem is not seriously or irreversibly harm due to the SGPF can be derived comparing the results of the two gulf-wide bycatch surveys. Burnell et al (2015) have analysed and compared these results. The authors found that the overall biodiversity did not change in a five-year interval and there were no significant differences between the patterns of abundance and distribution of the species caught. Other possible negative ecosystem effects from prawn trawling are regularly assessed during ERA workshops. These include translocation of organisms, turbidity, physical effects of trawling, anchoring, lost gear, pollution by debris, oil spills and sewage. A final report for the 2019 ERA is not available, although this assessment is expected to have resulted in risk scores for these hazards that are similar to the one from the previous ERA. Except for the physical effects of trawling and oil spills, all risk scores were ‘negligible’ (PIRSA, 2014b). The risk of oil spills was ranked as ‘moderate’ due to the serious consequences if such spills would occur, although the likelihood was considered low. The risk of physical impacts from trawling was ranked as ‘moderate’. Such impact was considered discernible in high intensity fishing areas, although these constitute only a small area of the gulf. These effects were considered appropriately managed by controlling effort in the fishery and trawl footprint (PIRSA, 2014b). Overall, SGPF is highly unlikely (less than 30% chance -assessed qualitatively) to disrupt the key elements (main predators, prey, ETPs, important habitats) underlying ecosystem structure and function to a point where there would be a serious or irreversible harm. Ecosystem modelling study and the results from bycatch surveys can be considered some evidence for this statement. In addition, the level of effort in the fishery has been maintained in a plateau for 20 years, and there have been no increases or shifts in the trawl footprint which give some confidence that the risk the UoA poses to ecosystem structure and function did not increase. SG60, and SG80 are met. The lack of recent quantitative information on all species catch the evidence is not sufficient to conclude that there is less than 20% chance that the fishery is highly unlikely (evidence of highly unlikely) disrupt the key elements underlying ecosystem structure and function to a point where there would be a serious or irreversible harm. SG100 is not met.

References

Emery, T., Woodhams, J. and Curtotti, R. (2019). Shark Gillnet and Shark Hook sectors. Fisheries Status Reports. ABARES. Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment. https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/fisheries/fishery-status/shark-gillnet-shark-hook-sectors Gillanders, BM, Goldsworthy, S, Prowse, TAA, Doubell, M, Middleton, J, Rogers, P, Tanner, JE, Clisby, NA, James, C, Luick, J, van Ruth, P, Bradshaw, CJA and Ward TM (2015). Spencer Gulf research initiative: Development of an ecosystem model for fisheries and aquaculture. University of Adelaide and SARDI Aquatic Sciences, Adelaide Mayfield, S., Ferguson, G.J., Chick R.C., Dixon, C.D. and Noell, C. (2014) A reporting framework for ecosystem-based assessment for Australian prawn trawl fisheries: A Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery case study. Final report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Prepared by the South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Science), Adelaide. FRDC Project No 2011/063 https://www.frdc.com.au/project/2011-062 PIRSA (2014b). ESD risk assessment of South Australia’s Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Adelaide. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/232477/FINAL_ESD_risk_assessment_of_South_Australias_ SGPF_July_2014.pdf

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

145 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Condition number (if relevant)

146 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

There are measures in place to ensure the UoA does not pose a risk of serious or PI 2.5.2 irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Management strategy in place There are measures in There is a partial strategy There is a strategy that place, if necessary which in place, if necessary, consists of a plan, in place take into account the which takes into account which contains measures to potential impacts of the available information and address all main impacts a Guide UoA on key elements of on the post is expected to restrain of the UoA the ecosystem. impacts of the UoA on the ecosystem, and at least ecosystem so as to achieve some of these measures are the Ecosystem Outcome 80 in place. level of performance. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale The SGPF Management Plan defines long-term management objectives, which are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC PI 2.5.1 (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). A goal of this management plan is the management of the SGPF as part of the broader ecosystem, using an ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) approach. An EBFM approach requires that potential impacts of the fishery on its associated ecosystem or ecosystems, including impacts on non-target species of fish or other aquatic resources are identified strategies are set out to address serious risks. These requirements are addressed in Goal 3 of the SGPF management plan and this goal’s objectives and measures set to achieve them, constitute a plan to address all main impacts of the SGPF on the ecosystem. The objectives of Goal 3 are: • Fishery impacts on by-catch and by-product species are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on threatened, endangered and protected species (TEPS) are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on benthic habitat and associated species communities are sustainable. In order to identify and prioritise issues, PIRSA uses a qualitative risk assessment for non-species components that make up the SGPF and some ecosystem components of the fishery, and a semi-quantitative assessment (ERAEF) for: target species, byproduct (retained bugs and calamari), bycatch species and defined habitat(s) in the fishery. To inform the ERAs, a vast range of information is available, among which, target species biennial stock assessments (e.g. Noell and Hooper, 2019), bycatch surveys (e.g. Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015), byproduct study (Roberts and Steer, 2010), ecosystem modelling study (Gillander et al, 2015), trawl footprint (Noell, 2017), sedimentology (e.g. O’Connell et al, 2016), habitat mapping (DEH, 2009, EPA, 2018, Jones et al, 2018), and others. With the occasion of ERA workshops, when high risks are identified, strategies in place to manage the risk for each component assessed are discussed and changes to this strategies and additional measures are triggered if considered necessary. The management strategy focuses on minimising impacts on ecosystem through maintaining the biomass levels of prawns and other retained species as well as minimizing bycatch, in order to minimise the potential for trophic perturbations. Other arrangements, such as gear restrictions, spatial and seasonal closures, a limited number of vessels and continue monitoring and research, further minimise the potential for ecosystem impacts through reducing potential impacts on the ecosystem components (i.e. retained non-target species, bycatch, ETP species and habitats). Performance indicators for achieving the objectives of Goal 3 include maintaining closed areas and controlling trawl footprint, maintaining appropriate monitoring and reporting, promoting technological changes for reducing impacts of fishing activity on the ecosystem components, developing Industry codes of practice where necessary (PIRSA 2014a, 2019a). Performance indicators are still in a development phase, with more research to be

147 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

undertaken within the next few years and the development of an ecological monitoring program (SGWCPFA, 2019). There is a strategy that consists of a plan, in place which contains measures to address all main impacts of the UoA on the ecosystem, and at least some of these measures are in place. SG 60, SG80 and SG100 are met.

Management strategy evaluation The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high considered likely to work, basis for confidence that confidence that the partial based on plausible the measures/ partial strategy/ strategy will b Guide argument (e.g., general strategy will work, based work, based on information Post experience, theory or on some information directly about the UoA comparison with similar directly about the UoA and/or ecosystem involved. UoAs/ ecosystems). and/or the ecosystem involved. Met? Yes Yes No

Rationale There is an objective basis for confidence that the strategy will work, based on empirical testing - practical experience, and based on bycatch and habitat research, as well as analytical testing – ecosystem modelling. Evidence that ecosystem indicators are considered in fishing strategies and management practices consists in maintaining the level of fishing effort within a narrow range for the last 20 years (Noell and Hooper, 2019) to ensure the risk to the ecosystem remains at negligible levels as recommended by the ecosystem modelling study. Also, trawl footprint did not increase or shift to impact on new areas and increase risk to the ecosystem, as recommended by the initial study for developing an EBFM reporting framework (Mayfield et al, 2014). As there is no recent quantitative information on all species catch, there is no high confidence that the strategy will work. SG100 is not met.

Management strategy implementation There is some evidence There is clear evidence that the measures/partial that the partial strategy is being strategy/strategy is being Guide c . post implemented successfully implemented successfully and is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a). Met? Yes No Rationale Fishing effort and footprint control (Noell and Hooper, 2019) are evidence that the plan for the management of the ecosystem has been put in place and is shaping operations and decision-making, as well as the compliance outcomes reported in Compliance Reports, showing no that any illegal activity that could increase the risk to the ecosystem is detected and prosecuted, although no significant issues have been identified in recent years (PIRSA, 2019c). SG80 is met. Consistent fishing effort levels and trawl footprint could be considered evidence that the strategy is achieving its objective, although without recent quantitative information on catch of all species, there is no clear evidence that the strategy is achieving its objective. SG100 is not met.

References

Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide.

148 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Currie, D.R., Dixon, C.D., Roberts, S.D., Hooper, G.E., Sorokin, S.J. and Ward, T.M. (2009). Fishery- independent by-catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjg h9vPva3qAhXgxDgGHVWkBPEQFjAAegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpubli cation%2F284730626_Fishery-independent_by- catch_survey_to_inform_risk_assessment_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Trawl_Fishery&usg=AOvVaw3xB9t 1yIbAEDNvkRNzCk6L DEH (2009). A technical report on the outer boundaries of South Australia’s marine parks network. Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia. Emery, T., Woodhams, J. and Curtotti, R. (2019). Shark Gillnet and Shark Hook sectors. Fisheries Status Reports. ABARES. Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment. https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/fisheries/fishery-status/shark-gillnet-shark-hook-sectors Gillanders, BM, Goldsworthy, S, Prowse, TAA, Doubell, M, Middleton, J, Rogers, P, Tanner, JE, Clisby, NA, James, C, Luick, J, van Ruth, P, Bradshaw, CJA and Ward TM (2015). Spencer Gulf research initiative: Development of an ecosystem model for fisheries and aquaculture. University of Adelaide and SARDI Aquatic Sciences, Adelaide Jones, A.R., Ward, T., Prowse, T.A.A., Doubleday,! Z.A., Deveney, M.R., Scrivens, S.L., Gillanders, B.M., O’Connell, L.G.,Wiltshire, K.H., Cassey, P., 2018. Capturing expert uncertainty in spatial cumulative impact assessments. Sci. Rep. 8, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598`018`19354`6 Mayfield, S., Ferguson, G.J., Chick R.C., Dixon, C.D. and Noell, C. (2014) A reporting framework for ecosystem-based assessment for Australian prawn trawl fisheries: A Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery case study. Final report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Prepared by the South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Science), Adelaide. FRDC Project No 2011/063 https://www.frdc.com.au/project/2011-062 Noell, C. J. (2017). Determining the trawl footprint of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2016/000565-1. SARDI Research Report Series No. 939. 21pp. Noell, C. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Recommendations for an Ecological Monitoring Program. SARDI Aquatic Sciences. Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Noell, C. J. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000770-10. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1029. 67pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/294526/SPG_Prawn_2017- 18_Fishery_Assessment_-_FINAL_20190814.pdf O'Connell, L. G., James, N. P., Doubell, M., Middleton, J. F., Luick, J., Currie, D. R., . . . Della Porta, G. (2016). Oceanographic controls on shallow‐water temperate carbonate sedimentation: Spencer gulf,south australia. Sedimentology, 63(1), 105-135. doi:10.1111/sed.12226 PIRSA (2014b). ESD risk assessment of South Australia’s Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Adelaide. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/232477/FINAL_ESD_risk_assessment_of_South_Australias_ SGPF_July_2014.pdf https://www.environment.sa.gov.au/files/sharedassets/public/marine_parks/tech_report_lowres.pdf PIRSA (2014a). Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf PIRSA (2019a). Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Prawn Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public- consultation_19.pdf PIRSA (2019c). Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishery 18/19 Compliance Report. 01 July 2018 to 30 to 30 June 2019. Provided by client.

149 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Roberts, S. and Steer, M. (2010). By-products assessment in Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery with an emphasis on developing management options for Balmain Bug. SARDI Report 439. https://fish.gov.au/Archived- Reports/2014/Documents/2014_refs/Roberts%20and%20Steer%202010.pdf SGWCPFA (2019b). Research Plan 2019. Provided by the client.

Draft Score: 85 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

150 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

PI 2.5.3 There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the UoA on the ecosystem Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Information quality Information is adequate to Information is adequate to a Guide identify the key elements broadly understand the post of the ecosystem. key elements of the ecosystem. Met? Yes Yes Rationale For the SGPF, it is considered that there is adequate information to broadly understand the key elements of the ecosystem. Information on species that occur in the fishery area and their patterns of distribution and abundance as well as changes in these patterns is available from the bycatch research that has been undertaken since 1990s (e.g. Carrick, 1997, McShane et al., 1998; Svane et al., 2007, Currie et al, 2009, Burnell et al, 2015). Also studies on particular species of interest are available, such as on syngnathids and habitat forming species distribution (Mayfield et al, 2014), on sponges distribution (Sorokin and Currie, 2009), on byproduct species status (Roberts and Steer, 2010), on giant cuttlefish (Steer, 2015), as well as regular stock assessments on target species (western king prawn), (e,g. Noell and Hooper, 2019). Also, there is spatial understanding of the ecosystem functionality of different areas (spawning, nursery or feeding areas) from research on the biology and life histories of the target species in SGPF (Dixon et al, 2013) and also in overlapping fisheries (e.g. information on MSF target species in Steer et al, 2020). This was, for example, the basis for setting up Industry self-imposed permanent closures to protect spawning grounds and nursery areas. Information on the key predator species and key prey as well as keystone species (cephalopods) and the trophic relationships that exist between the species in the ecosystem, is available from the Spencer Gulf ecosystem modelling study (Gillanders et al, 2015). There is also information on stable isotope signatures of syngnathids in Spencer Gulf, the main groups of ETPs that interacts with the SGPF (Sorokin et al, 2009). SG60 and SG80 are met.

Investigation of UoA impacts Main impacts of the UoA Main impacts of the UoA Main interactions between on these key ecosystem on these key ecosystem the UoA and these elements can be inferred elements can be inferred ecosystem elements can be b Guide from existing information, from existing information, inferred from existing post but have not been and some have been information, and have investigated in detail. investigated in detail. been investigated in detail. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale The impact of the SGPF has been investigated in detail, specifically within the Spencer Gulf ecosystem model for fisheries and aquaculture (Gillanders et al, 2015). Also, impacts of discarding bycatch on predators that feed on discards have been studied in Spencer Gulf and elsewhere (e.g. Svane, 2005, Chilvers and Corkeron, 2001, Ansman et al., 2012). The impacts of the SGPF on target species, primary, secondary and ETP species and habitats have been identified and described in previous PIs. The main functions of these species have been identified in research, including their place in the trophic system through ecosystem modelling, as well as the functions of the main habitats and the main in the ecosystem and are known, although not in detail for all species (e.g. there is limited information of secondary species and ETP populations). SG60 and SG80 are met but not SG100. C Understanding of component functions

151 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The main functions of the The impacts of the UoA on components (i.e., P1 target P1 target species, primary, species, primary, secondary secondary and ETP species Guide and ETP species and and Habitats are identified Post Habitats) in the ecosystem and the main functions of are known. these components in the ecosystem are understood. Met? Yes Yes Rationale The impacts of the fishery on the components of the ecosystem (target, bycatch, retained and ETP species, habitats etc) have been identified and subject to risk assessment through the ESD/EAERF process. Ecosystem impacts of the SGPF have also been assessed and modelled by Gillanders et al., 2015, indicating that the current level of trawling activities in Spencer Gulf does not affect overall biodiversity. Ongoing monitoring to assess the impacts of the fishery on the components is a core aspect of the management regime. Information is adequate to suggest the components of the ecosystem are understood and the SG 80 and SG 100 performance levels are met. Information relevance Adequate information is Adequate information is available on the impacts of available on the impacts of the UoA on these the UoA on the D Guide components to allow some components post and elements of the main consequences to allow the main for the ecosystem to be consequences for the inferred. ecosystem to be inferred. Met? Yes No Rationale Adequate information is available on the impacts of the UoA on these components to allow some of the main consequences for the ecosystem to be inferred as shown for each component in previous PIs. SG80 is met. However, the impact of the fishery on all elements (e.g. all secondary species) is not known in detail and recent quantitative information on catch is not available. Adequate information is not available on the impacts of the UoA on the components and elements to allow the main consequences for the ecosystem to be inferred. SG100 is not met. Monitoring Adequate data continue to Information is adequate to e Guide be collected to detect any support the development of post increase in risk level. strategies to manage ecosystem impacts. Met? Yes No Rationale Adequate data continue to be collected through fishery independent monitoring (fishing surveys, bycatch surveys, research studies) and fishery dependent monitoring (spot surveys, commercial catch and effort logbooks, wildlife interaction logbook, at-sea monitoring) (PIRSA, 2014a, 2019a). Adequate data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk level. SG80 is met. There is commitment from the SGWCPFA and PIRSA for research and implementation of an ecological monitoring program (Noell, 2019, SGWCPFA and PIRSA, 2019). This is likely to strengthen information adequacy to support the development of strategies to manage all ecosystem impacts. Currently, not all impacts of the fishery (direct and indirect) on all elements of the ecosystem are known (e.g. discarded catch is not routinely measured) and the information is not adequate to support the development of strategies to manage ecosystem impacts. SG100 is not met.

152 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

References

List any references here, including hyperlinks to publicly-available documents.

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

153 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

8.4 Principle 3: Management 8.4.1 Legal and customary framework (PI 3.1) The Offshore Constitutional Settlement provides for the Australian states and the Northern Territory to manage fisheries out to 3 nautical miles from the coast, and for the Australian Government to manage fisheries from three to 200 nautical miles. The settlement is not set out in one single document but is found in the legislation that implements it, including fisheries legislation for South Australia. However, these default arrangements are frequently varied through instruments known as Offshore Constitutional Settlement Arrangements. Australia is a signatory to a number of international agreements and conventions (which it applied within its EEZ), such as: • United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (regulation of ocean space); • Convention on Biological Diversity and Agenda 21 (sustainable development and ecosystem based fisheries management); • Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES; protection of threatened, endangered and protected species); • Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (standards of behaviour for responsible practices regarding sustainable development); • United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement; and • State Member of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (marine protected areas). The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 19991 is the Australian Government’s (hereafter referred to as the ‘Commonwealth Government’) central piece of environmental legislation. The EPBC Act is administered by the Commonwealth DAWE and provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places — defined in the EPBC Act as matters of national environmental significance. The DoE is responsible for acting on international obligations on a national level, by enacting policy and/or legislation to implement strategies to address those obligations. The Commonwealth DoE, through the Commonwealth Minister, has a legislative responsibility to ensure that all managed fisheries undergo strategic environmental impact assessment before new management arrangements are brought into effect; and all fisheries in Australia from which product is exported undergo assessment to determine the extent to which management arrangements will ensure the fishery is managed in an ecologically sustainable way in the long term. SA fisheries legislation and policy conforms to overarching Commonwealth Government fisheries and environmental law, including the EPBC Act. SA’s commercial export fisheries have been assessed using the Australian National ESD Framework for Fisheries2, in particular, the Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries (the Guidelines; CoA 2007). The Fisheries Management Act 2007 embraces Commonwealth management principles as laid down in Commonwealth Legislation (The Fisheries Management Act (Commonwealth) 1991) and the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act, 1999). The (South Australian) Fisheries Management Act 2007 embraces Commonwealth management principles as laid down in Commonwealth Legislation (The Fisheries Management Act (Commonwealth) 1991) and the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999).

1 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/epabca1999588/ 2 http://www.fisheries-esd.com

154 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Each fishery is managed by:

1. Licence conditions 2. Management plans 3. Fisheries regulations 4. Ministerial Determinations.

There are also a number of sub-ordinate regulations dealing with management policies that need to be in place for particular fisheries such as license terms, conditions limits and sanctions3, fees4 establishing reserves with restrictions on fishing and other activities5 VMS6. There are well established mechanisms for administrative and legal appeals of decisions taken in respect of fisheries, which are prescribed in Part 9 of the FMA. Decisions made by the Minister can be subject to a review process and appeals procedure. Appeal rights also exist under sections 112 and 113 of the Fisheries Management Act to the District Court and the Environment, Resources and Development Court, respectively. There have been no challenges to the decisions made under the FMA.

As from 2017, the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (SACAT)17 has a review jurisdiction under FMA (SA). This enables reviews of certain decisions made by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries made under the FMA. Licence holders have the right under section 111 of the Fisheries Management Act, 2007 to seek to review and licence variation or imposition of a licence condition or refusal to renew or consent to a licence transfer. The Fisheries Management Act 2007 identifies three distinct fishing sectors: Aboriginal traditional, recreational and commercial. Section 5 of the Fisheries Management Act 2007 states that Native Title rights and interests are not affected by the operation of the Act except to the extent authorised under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth). The Commonwealth Government has a commitment to negotiate indigenous land use agreements under the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993. The SA Fisheries Management Act 2007 (FMA 2007) acknowledges land use agreement made by the Commonwealth and provides for (Part 6, Section 60) the Minister and a native title group party to such an agreement to develop management arrangements for aboriginal traditional fishing. The FMA 2007 does not affect native title in any other way. Aboriginal traditional fishers have access to prawn resources in Spencer Gulf for traditional, domestic, non-commercial use subject to meeting requirements of the Native Title Act 1994. Under the Fisheries Management Act 2007, the Minister may create separate management plans for Aboriginal traditional fishing where an indigenous land use agreement (ILUA) exists with any Native Title group. When a management plan is developed it can be integrated with any Aboriginal traditional fishing management plans made in the future that apply to the waters of the management plan. The Narungga, Barngarla and Nukunu Nations Native Title claims overlap with the waters of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. No Indigenous land-use agreements (ILUA) exist and therefore no Aboriginal traditional fishing management plans have been made in relation to those claims at the time of writing. In relation to a proposal to prepare a management plan for a commercial fishery, section 44 of the Fisheries Management Act 2007 requires the Minister to seek the views of a representative of all signatories to any ILUA that is in force in relation to any of the area to which the draft management plan relates. The Minister is also required to refer the draft Management Plan to the representative of all signatories to any ILUA that is in force in relation to any area to which the plan relates. The Government of South

3 Fisheries Management Regulations (2017) Available at https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/R/FISHERIES%20MANAGEMENT%20(GENERAL)%20REGULATIONS%2020 17/CURRENT/2017.226.AUTH.PDF 4 Fisheries Management (Fees) Regulations 2017 5 Fisheries (Aquatic Reserves) Regulations 2016 6 Fisheries (Vessel Monitoring Scheme) Regulations 2017

155 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Australia had been negotiating and attempting to finalise a fishing ILUA with the Narungga Nations for some time, but this has not been successful and there is no ILUA or Aboriginal traditional fishing management plan in place for this group. The Australian High Court decision related to the application of State fisheries law to native title holders fishing for abalone in their local area in South Australia7. The decision concluded that the State fisheries legislation did not extinguish native title rights to fish and that the defence under section 211 of the NTA was applicable. It is therefore unlikely that fisheries legislation in SA has the effect of extinguishing native title rights to fish and that the defence provided by section 211 of the NTA will apply to most cases where the right being exercised is for a traditional, non-commercial purpose and where the person is in fact, an Aboriginal person. With the exception of Northern Teritory8, at this stage Native Title rights do not confer exclusivity in relation to any Australian waters and there is no impact to existing commercial fishing licences as a result. However, the SA Government and PIRSA are committed to working with the customary fishing sector to recognising customary rights. Section 128 (4) of the FMA acknowledges the rights of Aboriginal persons fishing for a customary fishing purpose — “The Minister may recommend the making of regulations relating to aboriginal traditional fishing if—

(a) The Minister is satisfied that the regulations are necessary or desirable for the purpose of giving effect to an aboriginal traditional fishing management plan made with a native title group under Part 6 Division 2; and

(b) The regulations are, in the opinion of the Minister, consistent with the plan and the indigenous land use agreement under which the plan was made; and

(c) The Minister has consulted the native title group and given due consideration to any comments made by the group in relation to the regulations.”

The FMA defines customary fishing as: “Means fishing engaged in by an Aboriginal person for the purposes of satisfying personal, domestic or non-commercial, communal needs, including ceremonial, spiritual and educational needs, and using fish and other natural marine and freshwater products according to relevant aboriginal custom”. A system or mechanism to formally commit to the legal rights created explicit or established by custom on people dependent on fishing for food (non-commercial use) is enshrined in the Native Title Act”. Aboriginal traditional fishers have access to prawn resources in Spencer Gulf for traditional, domestic, non-commercial use subject to meeting requirements of the Native Title Act 1994. The process caters for recognizing explicit rights up to 5 km and negotiations fall under the auspices of the Attorney General’s Department (Native Title Unit). These do not expressly allow participation in commercial fisheries, and a recent decision. Whether they are able to establish fishing rights for the whole of that area is a matter for the Court – In the recent Barngarla judgement9 the rights in the sea only went a limited way from the shore. All Laws and Regulations are subject to Parliamentary scrutiny of regulations. Fishery Specific Management Plans are also submitted before Parliament. The Fisheries Act 1982, the predecessor to the 2007 Act, containing many of the components within the 2007 Act, is proven to have been effective and tested. Legal challenges to the 1982 Act were upheld, and Co-management processes have been, or are being extended, to avoid such challenges in future. There were no challenges made to the 2007 Act, nor subsequent Regulatory changes.

7 http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/judgment-summaries/2013/hca47-2013-11-06.pdf 8 Blue Mud Bay, http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/land/blue-mud-bay-high-court- decision#axzz3xIR01KU0) 9 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-22/barngarla-people-granted-partial-native-title-in-eyre-peninsula/6033826

156 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

8.4.2 Roles and responsibilities / Consultation (P 3.1.2) Roles and responsibilities The South Australian Government, Department of Primary Industries and Regions, South Australia (PIRSA)10 has management jurisdiction all fisheries out to three nautical miles and within all State internal waters. PIRSA holds primary responsibility for fisheries management including: • Government policy development and preparing strategic plans • Legislative development and enactment • Licensing functions • Development of the management plan, including establishing sustainability benchmarks, in consultation with the Association and other stakeholders • Addressing fisheries access and allocation issues • Participating in development of harvest strategies • Formalising and implementing all harvest strategy decisions made by the association management committees or management advisory committees • Conducting ecological risk assessment and establishing ecosystem benchmarks • The cost recovery process, including determining service levels required and licence fee setting. • Promoting co-management of fisheries, research, education and training • Advising the Minister on license fees, the Fisheries Research and Development Fund, the allocation of access to aquatic resources in particular fisheries,

Each fishery has an appointed public servant to act as fishery manager, who takes responsibility for a number of fisheries. Fisheries compliance activities are undertaken by ‘Fisheries Services’, a Department of PIRSA. The Director of Fisheries may establish Working Groups or Sub Committees to investigate specific issues on its behalf. Such sub committees draw on a wide range of expertise, but not specifically from the stakeholder organizations. Examples of working groups that have been operational: Prawn Fisheries Harvest Strategy and Management Plan Steering Committee, Conservation Sector Engagement Working Group, Recreational Fishing Management Plan Steering Committee, Blue Crab Fishery Harvest Review Working Group, Cost Recovery Working Group, Fisheries Strategic Plans Working Group, Rules Review Working Group, and a Fisheries Consultative Processes Working Group. The South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI) is the research organization responsible for the research and monitoring programmes for ten South Australian fisheries11. SARDI provides PIRSA Fisheries with an annual stock assessment report for the SGPF, provides the Association with survey reports presenting fishery-independent survey results and undertakes extensive research into the impacts of fisheries on the ecosystem. Fishing Industry bodies are tasked with implementing co-management arrangements in each fishery. Management decisions and dialogue with PIRSA may be formulated through Management Advisory Committees, recently resurrected following the disbandment of the FCSA, or directly with fishery specific management committees which have an established track record in operating semi independently. The Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc12 (the Association) is the industry body tasked with implementing parts of the fisheries management framework. It is a voluntary independent seafood sector entity that represents Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishery licence holders. It is a non-profit primary resources development organisation that formed in 1968 and was incorporated in South Australia on 14 February 1984. It has a strong membership base, consisting of

10 http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries 11 http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/research/about_sardi 12 www.prawnassociation.com.au

157 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

39 members from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery and as well as members from the West Coast Prawn Fishery. Responsibility for the co-management functions are delegated to industry under current co-management arrangements and this is covered by an annual contract for fisheries co-management services (PIRSA, 201513) and a delegation instrument from the Minster for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries. These include the following: • Coordinating and managing stock assessment and spot survey activities, including contracting vessels to conduct surveys, organising survey logistics and industry based observer coverage. This activity is conducted under an exemption issued under Section 10 of the Fisheries Management (Prawn Fisheries) Regulations 2017, which is provided according to the discretion of the Minister. • Development of fishing strategies following industry-coordinated spot surveys and stock assessment surveys. The fishing strategies developed under this arrangement require government approval and are implemented by government using Section 10 of the Fisheries Management (Prawn Fisheries) Regulations 2017 through published notices in the government gazette. • The implementation and management of fishing strategies during fishing is undertaken by the Association’s Committee At Sea, primarily by spatially managing harvests to avoid the capture of small prawns and by closing the fishery when the triggers are met. • Fleet management, including dissemination of fishing notices, area closures fishing closure and other information. • Management of the observer program, in close consultation with SARDI and the CCSA14. The rules of the Association, as required under the Associations Incorporation Act 1985 (SGWCPFA, 1984), are set out in the Constitution of the Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc. They include membership, duties, powers and appointment of the committee, general meetings, and alteration of the rules. The committee (or governing body) of the Association is the ‘Management Committee’. The Constitution allows for establishing sub-committees and in so doing the Management Committee prescribes the name, role, membership and other arrangements as necessary for that sub-committee. An agreement between PIRSA and the Association prescribes the appointment of a Coordinator At Sea for the management of operational prawn fishing activities within the Spencer Gulf. Two staff, the Executive Officer and the Administration Officer, are employed by the Association to carry out management and administration functions. The Executive Officer operates as part of the management team and represents the Association for management activities. The Management Committee has established a number of sub-committees for the efficient running of Association business. Sub-committees must consist of at least one member of the Management Committee, but can have government and other stakeholder representation. Sub-committees that have been established are as follows: • Committee at Sea provides Real Time Management (fishery management) services for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery whilst at sea. • Research Sub-Committee; prioritises research needs, conducts investigations, reviews research proposals and reviews and discusses outcomes of research activities.

13 PIRSA, Contract for Fisheries Co-Management Servies (2018/2019)-Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn). 14 The three fishery independent stock assessment surveys a year use independent observers deployed from 6 (February) to 9 vessels (November and April), currently three of these vessels use industry representatives (deckhands). Deckhands are swapped from one vessel to another. Independent obaservers and deckhands have to undertake an observer training program which was run by Industry and SARDI over a couple of days to be qualified. The observer programme is very useful tool for assessments such as ground-truthing logbook data (Clark, S, 2020).

158 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The Association has developed a number of documents to ensure the effective and professional running of the Association, its committees and fishing activities, some of which are agreements between the Association and its members. Documents include: • Management Committee Code of Conduct • Committee At Sea Charter • Research Sub Committee charter • Prawn Survey Contract (between the Association, licence holders and skippers) • Prawn dependent observer contract • Bad Weather Deed • Skippers Working Code of Practice • Wallaroo Marina Code of Conduct • Practicing Code of Conduct for number of non-target species. • Various survey policies Important to the process of evolving co-management arrangements are the Management Committee Code of Conduct (Code of Conduct), Committee at Sea Charter and the Prawn Survey Contract. These documents are further explained to provide an understanding of the structure, professionalism and management of the Association. The Association’s governing body, the Management Committee, is elected from its membership, in addition to the appointment of an Independent Chairperson. The Management Committee is responsible for the management and financial wellbeing of the Association and it is these responsibilities and the Management Committee member responsibilities for and whilst at meetings that are detailed in the Code of Conduct. Committee at Sea members, not elected to the Management Committee, are also required to attend a number of Management Committee meetings. Committee At Sea members are also bound by the responsibilities laid out in the Code of Conduct, provided for in the Committee At Sea Charter. A Committee at Sea Charter (SGWCPFA, 2009) has been developed and approved by the Management Committee of the Association. The principal aim of this document is to ensure that Committee At Sea members provide leadership within the SGPF fleet by being aware of their responsibilities, fishing obligations and decision rules and support sustainable fishing practices within the SGPF including fishing strategies developed by the Management Committee. The Charter also outlines membership to the Committee At Sea, membership obligations, voting rights of members as well as review of the Charter. Ultimately, the Committee at Sea is responsible for management of fishing activities and amendment of harvest strategies whilst out at sea (Real Time Management). Therefore, it is imperative that the Committee At Sea acts responsibly within the framework of the Management Plan and other legislative controls. The Association contracts the services of registered survey licence holders and their vessels, (which included the skippers and crew) to conduct surveys. The contract outlines observer presence, equipment required, records to be kept and other management functions. To support surveys (participating crews and observers), a manual in addition to specialist equipment (survey box) is provided to each participating survey vessel at the time of survey. These survey boxes are returned to the Association at the end of each survey to allow for: equipment checking and repairing or replacing where required; stocking of appropriate forms and materials; and for documentation and instructions to be added as necessary. The Association has an annual contract with the Department of Primary Industries and Regions (South Australia) to provide Coordinator at Sea and Real Time Management services (PIRSA, January 2018). The functions provided by the Association, through the Coordinator at Sea, Committee at Sea, Executive Officer and the Management Committee, are provided for as a schedule to the contract. In addition, the Management Plan outlines operational activities, under which the fishery operates. Specifically, the Management Plan provides the framework for decision-making including the role of the Association and the decision rules. The Association has a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with SARDI (SGWCPFA, October, 2020), to provide a number of research services for the management of stock assessment surveys. This MoU permits recovery of costs by SARDI, for the Association’s activities in undertaking stock

159 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

assessment and bycatch surveys. The research costs recovered from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery and paid to the Association are for essential ‘core’ management activities. Core management activities are defined as those activities that must occur for the fishery to be able to operate in accordance with legislation and subordinate regulations, policies and plans. The Association is also committed to the ongoing research and ecologically sustainable development of the SA prawn industry. The Research Sub-Committee is set up with active participation from PIRSA, SARDI and CCSA. There are 10 members of this Committee, (6 fisher representatives, the EO of the Association, PIRSA, SARDI and the Conservation Council), each having voting rights (Charter for the Research Committee, SGWCPFA, 2010a). A stakeholder representative from the Conservation Council of South Australia (CCSA) holds a position on the Committee, which is fully funded by the Association. The table below illustrates the division of responsibility between the respective organisations under the co-management model. Table 24. Operational functions for managing the SGPF under current co-management model

Process Task / Duty SARDI Association PIRSA Fisheries PIRSA Conservation Sector Conservation

TEPS reporting (interactions) M TEPS impact assessment M I Review of stock assessment survey data for harvest M I D strategies Review of spot survey data for harvest strategies M I D Determine spatial harvest strategies (areas open to M I D fishing) Catch / effort (nightly catch trigger limit) restrictions M I D Harvest Strategies Gazettal / implementation of fishing notices M I I Amendments to fishing notices I D Coordination of Committee at Sea (to direct fishing D operations) Catch and prawn size data collection during fishing M (logbook) Closing original harvest strategy areas nightly (RTM) M D Notifying the fleet of changes D Fishing trip report M Survey development and design I I D Survey coordination and logistics D Survey data collection D Spot Surveys Survey data collation, verification and analysis M D Survey authorisation D Assessment of effectiveness of Harvest Strategies M I External review of stock assessment M Survey data collation M Research Coordinate and manage the survey I M I Stock assessment Survey development and design I M D surveys, catch & Survey logistics I I D effort data, and by- Survey data collection I D catch / by-product Survey data verification and analysis M I research Manage fishing logbook program, including validating M returns Logbook data: collate, enter, maintain database (storage) M

160 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Process Task / Duty SARDI Association PIRSA Fisheries PIRSA Conservation Sector Conservation Assessment of fishery against Management Plan M I I Assessment of effectiveness of Harvest Strategies M D I Collection and storage of other biological data M M Fishery assessment Data collation and analysis Fishery assessment report report (X1) (X1) Report writing M Peer review I M M Stock status Data collation and analysis Stock status report (X1) report (X1) Report brief I M M Survey interim Survey interim reports Data collation and analysis reports (x3) (x3) Report writing I M Develop observer program I D I M Observer Program Facilitate observer training I M D Maintain observer database I D I M = Managing Authority; D = Delegated Authority; I = Input Source: SGWCPFA Consultation PIRSA Fisheries has a well-established consultative co-management and collaborative arrangement in place in partnership with the Association. Both PIRSA and the Association recognize the importance of broader stakeholder involvement, inclusive of the conservation sector, largely represented by one body, the Conservation Council for South Australia. All decisions on changes to legislation are subject to public announcements and a 3-month consultative process. Consultation on fishery specific management plans requires a 2-month consultation process15. Consultation includes the following organisations (PIRSA, 2020): • Department for Agriculture, Water and Environment (Federal) • Department for the Environment, SA • South Australian Native Title Service • Attorney General’s Department (Native Title Unit) • Local Government Associations and City Councils • Fishing Associations and Management Advisory Committees • Conservation Council for South Australia • Department for Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy • South Australian Recreational Fishing Advisory Council (RecfishSA) • SARDI Aquatic Resources • University of Adelaide

15 PIRSA, November 2013

161 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

• South Australian Tourism Commission

In addition to the above organisations, advertisements are placed in appropriate newspapers asking for written submissions within a two-month period. Public meetings are also scheduled during the two month period respectively. Public comments are also sought consultation reports circulated via PIRSA. This may also include provisions for direct participation in workshops and public meetings, covering for example, Environmental Risk Assessment. An example includes the Environmental Sustainability Development (ESD) workshop (Noell and Beckmann 2019), where CCSA were an invited participant to the reporting framework and the ecological risk assessment for effects of fishing (ERAEF) on species components. In the meeting, information was provided by stakeholders and responses on derived outcomes given by both SARDI and PIRSA. The Minister also set up the Seafood Advisory Forum in 2020 (https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/seafood_advisory_forum_nominations_o pen), with the specific task of developing a 10-year plan to drive greater growth of South Australia’s seafood sector. Forum membership will include representatives from commercial fishing, charter fishing, recreational fishing, Aboriginal traditional fishing and aquaculture to facilitate strong and effective communication between all sectors. Lower level decisions such as gazettes involve consultation with affected parties, notably the fishers. These explain the rationale for decisions taken and how they will be applied. Notice of a pending gazette are placed on the PIRSA website, or circulated to industry associations, with a request to respond to the Program Leader Commercial Fishing. Examples include the recent pending announcements on ‘Fishing Run for the West Coast Prawn Fishery’ (South Australian Government Gazette (2020), Fishing Run for the West Coast Prawn Fishery 13 July, 2020).

CCSA (Brook16) made comment that the participatory process and interaction with SGWCPFA is very harmonious as compared with some of the other fisheries groups, and working groups. PIRSA/FCSA had facilitated active engagement of CCSA in the SGWCPFA Research Committee by providing support grants for costs. SGWCPFA has since fully funded participation of this NGO group. In these meeting, information is provided to stakeholders and responses on derived outcomes given by SARDI, PIRSA and SGWCPFA.

Fisher organisations, as well as other stakeholders, especially the NGOs, may make various direct representations and submissions to PIRSA. PIRSA duly responds with an explanation of the rational for making its decisions and demonstrates how it has considered the information provided, including when appropriate how information provided through consultation has been used (PIRSA – SGWCPFA 29 April 2019 (Snapper Spatial Closures). There are no other recent examples, but two working mediums include the SGWCPFA Committee (SGWCPFA Meeting minutes and the ERAEF Workshop, where verbal explanations and feedback are provided to participating stakeholders, notably the CCSA (Research Committee) and CCSA and SGWCPFA (ERAEF) respectively.

The Spencer Gulf Management Plan makes reference to relevant stakeholders. These are identified by PIRSA as CCSA, the Barngarla, Narungga and Nukunu Nations, The Department of Environment, the Department of Transport and the University of Adelaide. Native Title holders are relevant and affected stakeholders as they have claims registered with the Government of South Australia http://www.nntt.gov.au/Maps/SA_NTDA_Schedule.pdf and the relevance to Spencer Gulf are where islands listed fall within five kilometres of the high water mark they will fall within the claim area. are relevant and affected. However, Native Title holders have no specific fishing rights in the commercial fishery. The Native Title Nations (Narungga, Barngarla and Nukunu) were directly consulted by PIRSA (Evidence) prior to formulation of the revised Prawn Trawl Management Plan.

16 James Brook, CCSA was Interviewed on 29 July, 2015

162 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The Fisheries Management Plan 2020-2030, has been circulated for consultation in conformity with the standard procedures, the draft plan is placed on the PIRSA website (https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/spencer_gulf_prawn_fishery_managemen t_plan_consultation) and advertisements are placed in appropriate newspapers asking for written submissions within a two-month period. A public meeting was organised in October 2019 during the two to three month periods, but no one attended (Steve Shanks, July 2020). The Assessors believe these processes constitute a management system that expressly seeks to accept submission of relevant information. The process also provides the opportunity for all interested and affected parties to be involved.

8.4.3 Long-term Objectives (PI 3.1.3) Clear long-term objectives are explicit in Australia’s Commonwealth environmental and fisheries laws. Commonwealth Fisheries Management Act, 199117 requires that all State Governments conform to the following objectives: (a) ensuring, through proper conservation and management measures, that the living resources of the Australian Fishing Zone (AFZ) are not endangered by over-exploitation; and (b) achieving the optimum utilisation of the living resources of the AFZ; and (c) ensuring that conservation and management measures in the AFZ and the high seas implement Australia’s obligations under international agreements that deal with fish stocks. The following principles are principles of ecologically sustainable development as defined in the Act:

(a) decision-making processes should effectively integrate both long-term and short-term economic, environmental, social and equity considerations; (b) if there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation; (c) the principle of inter-generational equity—that the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations; (d) the conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration in decision-making; (e) improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms should be promoted. The National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (DoE, 1992) requires that fisheries management agencies throughout Australia to adopt a fisheries ecosystem management framework which will provide a more holistic and sustainable approach to management of aquatic resources. Governments will seek to enhance the decision-making capacity of management authorities, resource users and individuals, in particular through enabling them to make decisions that are based on knowledge of the likely consequences for the resource and the environment. Elements of a fisheries ecosystem management approach include: data collection and research on fish stocks and environmental factors to enhance management on an ecosystem basis; steps to address cross-sectoral issues between coastal management, total catchment management and fisheries management; awareness and education campaigns, for both users and the general public; and development of strategic management plans, framed within the principles of ESD, in conjunction with rationalisation of fishing capacity and over exploited fisheries. The principle objectives of the strategy are: • to ensure that fisheries management agencies work within a framework of resource stewardship • to develop national guidelines for state of the aquatic environment reporting • to disseminate information on the principles of ESD to fishers and the wider community State Governments are then required to review, and where necessary amend, fisheries legislation to

17 Fisheries Management Act (Commonwealth), Availabe at https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2014C00258/Html/Text#_Toc390691611

163 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

ensure it provides the basis for managing the fishery resource in ways which are consistent with the principles of ESD; conduct a review of fishing fleet capacity by fisheries management authorities; examine mechanisms for addressing the prioritisation of scientific and economic research activities to help research agencies coordinate their programs and direct their scarce resources to areas of greatest importance; cooperatively work to resolve management boundaries between the Commonwealth and the States/Territories, and between adjoining States and Territories, on a biological/ecological basis; seek to involve representatives from the fisheries industry in discussions on prioritisation of research and resolution of management boundaries; seek to formalise international commitments covering fishing on the high seas, driftnetting, reductions in land-based sources of marine pollution, shipping standards and implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment, 199218 requires that where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. In the application of the precautionary principle, public and private decisions should be guided by: careful evaluation to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment; and an assessment of the risk- weighted consequences of various options. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act)19 is the Australian Government’s central piece of environmental legislation, and provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places — defined in the EPBC Act as matters of national environmental significance. Its objectives are: • to provide for the protection of the environment, especially those aspects of the environment that are matters of national environmental significance; and • to promote ecologically sustainable development through the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of natural resources; • to apply the precautionary principle in decision making • to promote the conservation of biodiversity; • to provide for the protection and conservation of heritage; and • to promote a co-operative approach to the protection and management of the environment involving governments, the community, landholders and Indigenous peoples; and • to assist in the co-operative implementation of Australia’s international environmental responsibilities; and • to recognise the role of Indigenous people in the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of Australia’s biodiversity; and • to promote the use of Indigenous people’s knowledge of biodiversity with the involvement of, and in co-operation with, the owners of the knowledge. Clear long-term objectives are defined in the Fisheries Management Act 2007, which provides a broad statutory framework to ensure the ecologically sustainable management of South Australia’s fisheries resources20. The five objectives of the Act are: 1. Proper conservation and management measures are to be implemented to protect the aquatic resources of the State from over-exploitation and ensure that those resources are not endangered; 2. Access to the aquatic resources of the State is to be allocated between users of the resources in a manner that achieves optimum utilisation and equitable distribution of those resources to the benefit of the community; 3. Aquatic habitats are to be protected and conserved, and aquatic ecosystems and genetic

18 Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/about-us/esd/publications/intergovernmental-agreement 19 Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/about-us/esd/publications/national-esd-strategy. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc 20 Prior to this the primary legislative control was the Fisheries Act 1982.

164 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

diversity are to be maintained and enhanced; 4. Recreational fishing and commercial fishing activities are to be fostered for the benefit of the whole community; and 5. The participation of users of the aquatic resources of the State, and of the community more generally, in the management of fisheries is to be encouraged.

The Spencer Gulf Management Plan (PIRSA, 2020) reflects the objectives of the Act. The Management Plan aims to achieve outcomes that are consistent with broader Government objectives for the management of the marine environment. These include: • Maintaining an ecologically sustainable biomass • Optimising utilization and equitable distribution • Protecting and conserving aquatic resources, habitats and ecosystems • Cost effective and participative management of the fishery To satisfy the Commonwealth Government requirements for a demonstrably ecologically sustainable fishery, the fishery (or fisheries if a species is caught in more than one fishery), must operate under a management regime that meets Principles 1 and 2 of the Commonwealth Guidelines. The management regime must take into account arrangements in other jurisdictions, and adhere to arrangements established under Australian laws and international agreements. PIRSA has implemented Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) principles into its management planning and include: • Ecosystem structure and biodiversity (on a meso-scale basis); • Captured fish species; • Protected species (direct impact – capture or interaction); • Benthic habitats; and • External impacts. The EGPMF has been assessed pursuant to the EBFM framework, and strategies, partial strategies and measures have been implemented in the EGPMF based on the risk assessment outcomes. These are contained within a number of State Fisheries Plans including the Spencer Gulf Prawn Management Plan (PIRSA, 2020). 8.4.4 Fisheries Specific Objectives (PI 3.2.1) A Management Plan is in place for a 5-year period and the new plan commences from the October 2020. It replaces the Plan 2015-2020. The Plans contain well-defined and measurable short and long- term objectives, which are demonstrably consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, and are explicit within the fishery’s management system. The Management Plan is consistent with Section 43 and 44 the Fisheries Management Act 2007. The Management Plan is an expression of the policy that applies in relation to the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery to inform the exercise of any discretionary decision-making powers in the legislation, as they apply to the fishery. The Plan: • Sets out the management objectives and implements a strategy for achieving these • Identifies research needs and priorities • Sets out the resources required to implement the plan • Describes the biological, economic and social characteristics of the fishery • Identifies the impacts or potential impacts of the fishery on its associated ecosystem or ecosystems, including impacts on non-target species of fish or other aquatic resources • Identifies any ecological factors that could have an impact on the performance of the fishery • Assesses the risks to the ecosystem and set out strategies for addressing those risks • Sets out methods for monitoring the performance of the fishery and the effectiveness of the plan, including performance indicators, trigger points for review or action and progress reporting.

165 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

As set out in Section 7 of the Fisheries Management Act 2007, the objects of the Act is to protect, manage, use and develop the aquatic resources of the State in a manner consistent with ESD. The Act also requires that management plans be consistent with these objectives. A number of biological, social and economic factors are identified in the objects of the Act that must be balanced in pursuing ESD. However, it is specified that the primary consideration is to avoid the over-exploitation or endangerment of resources. The four key goals for the SGPF set out below are linked to the operational objectives for the South Australia Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery set out in Table 24. Performance Indicators (PIs) and Means of verification for each activity are provided to allow for the assessment of this management plan in meeting the identified goals. Goal 1: Maintain ecologically sustainable prawn biomass This goal relates to the sustainability of the target stock. The outcomes of this management plan in relation to sustainability are that management arrangements are sufficient to maintain: • Relative spawning stock biomass of prawn stocks at sustainable levels • Future prawn biomass is maintained above sustainable levels • Information collected is sufficient to manage fishing operations to sustainable levels. These outcomes aim to ensure that prawn resources in Spencer Gulf are harvested within sustainable limits as defined by PIs relevant to reference points described in the Harvest Strategy. The main strategies for ensuring the sustainability of the resource are: • Limited entry • Closed areas • Gear restrictions • Decision rules. Performance of the fishery against identified reference points are reported annually in a stock assessment report developed by SARDI Aquatic Sciences. These reports can be accessed from the SARDI website at www.sardi.sa.gov.au/fisheries. Goal 2: Optimum utilisation and equitable distribution This goal relates to optimising the economic and social benefits derived from the SGPF and focuses on allowing for economic efficiency of fishing operations. The outcome of this management plan in relation to optimum utilisation is: • Having an economically efficient fleet without compromising sustainability objectives.

The strategies implemented to achieve this goal are focused on a Harvest Strategy (Section 9) that allows for flexible fishing operations within sustainable limits. With regard to equitable distribution, as the fishery is exclusively a commercial fishery by virtue of the limiting management arrangements that hamper non-commercial fishing, the objectives in this plan relate to ensuring access to the resource is in line with requirements under the Act. The operational objective related to resource access is to: • Provide access to the resource as per PIRSA’s Allocation policy: Allocation of Access to Fisheries Resources Between Fishing Sectors (PIRSA, 2011)

Performance of the fishery against identified economic reference points are reported annually in economics indicators reports developed by Econsearch, which can be accessed from the PIRSA website www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries. Goal 3: Protect and conserve aquatic resources, habitats and ecosystems This goal relates to the management of the fishery using an EBFM approach. The outcomes of this management plan to achieve this goal are:

166 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

• Fishery impacts on by-catch and by-product species are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on endangered, threatened and protected species (ETPs) are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on benthic habitat and associated species communities are sustainable. Management strategies implemented to achieve this goal are: • Controls on fishing effort. • Closed areas. • Promoting activities that reduce the impacts of fishing activity. Goal 4: Cost effective and participative management of the fishery This goal relates to co-management of the fishery, planning of management activities, and the recovery of the costs of management of the fishery. The overall outcomes of this goal are: • To ensure that stakeholders and government fisheries administrations share responsibility and are involved in the decision-making processes for developing and implementing management arrangements. • To ensure that management arrangements are complied with. The cost effectiveness of these arrangements also need to be considered in the development process as the management costs are recovered from fishers in accordance with the government’s cost-recovery policy for fisheries. The operational objectives of this management plan in relation to co-management, planning and cost- recovery are: • Industry participation in management through co-operative arrangements. • Management arrangements supporting cohesion between fisheries industry and the wider community. • Maximise stewardship of fisheries resources. • Costs of management of the fishery funded by relevant stakeholders. The extent to which the SGPF is achieving the range of stated goals and objectives is assessed using a combination of indicators designed to measure performance of the fishery. These performance indicators may be biological or non-biological. Each performance indicator is measured against and management reference points (MRL) that may be quantitative or non-quantitative. Limit reference points represent the minimum acceptable level of fishery performance. If performance falls below limit reference points, measures to improve performance must be developed, following the management responses. Each performance indicator is related to a specific goal, outcome and activity. The following table, Table 24, defines the suite of performance indicators, their related activities and MRLs. Importantly, the values provided are the initial values set for the first year of the life of this Management Plan. The management reference points may be changed on an annual basis if additional scientific information is available that suggests change is appropriate. The reasoning behind these changes should be documented. The limits have not been changed within the confines of the existing Management Plan. These performance indicators are reported on by PIRSA Fisheries. They are assessed from a number of sources that include stock assessment, EBFM reports and economic reports. The performance indicators in the table measure the success of strategies to address the impacts of fishing on the ecosystem. These indicators are assessed annually to ensure attainment of the outcome, and on 5-year cycle to coincide with the life of this Management Plan. The evidence suggests that fisheries specific control rules are in place, and these are well defined and measurable, and consistent with achieving outcomes expressed under MSC Principle 1, 2 and 3.

167 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Table 25. Management goals, objectives and strategies for management for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Objective Strategies ESD risk Performance indicator Description Reference point addressed Goal 1: Maintain ecologically sustainable prawn biomass. 1a Management 1ai. Controls on fishing effort through, Fishing Average adult prawn Adult prawn catch rates from Average adult arrangements are restriction on the number of licences impacts on catch rate from three SASs is used as an indicator prawn catch rate ≥ sufficient to maintain (mesh size and head line length target SASs each season. of relative spawning biomass. 68.2 kg/hr (2.5 relative spawning stock restrictions); adherence to limits on the species. Catch rates are weighted as lb/min). biomass of prawn stocks amount of gear used in the fishery; described in the Harvest

at sustainable levels. restriction to areas and times in line with Strategy. Harvest Strategy, horsepower, vessel size. 1aii. Closed areas maintained, e.g. waters <10m. 1aiii. Annual Harvest strategy guides fishing operations. 1b Future prawn biomass 1bi. Controls on fishing effort through, Fishing Recruitment index Index of future biomass. > 35 is maintained above restriction on the number of licences impacts on (square root of the

sustainable levels. (mesh size and head line length target number of juvenile restrictions); adherence to limits on the species. prawns (males <33 and amount of gear used in the fishery; females <35 mm CL) restriction to areas and times in line with captured per nautical Harvest Strategy, horsepower, vessel size. mile trawled following Carrick (2003)). 1bii. Closed areas maintained, e.g. waters Mean egg production. Count in million eggs/ hr >500 <10m. trawled during November 1biii. Annual Harvest Strategy guides fishing FIS. operations. 1c: Information is 1ci. Fishery-dependent information collected Research Commercial catch and Spatial and temporal catch Mean commercial collected sufficient to through commercial logbooks. knowledge effort. and effort data provided by all catch rate > manage fishing commercial fishers for each 80kg/trawled hour. 1cii. Fishery-independent prawn surveys operations to sustainable day fished in commercial Logbook records conducted. levels. logbooks. provided by all 1ciii. Fishery status assessment reported. fishers for 100% of fishing nights.

168 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Objective Strategies ESD risk Performance indicator Description Reference point addressed 1civ. Appropriate environmental data to aid Fishery independent Fishery assessment reports Fishery surveys assessment collected. surveys conducted. against biological PIs in the conducted Harvest Strategy. sufficient to inform 1cv. Research plan maintained to guide annual fishery strategic research. status assessments. Strategic research plan. A research and monitoring Research plan plan prioritises research and updated annually. monitoring activities developed by SGWCPFA Research Subcommittee.

Objective Strategies ESD risk Performance indicator Description Reference point addressed Goal 2: Ensure optimal utilisation and equitable distribution.

2a An 2ai. Harvest strategy allows commercial Industry Gross value of production Total catch valued at the GVP monitored economically operators to maximise operational profit. (GVP). landed beach price. Used to regularly. efficient fleet flexibility and economic efficiency. Economic determine the whole fishery without value to value. 2aii. Economic performance of fishery assessed. compromising regional sustainability centres. Return on investment Net profit after depreciation as ROI monitored a percentage of capital objectives. Asset value. (ROI). regularly employed reported in Market economic indicators reports. access. Economics. Gross operating surplus GOS provides an index of GOS monitored (GOS). capacity of operator to remain regularly in the fishery in the short to medium term. Economic indicators Reporting against economic Economic indicator report. PIs. report conducted regularly. Number of full time Employment directly and Number of FTEs equivalent (FTE) indirectly associated with the monitored when fishery. available.

169 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

positions directly and indirectly employed.

2b Manage 2bi. Resource allocation between sectors Allocation. Allocation reviewed as Allocation reviewed if allocated shares of provided in this management plan. per Allocation Policy appropriate. the resource as per 2bii. Review of allocation provided in the (PIRSA 2011), if Allocation Policy. management plan. appropriate.

Objective Strategies ESD risk Performance indicator Description Reference point addressed Goal 3: Protect and conserve aquatic resources, habitats and ecosystems. 3a Fishery impacts 3ai. Control fishing effort through, restriction on Impacts on By-catch and by-product Monitoring changes in EBFM reporting on by-catch and by- the number of licences (Mesh size and head trophic catch rate abundance of by-catch and by- undertaken regularly. product species are line length restrictions); limits on the structure. (number/hectare) from product species that may

sustainable. amount of gear used in the fishery, By-catch. by-catch surveys. indicate trophic structure restrictions on horse power. change using process identified in the EBFM 3aii. Closed areas maintained e.g. waters <10m. project. 3aiii. Risks to by-catch and by-product species Long-term by-catch Development of monitoring Appropriate reference monitored through ESD risk assessment. reporting and and reporting methodologies points identified in 3aiv. Closed areas through co-management monitoring measures allow for risks to by-catch EBFM project report arrangements promoted. developed where species to be identified developed and appropriate. effectively and assist in considered for long 3av. Promote investigation into technology to developing effective term monitoring. reduce impacts of fishing activity. mitigation measures. 3avi. Industry codes of practice for by-catch Technology for reducing Technology that mitigate Technology for species where available. impacts of fishing identified risk to by-catch reducing impacts of 3avii. Long term by-catch reporting and activity on by-catch species sustainability be fishing activity on by- monitoring to be established in line with the species sustainability adopted where available and catch species EBFM methods. adopted where appropriate. sustainability adopted appropriate. where appropriate.

170 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Objective Strategies ESD risk Performance indicator Description Reference point addressed EBFM report21. EBFM report completed. ESD risk assessment ESD risk assessment report reviewed in life of reviewed in life of the plan. plan. 3b Fishery impacts 3bi. Closed areas maintained e.g. waters <10m. TEPS. Interaction rate for All commercial fishery are Interaction rates for on TEPS are TEPS (number of required to report in wildlife TEPS from wildlife 3bii. Vulnerability of TEPS to fishing operations sustainable. interactions per fishing interaction logbooks for interaction logbooks monitored. day reported in wildlife interactions with TEPS. and SASs monitored 3biii. Fishing interactions with endangered, interaction logbooks). annually.

threatened and protected species recorded in wildlife interaction logbooks. Number of The number of TEPS per TEPS number/ TEPS/hectare reported hectare as reported in the hectare monitored and 3biv. Management measures to avoid interactions in EBFM reports. EBFM reporting project reported in EBFM with TEPS developed where appropriate. underway at the time of reports regularly. 3bv. Industry codes of practice for TEPS developing this management adopted where available. plan may provide an index of TEPS abundance that are not 3bvi. Closed areas through co-management available from other sources. arrangements promoted. Closed areas maintained. Area closures to reduce Area closures for fishery impacts on syngnathids reducing fishery are considered in developing impacts on harvest strategies where syngnathids included appropriate. in fishing strategies where appropriate. Industry codes of Where appropriate, codes of Where developed, practice followed where practices for avoiding or Industry codes of developed. reducing the impacts of practice are interactions with TEPS communicated to developed by industry. fishing fleet and adopted.

21 An EBFM report was in preparation at the time of finalising this management plan. This report provides a framework for continued monitoring of ecosystem components of the fishery.

171 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Objective Strategies ESD risk Performance indicator Description Reference point addressed 3c Fishery impacts 3ci. Controls on fishing effort through, Broader Annual fishery footprint Annual fishing footprint refers Fishing footprint does on benthic habitat restriction on the number of licences (mesh environment. relative to maximum to the area of Spencer Gulf not change by more and associated size and head line length restrictions); limits Habitat annual fishing footprint fished in a year. than 2% from historic species on the amount of gear used in the fishery; disturbance. maximum. maximum annual communities are restriction to areas and times in line with Impacts on fishing footprint. sustainable. fishing strategy. trophic structure. Closed areas maintained. Closed areas 3cii. Closed areas maintained e.g. waters <10m. maintained in fishing Removal 3ciii. Technology to reduce impacts of fishing strategies. of/damage to activity on habitats developed and promoted organisms by where appropriate. fishing. 3civ. Impacts on habitat and associated species communities monitored.

172 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Objective Strategies ESD risk Performance indicator Description Reference point addressed Goal 4: Enable effective and participative management of the fishery.

4a Industry 4ai. Fishing Strategies developed and Management Membership on SGWCPFA Management Membership of participation in maintained through the SGWCPFA effectiveness. SGWCPFA’s Committee provide advice to SGWCPFA committees management Management Committee and the Co- Management PIRSA on fisheries related is maintained and through co- Committee-at-sea. management. Committee and issues including fishing positions filled. operative Access. Research strategy development and at- Industry and PIRSA co- arrangements. Governance – Subcommittee. sea decisions to maintain management Industry. fishing strategies. responsibilities fulfilled as per co-management agreement. Fishing strategies are Fishing strategies that set the Fishing strategies are set in accordance with guidelines for fishing set in accordance with the Harvest Strategy. operations are in line with the the Harvest Strategy. aims and management framework described in the Harvest Strategy. 4b Management 4bi. Stakeholder input to the management of the Management Ensure stakeholders are The SGWCPFA’s Membership of industry arrangements fishery, through established co-management effectiveness. involved in Management Committee and and non-industry support cohesion processes. Fishing development of its Research Subcommittee stakeholders on and connectedness Industry management provide advice to PIRSA on SGWCPFA committees 4bii. Communicate management arrangements between fisheries relationship arrangements through fisheries related issues under is maintained. to the wider community. industry and wider with maintenance of co- formal a co-management Co-management community. community. management agreement. arrangements between Governance – arrangements. Fishing strategies as described SGWCPFA and Others Management in the Harvest Strategy are government are (NGOs). arrangements allow developed in collaboration maintained. commercial operators to with the SGWCPFA. Fishing strategies are maximise operational Information related to developed through the flexibility. management of the fishery is SGWCPFA. Non-fishing stakeholder correct and relevant on PIRSA PIRSA website positions maintained on website. information is updated as required.

173 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Objective Strategies ESD risk Performance indicator Description Reference point addressed SGWCPFA Research Subcommittee. Management information is available on PIRSA website. 4c Maximise 4ci. Undertake annual compliance risk Governance – Number of Number of prosecutions Number of prosecutions stewardship of assessment. Industry. prosecutions. related to the fishery. over three years does fisheries resources. Fishing not increase 4cii. Implement a cost-effective compliance and Compliance risk Compliance risk assessment Industry significantly. monitoring program to address identified assessment undertaken undertaken in cost-recovery relationship risks. in cost-recovery process. Compliance risk with process. assessment undertaken. 4ciii. Information on fisheries management is community. Information related to available in a timely and publicly accessible Fishing Management management of the fishery is PIRSA website manner. impacts on information is available correct and relevant on PIRSA information is updated target species. on PIRSA website. website. as required. 4d Costs of 4di. Annual real costs of management, research Management Cost-recovery process Cost-recovery process management of the and compliance for the fishery determined effectiveness. undertaken. undertaken regularly, or fishery funded by through established cost-recovery process. as appropriate. relevant 4dii. Costs of management research, co- stakeholders. management and compliance is collected from commercial licence holders.

174 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

8.4.5 Decision making processes (PI 3.2.2) There are established decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. The Minister, with the advice of the FCSA, makes strategic policy decisions and is ultimately responsible for the formulation of the Management Plan. These decisions conform to the principles of the Act, and endorse the Precautionary and the ecosystem based approach to fisheries management. Management Plans are formulated by PIRSA, in consultation with the SGWCPFA and other stakeholders. Decision- making processes respond to all issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions. These are consistent with the outcomes of the Management Plan. These decisions are made by the management organisations, PIRSA and SGWCPFA, under the co-management framework. Explanations are provided for actions or lack of actions by the organisations tasked with implementation. Failure to achieve the management reference levels is submitted by PIRSA to the Minister detailing the reasons for non- compliance. It then becomes the responsibility of the SGWCPFA Management Committee and PIRSA to rectify failure to achieve specific management outcomes. Formal reporting processes are explicit and required as part of the MoU between PIRSA and the Association (GoSA, 2018). The Memorandum of Understanding between the SGWCPFA and SARDI (SGWCPFA and Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, 2019) makes provision for specific research actions and reports to be implemented. The Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Management Plan monitoring and performance indications provided the basis for incorporating relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. At Sea monitoring also provides the basis for the Committee at Sea to respond to any real time monitoring activities. In formulating decisions PIRSA Fisheries takes responsibility for the following: • Full independent audit process of all delegated functions • Enforcement and compliance functions • Conducting ecological risk assessment • Leading development of the management plan and monitoring the attainment of the outcomes and activities in consultation with the Association, its research sub-committee and other stakeholders • Setting the harvest strategy • Cost recovery of core management processes delegated to the Association. The Association undertakes the following tasks: • Communicating with PIRSA (and industry members) on matters relating to fisheries management administration • Educating industry members on policy rules and regulations in consultation with PIRSA to improve voluntary compliance • Consulting with industry members on policy and other initiatives related to Administration of the Act as requested by PIRSA • Advising PIRSA on policy, initiatives and plans related to administration of the Act (and providing reports to PIRSA) • Undertaking projects that will improve the administration of the Act (e.g. data, compliance, management) and reporting to PIRSA • Collecting relevant economic and social data relating to the administration of the Act, and reporting to PIRSA • Conducting strategic planning services for the industry through an existing strategic plan endorsed by PIRSA • Providing the coordinator at sea (Real time management services) • Participating in cost recovery consultation • Addressing projects related to the industry strategic plan including aboriginal traditional fisheries management, improving the economic and social status of the fishery and people development and leadership. The consultation process ensures that the management system or fishery acts proactively to avoid legal disputes. The co-management system allows for delegation of responsibilities and the partnership approach between government and industry actively works towards avoiding disputes. In addition, licence conditions provide for a system of dispute resolution in the event that the prescribed licence holder is not satisfied with the conditions (Section 111-113 of the Fisheries Management Act). All letters to Licence holders contain the following statement: Licence holders have the right under Section 111 of the Fisheries Management Act, 2007, to seek review of a variation or the imposition of a licensing condition or refusal to issue, renew or consent to the transfer of a licence. Appeal rights

175 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

also exist under Sections 112 and 113 of the FMA, 2007, to the District Court and the Environment Resources and Development Court respectively22. No legal challenges or judicial decisions have taken place in the SGPF, but the decision making process does have to take account of Native Rights (High Court Judgement, 2013). 8.4.6 Compliance and enforcement (PI 3.2.3) There are two components of compliance applied in the SGPF. PIRSA Fisheries Services is responsible for fisheries Monitoring, Control and Surveillance. The Association and its Committee at Sea undertake day-to-day real time management actions (SHWCPFA, 2009) but also serve to support compliance and verification processes. Fisheries Services Group Compliance resourcing The Fisheries Services Group (FSG) undertakes the function of enforcing fisheries management arrangements and operates a range of strategies, including effective targeted monitoring and surveillance; up to 40 appropriately assigned staff, with Compliance operations operating from Port Lincoln, Ceduna and Whyalla in West Region; a Fisheries Patrol Vessel (FPV), the Southern Ranger, and up to 20 smaller support craft operating throughout the region; and a system of suitable deterrents in the form of fines, administrative penalties, accumulative penalty points and targeted educative campaigns. The FSG Divisions also provides licensing facilities from its regional offices, as well as online renewal and payment. Regional operational areas are supported by the FSG’s Adelaide-based Compliance and Strategic Operations (Prosecutions and Investigations). Key State compliance objectives include: • Maintain ecologically sustainable stock levels • Ensure optimum utilisation and equitable distribution • Minimise impacts on the ecosystem • Enable effective management with greater industry involvement. Fisheries Officers undertake regular land and sea patrols using a compliance delivery model supported by a risk assessment process and associated operational planning framework. Throughout the region, employ radar, night vision and specially equipped four-wheel-drive vehicles, and small vessels for covert deployments. They also make use of sophisticated surveillance, mapping and GPS equipment to assist in evidence gathering. This includes high-powered telescopes and photographic mapping technology. Historically, large patrol vessels have assisted FOs at various times of the year for offshore patrols. During the 2019/20 season, comprising 50 fishing season days, the two district offices supported a total 32 officer days and 10 FPV days. The development of fishery-specific Prawn Fishery Compliance Plan (PFCP) (incorporating the SGPF and the West Coast Prawn Fishery) and compliance strategies continues to provide the most effective and efficient method for a planned and measurable approach to compliance delivery. The Division reviews the compliance risk assessments each year. The risk assessment process can also be triggered by the introduction of new supporting legislation23 in a fishery / resource or the identification of any new major issues that would require FSG managers to assess their compliance program. The risk assessment process involves the participation of managers, field-based FOs, researchers, the Association and representatives from other interested stakeholder groups, including Marine Parks. There are two tiers in the risk assessment process — the first tier is the formal transparent process involving industry and other stakeholders, and the second tier is internal, fishery managers and compliance personnel. The second process feeds into the fishery’s PFCP, which provides the formal framework for the delivery of specific compliance services that remove or mitigate the identified risks.

22 PIRSA Notice to Fishers – Change to Bug Size Limit SGPF, August, 2014 23 ‘Supporting legislation’ refers to any Regulation or Gazette that would allow non-compliance with the management framework to be detected and prosecuted with a reasonable chance of securing a conviction. 176 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The compliance risk assessment process identifies modes of offending, compliance countermeasures and risks and relies on a weight-of-evidence approach, considering information available from specialist units, trends and issues identified by local staff and Departmental priorities set by the SGPF Management Plan. The PFCP provides a formal and transparent process for staff to carry out defined compliance activities in order to monitor, inspect and regulate the compliance risks to each specific high-risk activity in a fishery, and in turn confirm they are at an acceptable and manageable level. This is supported by measurable reporting methods defined under the PFCP to demonstrate compliance activities being undertaken are having a direct and significant impact on reducing identified risks. The development of a PFCP consists of identifying and applying tailored compliance strategies for each identified risk. In the case of SGPF, this includes strategies that may deal with higher identified risks related to seasonal considerations, spatial considerations, environmental considerations and identified persons or groups of interest. Each PFCP is reviewed following a compliance risk assessment. Additionally, by regularly reviewing the PFCP for all fisheries in a particular location, rational and accountable decisions can be made about deploying compliance resources and ensuring that resources are available to mitigate risks to an acceptable level. Following a formal review of a fishery’s PFCP and associated compliance strategies, compliance activities are prioritized in accordance with risk, budget and resourcing considerations. Annual planning meetings are held for PFCP, with regular specific planning of day-to-day targeted and non- targeted patrols linked to the PFCP based on resources and competing priorities. Western Regions regional staff co-ordinate the allocation and prioritisation of existing resources across all programs in the region based on the risk assessments and related OCPs. Compliance planning meetings are held regularly to ensure staffing requirements are adequate for scheduled compliance activities. Available compliance resources are allocated based on the risk assessment outcomes and the contacts and compliance statistics that are captured, reported on and reviewed at the end of each year. The allocated resources and compliance strategies (i.e. monitoring, surveillance and education activities) are outlined in the PFCP, which specifies planned hours and staff allocated to key compliance tasks and duties. This planning and delivery process allows for more-targeted, effective and relevant compliance service in terms of both cost and activities. There is also flexibility within the region to allocate additional resources to respond to changes, such as the need for a planned tactical operation in response to fresh intelligence. Redirecting existing resources or seeking additional resources from other areas or units may achieve this. Similarly, changing priorities and resourcing on a local level can involve reducing planned delivery of compliance services to ensure resources are directed to where they are most needed. The Regional Office of the Division relevant to the SGPF is Port Lincoln and supported by district offices located at Ceduna and Whyalla. Staff located at these offices provide on-ground compliance and educative delivery for these fisheries. Key compliance and enforcement personnel located in the region and their responsibilities include: 1. Compliance Operations Section a. Overall responsibility for PFCPs and compliance strategies, including their development, review and ensuring outcomes are delivered; b. Field responsibility for PFCPs and strategies, including reporting any deficiencies and reporting the outcomes as they are delivered or achieved; c. Responsible for providing sufficient and appropriate resources to achieve compliance outcomes; d. Provides large oceangoing patrol vessels for Statewide offshore compliance operations and education activities. e. Ensuring FO safety is considered at all times and the Region’s occupational health and safety requirements are met; 177 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

f. Monitoring the progress of the PFCPs and strategies during their execution; g. Provide briefings and de-briefings as required; h. Consulting with all key stakeholders when reviewing the PFCPs and strategies; and i. Develops and implements strategic compliance policy and standards; j. Provides compliance risk assessments for fisheries; k. Provides review and implementation of fisheries management and compliance legislation; l. Oversees collection and analysis of compliance data; m. Liaising with staff from other agencies e.g. DoE in relation to Marine Parks n. Complying with the Standard Operating Procedures, Prosecution Guidelines, the Department’s Code of Conduct and promoting the vision and mission statement of PIRSA. o. Develops occupational health and safety standards for FOs; and p. Provides recruitment and training of new and existing FOs. q. Reporting outcomes. FOs are formally appointed pursuant to the FMA, which clearly sets out their powers to enforce fisheries legislation, enter and search premises, obtain information and inspect catches. FOs are highly trained; they must have a thorough knowledge of the legislation they are responsible for enforcing and follow a strict protocol for undertaking their duties in accordance with FMA and in recording information relating to the number and type of contacts, offences detected and sanctions applied. 2. Strategic Operators Unit • Conducts major investigations and initiates proactive intelligence-driven operations; • Targets any serious and organised criminal activity within the fishing sector; • Provides specialist investigative training; and • Provides technical assistance in relation to covert surveillance. 3. Prosecutions Unit • Manage the system used to issue infringement notices or commence prosecution processes when offences are detected; and • Custodians of information relating to detected offences that can be used for official reporting purposes. Operational planning Compliance staff utilise a number of formal monitoring and surveillance activities and control mechanisms in the SGPF. Fisheries legislation forms the one component of the control system for commercial fisheries in SA, and these are applied through Licence conditions. The SGPF is subject to controls under: • Fisheries Management Act, 2007 • Fisheries Management Act, 1991 (Commonwealth) • Fisheries Management (Prawn Fisheries) Regulations, 2017 • Fisheries Management (Marine Scalefish Fisheries) Regulations, 2017 • Criminal Assets Confiscation Act, 2005 • Summary Offences Act, 1953 • The EPBC Act (export exemptions); • The SGPF Management Plan; and • Licensing Conditions.

178 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The licensee and/or the master of every licenced fishing boat are required to submit accurate and complete catch and TEP logbook returns. On each logbook sheet, fishers are required to report the starting position (longitude and latitude), start time, duration, prawn and by-product catch for each trawl shot, as well as daily records of all ETP species interactions. A description of the control measures in place is provided in Table 16. Table 26. Description of the control measures and instruments of implementation in the SGPF

Measure Description Instrument

Limited Entry A limited number of Managed Fishery Licenses (39 Fisheries Management (Prawn vessels) are permitted to operate in the SGPMF. Fisheries) Regulations, 2017 SGPF Management Plan

Effort Restrictions Control fishing effort through temporal closures Fisheries Management (Prawn No trawling during daylight hours Fisheries) Regulations, 2017 SGPF Management Plan

Spatial restrictions Spatial closures Fisheries Management (Prawn • Self imposed Fisheries) Regulations, 2017 • Marine Parks SGPF Management Plan No trawling in waters shallower than 10m Gazette notices

Demersal otter trawl, Single or double rig, Fisheries Management (Prawn Maximum combined headline length (29.26 m), Fisheries) Regulations, 2017 Gear Controls Mesh size (4.5 cm), Maximum vessel length (22 m) Licensing conditions and maximum vessel power (336 kW).

Bycatch Reduction The fleet is required to have BRDs in the form of 15 Not regulated. Best practice Devices (BRDs) cm crab bag inside the prawn net and hoppers to and importantly works. separate the catch

Prohibited species Take of protected and non protected species Fisheries Management Act, including syngnathids, Blue swimming crab 2007 In possession of finfish in contravention of the Fisheries Management (Marine allowable 2 kg for consumption Scalefish Fisheries) Regulations, 2017 Take of finfish and crabs off vessel return to port Licence condition Take of undersized and/or berried slipper lobster

Reporting Fishers are required to report all retained (target and FRMR (regulation 64) by-product) species catches and ETP species interactions and fishing location in statutory daily logbooks.

FOs deliver compliance activities directed at commercial fisheries through pre-season briefings with the masters of the licenced fishing boats and pre-season inspections, as well as at-sea inspections and investigations resulting from suspected breaches detected intelligence, radar or night vision. VMS is not used due to the small area fished, allied to acceptance of peer pressure applied to fishers (Simon Clark, pers. comm. July, 2020). FOs undertakes the majority of surveillance activities in the SGPF during field-based patrols. Target actions for the SGPF comprises: • Update operating guidelines

179 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

• Meet with license holders prior to the commencement of the season and clarify issues relating to gear requirements, requirements around the take of finfish (< 2 kgs/boat for on board consumption), and disseminate details of legislative changes for the coming season • Induct all new entrants • Establish liaison and contact with industry through one to one meetings with licence holders, through attending industry meetings and meetings with Fishery policy and research staff • Inspect nets and headline length to ensure compliance with the technical regulations.

Boardings take place at sea, where the primary activity is to check for finfish. Ad hoc monitoring occurs on land to check on violations, as well as regular landing inspections. Actions may be determined as part of a regular review or through intelligence provided by industry. The history of this fishery is that were any fisher to demonstrate non-compliance, the industry would inform the Division, and the system of peer pressure, allied to co-management, effectively ensures that there is no systematic non-compliance (Andrew Carr Dietman, pers.com, July, 2020). Compliance activities undertaken during patrols are recorded and reported by FOs using a daily patrol contact (DPC) form. The purpose of these forms is to record and classify contacts and time spent in the field for each FO. These forms provide managers with information about: • The number of field contacts made, which provides a context for the number of offences detected. This includes random contacts and offences from random inspections; • The number of targeted contacts made, which provides information on the effectiveness of the intelligence gathering capacity at identifying ‘targets’; • The number of face-to-face contacts outside of a compliance context (referred to as ‘A/L/E’ contacts) made, which provides information on the educative effort of FOs in a fishery; and • Other routine information that can be used to help managers report on where and on which fisheries FOs have undertaken patrols. This information is also used in patrol planning and risk assessments and ensures accountability of the compliance program. A ‘contact’ occurs when an FO has a chance of detecting illegal activity being undertaken by a fisher and includes personal contact (face-to-face), covert activities (e.g. deliberate, intensive surveillance) and unattended gear checks (e.g. checking BRDs on a trawl net) and A/LE contacts. The Division has also implemented an initiative called Fishwatch24, whereby the community can report instances of suspected illegal fishing. The Fishwatch phone line provides a confidential quick and easy way to report any suspicious activity to Departmental compliance staff. Sanctions There is an explicit and statutory sanction framework that is applied should a person contravene legislation relevant to the SGPF. Sanctions applicable to the FMA are set out in the Fisheries Management (General) Regulations 2017. The fine schedule ranges from AUD 315 to AUD 560,000, with provision for 4 years (imprisonment for trafficking and unlawful sales), and the application of up to 200 demerit points (Fisheries Management (Demerit Points) Regulations 2017), leading to the confiscation of a fishing license.

Breaches in fishery rules may occur for a variety of reasons, and FOs undertake every opportunity to provide education, awareness and advice to fishers; however, all offences detected in the fishery are considered to be of significant concern and are addressed by FOs via the prosecution process comprising Caution, Written Notice, Expiation notice (‘on the spot fine’) and Prosecution (offences of serious nature (prescribed in the FMA) that immediately proceed to formal, legal prosecution). More serious offences against the legislation will require the Division to seek to prosecute. The Division’s Prosecution Steering Committee (PSC) reviews recommendations made by the FSG in respect to alleged

24 http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/About-Us/Contact-Us/Pages/Fish-watch.aspx 180 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

offending against the FMA (or Pearling Act) and considers whether such decisions are in the ‘public interest’. This process ensures fairness, consistency and equity in the prosecution decision-making process. All fisheries offences in SA are recorded in a dedicated Divisions prosecutions unit. Offences detected in the SGPF in the last 5 years are: • 1 Expiation issued for “Contravene Licence Condition” (3 cautions for the same offence) • 10 Expiations for “Fail to Supply Log Book Data” (3 cautions for the same offence) • 1 Expiation for “Fish in Closed Area” (1 caution for the same offence) • 1 Expiation for “Fail to Prior Report” • 2 Cautions for “Take Non Permitted Species”

This information demonstrates that the low number of infractions is not the result of low enforcement activity. The Committee at Sea The primary function of the Committee at Sea is to implement real time fisheries management decisions. However, defined functions of the CAS (SGWCPFA, 2009) are to: • Support the Management Committee’s harvest strategies, developed at Management Committee meetings. • Develop at-sea fishing strategies that ensures the fishery: • is compliant with legislative obligations • is compliant with its obligations under the Management Plan, including the four key management goals for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: o Maintain ecologically sustainable stock levels o Ensure optimum utilisation and equitable distribution o Minimise impacts on the ecosystem o Enable effective management with greater industry involvement. • is compliant with any Management Committee directive • To monitor fishing at all times and take necessary action(s) when required, to ensure the fishery is managed in accordance with at-sea fishing strategies as per above.

These fisheries operate using a constant escapement approach, with catch and effort monitored by the Committee at sea and used to inform in-season control rules related to opening/closure of management areas throughout the Fishery. As part of the control rules, once the catch rates in an area fall below the limit reference levels, the area is closed to fishing activity (for a specified period of time or for the remainder of the season depending on the area). Thus, there is an incentive for fishers not to under-report catches, as this will generate a lower catch rate and thus, the potential closure of an area to fishing activity. It is evident from Management Committee Minutes that the Committee, and the Association members, actively engage in self-policing activities (SGWCPFA Committee at Sea Report, April 2020 and Committee at Sea Report, May 2020). A potential threat, for example, is fishing over gazetted closure lines. No VMS system is in place, but the fleet operates in close proximity and can observe any active infringements and rectify these accordingly. Fishers have in many cases advanced the various restrictions applied in the form of real time closures, and apply these voluntarily. These closures are retrospectively gazetted by PIRSA in accordance with Section 79 of the Fisheries Act, 2007. At all times it is the responsibility of the skipper to notify the Committee at Sea of small prawns or any suspected illegal activity (Spencer Gulf Prawn Fleet Skippers Working Code of Practice (October 2014). 8.4.7 Performance Review (P3.2.4) PIRSA’s Management Plan and attainment of Management Reference levels are subject to annual internal review. All SARDI reports are subject to internal review. The Association’s Research sub-committee evaluates all reports submitted.

SARDI Research reports funded by FRDC and Seafood CRC are subject to external review. These include the bio economic model for South Australian Prawn Trawl Fisheries (Noell et al., 2018). Two other critical documents supporting the assessment, the PIRSA ESD and the SARDI reporting framework for ecosystem-based assessment, had been subject to external review.

181 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

PIRSA’s Management Plan is subject to internal review. The plan and revised harvest was developed by a Steering Committee, with an independent , Smith as part of the team (Steve Shanks, July 2020). The co-management system was also subject to external review (Neville, 2015). The fishery is assessed by Department of Environment (DoE) as an Ecologically Sustainably Managed Fishery under part 13 and 13(A) of the EPBC Act 1999 (DoEE, 2015)25.

8.4.8 Principle 3 Performance Indicator scores and rationales

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it: - Is capable of delivering sustainability in the UoA(s); PI 3.1.1 - Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and - Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Compatibility of laws or standards with effective management There is an effective There is an effective There is an effective national legal system and a national legal system and national legal system and framework for organised and effective binding procedures cooperation with other cooperation with other governing cooperation a Guide parties, where necessary, to parties, where necessary, to which post with other parties deliver management deliver management delivers management outcomes consistent with outcomes consistent with outcomes consistent with MSC Principles 1 and 2 MSC Principles 1 and 2. MSC Principles 1 and 2.

Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale Australia’s national legal system adheres to all the core international agreements and conventions. The Offshore Constitutional Settlement (Borthwick 2012) provides for the Australian states and the Northern Territory to manage fisheries out to 3 nautical miles from the coast. SA fisheries legislation and policy conforms to overarching Commonwealth Government fisheries and environmental law, including the EPBC Act. The EPBC Act provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places — defined in the EPBC Act as matters of national environmental significance. The Fisheries Management Act, 2007 (FMA) sets out the legal requirements for managing SA fisheries and in consistent with MSC Principles1 and 2. The Minister has the functions and powers assigned or conferred by or under Part 3 of the FMA. The Minister may delegate powers to the Executive Director of PIRSA, who in turn may delegate to the Director of Fisheries & Aquaculture. The executive structure of the Department brings all key aspects of fisheries management, such as research, policy, compliance & enforcement under a single dedicated department umbrella.

Binding procedures are explicit within these Acts. Therefore, the national legal system and governing binding governance cooperation meets SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100.

b Resolution of disputes

25 https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl 182 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The management system The management system The management system incorporates or is subject incorporates or is subject incorporates or is subject by law to a mechanism for by law to a transparent by law to a transparent the resolution of legal mechanism for the mechanism for the Guide disputes arising within the resolution of legal disputes resolution of legal disputes post system. which is considered to be that is appropriate to the effective in dealing with context of the fishery and most issues and that is has been tested and appropriate to the context proven to be effective. of the UoA. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale There are well established mechanisms for administrative and legal appeals of decisions taken in respect of fisheries, which are prescribed in Part 9 of the FMA. Decisions made by the Minister can be subject to a review process and appeals procedure. Appeal rights also exist under sections 112 and 113 of the Fisheries Management Act to the District Court and the Environment, Resources and Development Court Respectively. There have been no challenges to the decisions made under the FMA. Licence holders have the right under section 111 of the Fisheries Management Act, 2007 to seek to review and licence variation or imposition of a licence condition or refusal to renew or consent to a licence transfer. Previous challenges were made to the 1982 Act and upheld. All Legislation and actions may also be subject to scrutiny from the Ombudsman. PIRSA is also required to respond to Freedom of Information requests. The consultative, educative and co-management approach to management adopted by PIRSA, is inclusive of all stakeholders, and provides informal but effective mechanisms to minimise opportunities for disputes. Therefore, the national legal system provides for a transparent mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes and meets SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100. Respect for rights The management system The management system The management system has a mechanism to has a mechanism to has a mechanism to generally respect the legal observe the legal rights formally commit to the rights created explicitly or created explicitly or legal rights created established by custom of established by custom of explicitly or established by Guide c people dependent on people dependent on custom of people post fishing for food or fishing for food or dependent on fishing for livelihood in a manner livelihood in a manner food and livelihood in a consistent with the consistent with the manner consistent with the objectives of MSC objectives of MSC objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2. Principles 1 and 2. Principles 1 and 2. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale The Commonwealth Government has a commitment to negotiate indigenous land use agreements under the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993. The SA Fisheries Management Act 2007 (FMA 2007) acknowledges land use agreement made by the Commonwealth and provides for (Part 6, Section 60) the Minister and a native title group party to such an agreement to develop management arrangements for aboriginal traditional fishing. The FMA 2007 does not affect native title in any other way. PIRSA also has a customary fishing policy. This applies to those of aboriginal descent, fishing in a traditional manner, for non- commercial needs. This requires fisheries policy and management to provide specific and appropriate consideration of management practices in customary fisheries. Therefore, the management system has a mechanism to formally commit to the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food and livelihood in a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2 and meets SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100. References Borthwick, D (2012). Review of Commonwealth Fisheries: Policy, Legislation and Management, DAFF, https://www.google.com.au/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Review+of+the+operation+of+the+Fisheries+Act&ie=UTF- 8&oe=UTF-8&gferd=cr&ei=d7J-WI6LNsbr8Af37PACw

183 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999, Available at https://www.environment.gov.au/epbc Fisheries Management Act 2007, Available at https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/FISHERIES%20MANAGEMENT%20ACT%202007.aspx Native Title Act 1993, Available at Native Title Act 1993 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator All information is available

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

184 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to interested and affected parties PI 3.1.2 The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant parties Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Roles and responsibilities Organisations and Organisations and Organisations and individuals involved in the individuals involved in the individuals involved in the management process have management process have management process have been identified. Functions, been identified. Functions, been identified. Functions, a Guide roles and responsibilities roles and responsibilities roles and responsibilities post are generally understood. are explicitly defined and are explicitly defined and well understood for key well understood for all areas of responsibility and areas of responsibility and interaction. interaction. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale There is an explicit definition of the role of the Federal (AFMA) and State level of fisheries management. Critically, this includes clearly stating where overall responsibility for fisheries is divided between State and Commonwealth according to the Offshore Constitutional Settlement. Within PIRSA, there is explicit definition and understanding of the roles of the Department. The executive structure of the department brings all key aspects of fisheries management, research, policy and compliance under a single dedicated department umbrella. This increases clarification of roles and responsibilities. The roles of other departments such as Department of the Environment are also explicitly defined and it is understood how these relate to each other. SA fisheries explicitly make provision for delegating management responsibilities to the fisher organisations based on a co- management model. This again allows for explicit management decisions to be made at fishery level. The role of SGWCPFA is underpinned not only by the relationship with PIRSA but also through working relationships with SARDI. The functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and well understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction and meet SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100. Consultation processes The management system The management system The management system includes consultation includes consultation includes consultation processes that obtain processes that regularly processes that regularly relevant information seek and accept relevant seek and accept relevant from the main affected information, including information, including b Guide parties, including local local knowledge. The local knowledge. The post knowledge, to inform the management system management system management system. demonstrates consideration demonstrates consideration of the information of the information and obtained. explains how it is used or not used. Met? Yes Yes Yes

Rationale There is a comprehensive consultation processes in place that regularly seeks and accepts information. These include an assortment of public consultation processes on changes to Legislation, fishery specific management plans and Environmental Risk Assessment. This process provides for responses to submissions made, and also includes the requirement for open discussion through public meetings. Gazette announcements relating to the intent to implement fishery specific management actions also

185 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery provide for public response, facilitated through newspaper announcements and postings on PIRSA’s website (https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/spencer_gulf_prawn_fishery_management_plan_consultation). Fisher organisations, as well as other stakeholders, especially the NGOs, make various direct representations and submissions to PIRSA. As and when this occurs, PIRSA duly responds with an explanation of the rational for making its decisions and demonstrates how it has considered the information provided, including when appropriate how information provided through consultation has been used (The Minister to PIRSA, 29 July, 2019 (Snapper Spatial closures). It is also noteworthy that verbal responses are provided to participating stakeholders in both the SGWCPFA Research Committee meetings and during the ERAEF Workshop. The Fisheries Management Plan, 2020-2030 was circulated for consultation in conformity with the standard procedures, i.e. advertisements are placed in appropriate newspapers asking for written submissions within a two-month period. Public meetings are also organised during the two to three month periods. These constitute a management system that expressly seeks to accept submission of relevant information. The process also provides the opportunity for all interested and affected parties to be involved including relevant eNGOs (CCSA), the Association, SARDI, PIRSA, CCSA and the Department of Transport all participated in the Spencer Gulf prawn ERA, where information was considered and, through Workshop processes, PIRSA/SARDI explained how it is used or not used in formulating species specific risks. The management system demonstrates consideration of the information and explains how it is used or not used. SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 are met.).

Participation The consultation process The consultation process provides opportunity for provides opportunity and all interested and affected encouragement for all Guide parties to be involved. interested and affected C Post parties to be involved, and facilitates their effective engagement. Met? Yes No Rationale PIRSA consults with both a relevant set of government and local government stakeholders including the National and State Departments of Environment, the AG’s office and South Australian Native Title Service, as well as with the Fisheries associations, Management Advisory Committees, NGOs and the University of Adelaide. Effective engagement is facilitated through public notices, written responses from PIRSA to these organisations, and Public Meetings. The SGWCPFA includes the CCSA as a member of its Research Committee, which is the principal body influencing management outcome. SGWCPFA fully funds the participation of CCSA in these meetings. Both SARDI and PIRSA are also members of this Committee. The Spencer Gulf Management Plan makes reference to relevant stakeholders which are identified as CCSA, the Barngarla, Narungga and Nukunu Nations, The Department of Environment, the Department of Transport and the University of Adelaide.

Evidence suggests that he management system is open to interested or affected parties and stakeholders and that any information that is viewed as important by those parties can be fed into and be considered by the process in a way that is transparent to the interested or affected parties and stakeholders. The consultation process provides opportunity and encouragement for all interested and affected parties to be involved, and facilitates their effective engagement. SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 are met.

References Government of SA, Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, (Draft) PIRSA, 2020. Available at https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/spencer_gulf_prawn_fishery_management_plan_consultation Noell CJ and Beckmann, CL (SARDI Aquatic Sciences) 2019. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (Revised). Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. 22pp. PIRSA to SGWCPFA (April 2019) Letter from Peter Dietman to Simon Clark on Snapper Spatial Closures PIRSA’s website (https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/spencer_gulf_prawn_fishery_management_plan_consultation

186 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

SGWCPFA Research Committee Minutes (2019) Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80 Awaiting stakeholder confirmation on the effectiveness of Information gap indicator the consultation process and an update from PIRSA on how information provided is used or not used

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

187 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide decision-making PI 3.1.3 that are consistent with MSC Fisheries Standard, and incorporates the precautionary approach Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Objectives Long-term objectives to Clear long-term objectives Clear long-term objectives guide decision-making, that guide decision- that guide decision- consistent with the MSC making, consistent with making, consistent with a Guide Fisheries Standard and the MSC Fisheries Standard MSC Fisheries Standard post precautionary approach, and the precautionary and the precautionary are implicit within approach are explicit approach, are explicit management policy. within management policy. within and required by management policy. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale Clear Long Term Objectives are defined in the Fisheries Management Act, 2007 and contain direct reference to sustainable exploitation and conservation, protection of aquatic habitats and aquatic ecosystems. The Management Plan reflects the objectives of the Act. The Management Plan aims to achieve outcomes that are consistent with broader Government objectives for the management of the marine environment. These include: the EPBC Act, the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development and the Precautionary Principle which are set out in the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment, The Australian Government ‘Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries’, which relate to the requirements of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; and the National Policy on Fisheries By-catch. SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 have been met. References SA Fisheries Management Act 2007 PIRSA, Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, 2020-2030 The National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development, 1992; available at http://www.environment.gov.au/about- us/esd/publications/national-esd-strategy

The Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment; available at http://www.environment.gov.au/about-us/esd/publications/intergovernmental- agreement

Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries; available at http://www.environment.gov.au/resource/guidelines-ecologically- sustainable-management-fisheries The Environment Protection And Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; available at http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc The National Policy on Fisheries By-Catch; available at http://www.agriculture.gov.au/fisheries/environment/bycatch/nat_by_policy_1999.

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information complete

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

188 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

189 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The fishery-specific management system has clear, specific objectives designed to PI 3.2.1 achieve the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2 Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Objectives Objectives, which are Short and long-term Well defined and broadly consistent with objectives, which are measurable short and achieving the outcomes consistent with achieving long-term objectives, which expressed by MSC’s the outcomes expressed by are demonstrably consistent a Guide Principles 1 and 2, are MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, with achieving the outcomes post implicit within the fishery- are explicit within the expressed by MSC’s specific management fishery-specific Principles 1 and 2, are system. management system. explicit within the fishery- specific management system. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale A Management Plan is in place for a 5-year period and the new plan commences from the October 2020. It replaces the Plan 2015- 2020. The Plans contain well-defined and measurable short and long-term objectives, which are demonstrably consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, and are explicit within the fishery’s management system. The Management Plan is consistent with Section 43 and 44 the Fisheries Management Act 2007. The Management Plan is an expression of the policy that applies in relation to the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery to inform the exercise of any discretionary decision-making powers in the legislation, as they apply to the fishery. The Plan: • Sets out the management objectives and implements a strategy for achieving these • Identifies research needs and priorities • Sets out the resources required to implement the plan • Describes the biological, economic and social characteristics of the fishery • Identifies the impacts or potential impacts of the fishery on its associated ecosystem or ecosystems, including impacts on non-target species of fish or other aquatic resources • Identifies any ecological factors that could have an impact on the performance of the fishery • Assesses the risks to the ecosystem and set out strategies for addressing those risks • Sets out methods for monitoring the performance of the fishery and the effectiveness of the plan, including performance indicators, trigger points for review or action and progress reporting. As set out in Section 7 of the Fisheries Management Act 2007, the objects of the Act is to protect, manage, use and develop the aquatic resources of the State in a manner consistent with ESD. The Act also requires that management plans be consistent with these objectives. A number of biological, social and economic factors are identified in the objects of the Act that must be balanced in pursuing ESD. However, it is specified that the primary consideration is to avoid the over-exploitation or endangerment of resources. The four key goals for the SGPF set out below are linked to the operational objectives for the South Australia Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery set out in Table 24. Performance Indicators (PIs) and Means of verification for each activity are provided to allow for the assessment of this management plan in meeting the identified goals. Goal 1: Maintain ecologically sustainable prawn biomass This goal relates to the sustainability of the target stock. The outcomes of this management plan in relation to sustainability are that management arrangements are sufficient to maintain: • Relative spawning stock biomass of prawn stocks at sustainable levels • Future prawn biomass is maintained above sustainable levels • Information collected is sufficient to manage fishing operations to sustainable levels. These outcomes aim to ensure that prawn resources in Spencer Gulf are harvested within sustainable limits as defined by PIs relevant to reference points described in the Harvest Strategy. 190 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The main strategies for ensuring the sustainability of the resource are: • Limited entry • Closed areas • Gear restrictions • Decision rules. Performance of the fishery against identified reference points are reported annually in a stock assessment report developed by SARDI Aquatic Sciences. These reports can be accessed from the SARDI website at www.sardi.sa.gov.au/fisheries. Goal 2: Optimum utilisation and equitable distribution This goal relates to optimising the economic and social benefits derived from the SGPF and focuses on allowing for economic efficiency of fishing operations. The outcome of this management plan in relation to optimum utilisation is: • Having an economically efficient fleet without compromising sustainability objectives.

The strategies implemented to achieve this goal are focused on a Harvest Strategy (Section 9) that allows for flexible fishing operations within sustainable limits. With regard to equitable distribution, as the fishery is exclusively a commercial fishery by virtue of the limiting management arrangements that hamper non-commercial fishing, the objectives in this plan relate to ensuring access to the resource is in line with requirements under the Act. The operational objective related to resource access is to: • Provide access to the resource as per PIRSA’s Allocation policy: Allocation of Access to Fisheries Resources Between Fishing Sectors (PIRSA, 2011)

Performance of the fishery against identified economic reference points are reported annually in economics indicators reports developed by Econsearch, which can be accessed from the PIRSA website www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries. Goal 3: Protect and conserve aquatic resources, habitats and ecosystems This goal relates to the management of the fishery using an EBFM approach. The outcomes of this management plan to achieve this goal are: • Fishery impacts on by-catch and by-product species are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on endangered, threatened and protected species (ETPs) are sustainable. • Fishery impacts on benthic habitat and associated species communities are sustainable. Management strategies implemented to achieve this goal are: • Controls on fishing effort. • Closed areas. • Promoting activities that reduce the impacts of fishing activity. Goal 4: Cost effective and participative management of the fishery This goal relates to co-management of the fishery, planning of management activities, and the recovery of the costs of management of the fishery. The overall outcomes of this goal are: • To ensure that stakeholders and government fisheries administrations share responsibility and are involved in the decision- making processes for developing and implementing management arrangements. • To ensure that management arrangements are complied with. The cost effectiveness of these arrangements also need to be considered in the development process as the management costs are recovered from fishers in accordance with the government’s cost-recovery policy for fisheries. The operational objectives of this management plan in relation to co-management, planning and cost-recovery are: • Industry participation in management through co-operative arrangements. • Management arrangements supporting cohesion between fisheries industry and the wider community. • Maximise stewardship of fisheries resources. • Costs of management of the fishery funded by relevant stakeholders. The extent to which the SGPF is achieving the range of stated goals and objectives is assessed using a combination of indicators designed to measure performance of the fishery. These performance indicators may be biological or non-biological. Each performance indicator is measured against and management reference points (MRL) that may be quantitative or non-quantitative. Limit reference points represent the minimum acceptable level of fishery performance. If performance falls below limit reference points, measures to improve performance must be developed, following the management responses.

191 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Long and short-term specific objectives are documented in the Management Plan for The South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, 2020-2030, PIRSA. The Plan has a long-term management objective, which is demonstrably consistent with achieving outcomes expressed by MSC Principles 1 to maintain an ecologically sustainable prawn biomass. The instrument to achieve this is the harvest strategy. Achieving this goal is supported by a series of activities defined and measurable performance indicators, management reference levels and control rules for the target species (Table 16). The long-term management objectives, which are demonstrably consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC Principle 2, are also defined in the Plan: Fishery impacts on by-catch and by-product species are sustainable; fishery impacts on ETPs are sustainable; and fishery impacts on benthic habitat and associated species communities are sustainable. These are supported by defined and measurable performance indicators, management reference levels, and control rules. Well-defined and measurable short and long-term objectives, which are demonstrably consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, are explicit within the fishery’s management system achieving SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100.

References PIRSA (2020) The South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Management Plan, 2020-2030, Available at https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public-consultation_19.pdf

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

192 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making PI 3.2.2 processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Decision-making processes There are some decision- There are established making processes in place decision-making processes a Guide that result in measures and that result in measures and post strategies to achieve the strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. fishery-specific objectives. Met? Yes Yes Rationale There is an established decision making process in place comprising annual and in-season consultation and decision-making that may result in measures to meet short-term (operational) objectives (driven by the control rules contained in the current Harvest Strategy); real time fisher decisions relating to fishing actions and strategies; and longer-term consultation and decision-making that results in new measures and strategies to achieve the long-term fishery-specific management objectives (i.e. changes to the management framework). Therefore, both SG 60 and SG 80 have been met.

Responsiveness of decision-making processes Decision-making processes Decision-making processes Decision-making processes respond to serious issues respond to serious and respond to all issues identified in relevant other important issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and research, monitoring, evaluation and b Guide consultation, in a evaluation and consultation, in a post transparent, timely and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take some account of the wider adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions. account of the wider implications of decisions. implications of decisions. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale The decision-making process for the SGPF is consistent with those for the broader management system and responds to the defined harvest and bycatch management strategies, which respond to research, outcome evaluations and monitoring programmes. Specific and relevant issues may be evaluated through a number of mechanisms that take account of the wider implications of decisions, including establishment of a working group; workshops (e.g. ecological risk assessments (PIRSA, 2019); and/or PIRSA/Association Management and Research meetings (e.g. harvest strategy development, ecological and compliance risk assessments).

Therefore, SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 have been met. Use of precautionary approach c Decision-making processes Guide use the precautionary post approach and are based on best available information.

193 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Met? Yes Rationale The control rules incorporate a precautionary approach to the decision-making process by requiring a review when the target reference level is not met. This ensures that any warning signs are recognised and investigated / addressed in their early stages. The frequency of evaluation (both annually and in-season) and review means that management action to investigate and, where required, alleviate adverse impacts on stocks is always taken before the performance indicators reach the limit reference level. The application of the research, monitoring and evaluation within the SGPF management plan provides a good tool to assess the relative risks to bycatch, ETP species and habitats, initiating when appropriate, actions to deal with at risk species and assemblages. Examples of precautionary actions include controlling the trawl footprint, regulating fishing to take account of real time variations in prawn size and closing areas in the event of ETP interactions, irrespective of the low risks shown to teleost and invertebrate species. Since there is strong evidence of precautionary actions covering both P1 and P2 management issues, the SG 80 has been met. Accountability and transparency of management system and decision-making process Some information on the Information on the Formal reporting to all fishery’s performance and fishery’s performance interested stakeholders management action is and management action provides comprehensive generally available on is available on request, information on the request to stakeholders. and explanations are fishery’s performance provided for any actions or and management actions d Guide lack of action associated and describes how the post with findings and relevant management system recommendations responded to findings and emerging from research, relevant recommendations monitoring, evaluation and emerging from research, review activity. monitoring, evaluation and review activity. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale PIRSA, SARDI, SGWCPFA provide a comprehensive range of formal and informal reports which confirm fishery performance and how management has responded to findings from recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. These include the SGPF Management Plan which provides information on Management performance indicators and Management Reference Levels; SGWCPFA Committee at Sea reports; Gazette notices (PIRSA, 2019); and outcomes of management decisions, research and studies including the annual stock status report (Noell C.J. and G. E. Hooper G.E (2019), by product reports (Burnell, O.B et al 2015), bycatch (Currie et al, 2009) and ETP reports (Mackay, A.I., 2018) and Habitats (Noel C.J 2018). Explanations are provided for actions or lack of actions by the organisations tasked with implementation. Failure to achieve the management reference levels would be submitted by PIRSA to the Minister detailing the reasons for non-compliance (PIRSA, July 2020). It then becomes the responsibility of the SGWCPFA Management Committee and PIRSA to rectify failure to achieve specific management outcomes. Formal reporting processes are explicit and required as part of the MoU between PIRSA and the Association (PIRSA, 2018). The Memorandum of Understanding between the SGWCPFA and SARDI (SGWCPFA and Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, 2019) makes provision for specific research actions and reports to be implemented. The Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Management Plan monitoring and performance indications provided the basis for incorporating relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. At Sea monitoring also provides the basis for the Committee at Sea to respond to any real time monitoring activities. Therefore, both SG 80 and SG 100 have been met.

e Approach to disputes

194 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Although the management The management system or The management system or authority or fishery may be fishery is attempting to fishery acts proactively to subject to continuing court comply in a timely fashion avoid legal disputes or challenges, it is not with judicial decisions rapidly implements judicial indicating a disrespect or arising from any legal decisions arising from Guide defiance of the law by challenges. legal challenges. post repeatedly violating the same law or regulation necessary for the sustainability for the fishery. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale The consultation process ensures that the management system or fishery acts proactively to avoid legal disputes. The co- management system allows for delegation of responsibilities and the partnership approach between government and industry actively works towards avoiding disputes. In addition, licence conditions provide for a system of dispute resolution in the event that the prescribed licence holder is not satisfied with the conditions (Section 111-113 of the Fisheries Management Act). No legal challenges or judicial decisions have taken place in the SGPF but there was a recent Australian High Court decision related to the application of State fisheries law to native title holders fishing for abalone in their local area in South Australia. The decision concluded that the State fisheries legislation did not extinguish native title rights to fish and that the defence under section 211 of the NTA was applicable. This now requires native title issues to be explicitly considered in the formulation of each Management Plan. Evidence from the SGMP shows that Native Title issues were explicitly considered. The scoring guidance outcomes SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 are met.

References Australian High Court Judgement. Available at http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/judgment-summaries/2013/hca47- 2013-11-06.pdf. Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Currie, D.R., Dixon, C.D., Roberts, S.D., Hooper, G.E., Sorokin, S.J. and Ward, T.M. 2009. Fishery-independent by-catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjgh9vPva3qAhXgx DgGHVWkBPEQFjAAegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F284730626_Fishery- independent_by- catch_survey_to_inform_risk_assessment_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Trawl_Fishery&usg=AOvVaw3xB9t1yIbAEDNvkRNz Ck6L GoSA (2018), Contract for Fisheries Co-Management Services MoU between PIRSA and the Association. Mackay, A.I. (2018) Operational Interactions with Threatened, Endangered or Protected Species in South Australian Managed, ARDI Publication No. F2009/000544-8 SARDI Research Report Series No. 981isheries Data Summary: 2007/08 – 2016/17 Noell, C.J (2017), Determining the trawl footprint of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, SARDI Publication No. F2016/000565-1 SARDI Research Report Series No. 939

Noell, C.J. and Beckmann, CL (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (Revised). Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. 22pp. Noell C.J. and G. E. Hooper G.E (2019), Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and AquacultureSARDI Publication No. F2007/000770-10 SARDI Research Report Series No. 1029 PIRSA (2014) Using Size of Sexual Maturity for Determining the Minimum Legal Size for Balmain Bug PIRSA (2019) The Memorandum of Understanding between the SGWCPFA and SARDI 195 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

SGWCPFA, Committee at Sea Reports Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Management Plan 2020-2030. Available at https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/spencer_gulf_prawn_fishery_management_plan_consultation

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

196 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the management PI 3.2.3 measures in the fishery are enforced and complied with Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 MCS implementation Monitoring, control and A monitoring, control and A comprehensive surveillance mechanisms surveillance system has monitoring, control and exist, and are implemented been implemented in the surveillance system has in the fishery and there is a fishery and has been implemented in the a Guide reasonable expectation that demonstrated an ability to fishery and has post they are effective. enforce relevant demonstrated a consistent management measures, ability to enforce relevant strategies and/or rules. management measures, strategies and/or rules. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale Relevant management measures include a limited entry licensing system, effort restrictions, gear controls, including bycatch reduction devices, closed seasons and fishing day caps, spatial and temporal closures and reporting systems. The PIRSA’s Fisheries Services Group (FSG) delivers the Division’s compliance services for commercial fisheries. The Monitoring actions are supported by Fisheries Officers based in Port Lincoln, Ceduna and Whyalla. Inspectors undertake targeted inspections based on risk assessment and conform to a Prawn Fishery Compliance Plan. All licensed fishing vessels are required to submit complete catch returns as well as ETP logbooks. Other regulations applied comprise gear restrictions, bycatch limits, fishing outside closed areas and fishing inside temporal restrictions. Monitoring of the effectiveness of the compliance system demonstrates a high degree of effectiveness of the system applied. An educational programme conducted by FSG further supports the compliance system. FSG also operate a Fishwatch system (https://pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/fishwatch/report_illegal_fishing_activities). Self-monitoring by industry and strong peer pressure to stay within the limits is evidence of strong fisher compliance. Regulatory and self-regulatory actions through co-management, along with comprehensive resourcing of assets demonstrate that an effective compliance system is in place. The Association’s Committee at Sea operates its own self-policing functions. Therefore, SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 have been met.

Sanctions Sanctions to deal with non- Sanctions to deal with non- Sanctions to deal with non- compliance exist and there compliance exist, are compliance exist, are B Guide is some evidence that they and consistently applied and post consistently applied are applied. thought to provide demonstrably provide effective deterrence. effective deterrence. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale There is an explicit and statutory sanction framework that is applied should a person contravene legislation relevant to the SGPF. Sanctions applicable to the FMA are set out in the Fisheries Management (General) Regulations 2017. The fine schedule ranges 197 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery from AUD 315 to AUD 500,000, with provision for 4 years (imprisonment for trafficking and unlawful sales), and the application of up to 200 demerit points (Fisheries Management (Demerit Points) Regulations 2009), leading to the confiscation of a fishing license (https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/251750/Demerit_Point_Scheme_FAQ_April_2015.pdf). Offences are very rare, but the system exists that the process is applied effectively. Therefore SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 have been met.

Compliance Fishers are generally Some evidence exists to There is a high degree of thought to comply with demonstrate fishers confidence that fishers the management system for comply with the comply with the the fishery under management system under management system under c Guide assessment, including, assessment, including, assessment, including, post when required, providing when required, providing providing information of information of importance information of importance importance to the effective to the effective to the effective management of the fishery. management of the fishery. management of the fishery. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale The Division measures compliance outcomes by estimating compliance and non-compliance rates. There was one serious offences recorded on the SGPF in the last 5 years. This was one vessel fishing ‘over the line’ in 2016/217, in which an expiation was issued (SGWC 2016/2017). The industry provides daily catch data to research and compliance, and collects information on ETP interactions. There is very strong evidence that fishers systematically comply with the regulatory system and continually provide relevant information. Therefore SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 have been met. The actions of the Committee at sea also ensure real time compliance. Under the co-management system fishers provide information to support the effective management of the fishery (Committee at Sea Reports, 2019 and 2020). Information is also provided in the form of catch and ETP species logbooks. Whilst there is no VMS, information was passed to Compliance on one line incursion, demonstrating the effectiveness of the Co-management system (SGWC 2018/2019). This resulted in a written warning.

Systematic non-compliance There is no evidence of Guide d systematic non- post compliance. Met? Yes Rationale There is no evidence of systematic non-compliance by the licensees and skippers in the SGPF, nor is there evidence that the existing (negligible) level of non-compliance in the past five years is a risk to target prawn stocks or ecosystem components. Details of offences committed and actions taken in the SGPF in the last 5 years are: • 1 Expiation issued for “Contravene Licence Condition” (3 cautions for the same offence) • 10 Expiations for “Fail to Supply Log Book Data” (3 cautions for the same offence) • 1 Expiation for “Fish in Closed Area” (1 caution for the same offence) • 1 Expiation for “Fail to Prior Report” • 2 Cautions for “Take Non Permitted Species”

SG 80 has been met References GoSA, Fisheries Management (General) Regulations 2017. Available at https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/R/FISHERIES%20MANAGEMENT%20(GENERAL)%20REGULATIONS%202017.as px Fisheries Management (General) Regulations 2017. Available at http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/R/Fisheries%20Management%20(General)%20Regulations%202007.asp

198 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Fisheries Management (Demerit Points) Regulations 2017. Available at https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/R/FISHERIES%20MANAGEMENT%20(DEMERIT%20POINTS)%20REGULATIONS %202017/CURRENT/2017.223.AUTH.PDF PIRSA Fisheries Demerit Points Scheme, Available at https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/251750/Demerit_Point_Scheme_FAQ_April_2015.pdf Fishwatch http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/About-Us/Contact-Us/Pages/Fish-watch.aspx PIRSA, Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishery -15/16 Risk Assessment & Compliance Programme PIRSA, Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishery Compliance Updates, 2014-2015 -2018/2019 SGWCPFA, Committee at Sea Code, 2009 SGWCPFA, Record of Committee at Sea Meeting, 2019 Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80 More information sought of Compliance activities Information gap indicator and offences

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

199 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery- PI 3.2.4 specific management system against its objectives There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Evaluation coverage There are mechanisms in There are mechanisms in There are mechanisms in a Guide place to evaluate some place to evaluate key parts place to evaluate all parts post parts of the fishery-specific of the fishery-specific of the fishery-specific management system. management system. management system. Met? Yes Yes Yes Rationale

A Harvest Strategy and Management Plan Steering Committee met on two occasions in 2019 and provided oversight of the Management Plan (MP) development. The Management Plan Steering Committee initiates specific reports which contribute to measuring the outcomes measured in the Plan.

A “Strategic Research Plan” is also developed by the SGWCPFA. The current Research Plan 2019. was developed by the SGWCPFA Management Committee Research Subcommittee. The plan includes a list of current, future planned, and “aspirational” projects, and includes specific reference to fit within this timeframe and there is evidence that the revised research plan addresses fishery-specific and ecosystem orientated research outputs that are consistent with the outcomes of the management plan. Research results are disseminated to all interested parties in a timely fashion.

PIRSA Compliance apply an Annual Risk Assessment process to determine the most likely offence types, and a deployment optimisation strategy. Therefore SG 60, SG 80 and SG 100 have been met.

Internal and/or external review The fishery-specific The fishery-specific The fishery-specific management system is management system is management system is Guide b subject to subject to subject to post occasional regular internal regular internal internal review. and occasional external and external review. review. Met? Yes Yes No Rationale

PIRSA undertakes specific research and evaluation projects, which support the application of the Spencer Gulf Management Plan. An example includes the ESD report (Noell and Beckwith, 2019)

SARDI also undertakes separate research, which may form part of a cross section of fisheries (e.g. TEPs monitoring), and usually funded through the SARDI Research & Development Programme and by FRDC. These can be readily seen on the SARDI Fisheries website http://pir.sa.gov.au/research and http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/commercial_fishing/commercial_fisheries/prawn_fishery_-_spencer_gulf_and_west_coast. These documents are disseminated to all interested parties in a timely fashion and are widely and publicly available. SARDI reports are internally peer reviewed. FRDC funded reports are externally peer reviewed. Outputs are also regularly disseminated to the Association through the Research Committee and at the regular Association Management Committee meetings, and members of the Research Committee include the main stakeholders (‘interested parties’) in the fishery. This includes PIRSA, SARDI and CCSA. The SGWCPFA does not post documents on its website, but outputs, supporting the management of the fishery and in conformity with P1 P2 and P3 objectives are made available to all research organisations and NGOs on request.

200 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

The Committee for the Spencer Gulf Harvest Strategy and Management Plan included the appointment of an Independent Scientist, Dr Tony Smith, as a member of the Committee. The Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Harvest Strategy was Peer Reviewed by Dichmont 2013. There is no evidence that the PIRSA Compliance program has been subject to external review. The overarching external review is assessed by Department of Agriculture, Environment and Water (DoEAW) as an Ecologically Sustainably Managed Fishery under part 13 and 13(A) of the EPBC Act 1999 (DoEE, 2015). This assessment reviews the management system for target species and ecosystem components associated with the fishery. Therefore SG 60 and SG 80 SG are met, but some key parts of the Management system, Compliance and Stock Assessment are not regularly externally reviewed. SG 100 is not met. References

PIRSA Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, 2020-2019 Dichmont, C., Review of Draft SGPF Management Plan 2013 July 2013. SARDI Reports PIRSA (2017b), Compliance Risk Assessment, 2015/2016 SGWCPFA, Research Plan, 2019. DoAEW (2015), Ecologically Sustainably Managed Fishery under part 13 and 13(A) of the EPBC Act 1999. Available at https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl

Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report

Draft scoring range ≥80

Information gap indicator More information sought

Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report Overall Performance Indicator score

Condition number (if relevant)

201 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

9 References Ahnesjö, I. and Craig, J.F. (2011), The biology of Syngnathidae: pipefishes, seadragons and seahorses. Journal of Fish Biology, 78: 1597-1602. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2011.03008.x Ansmann IC., Parra GJ., B. Chilvers L., Lanyon JM.(2012). Dolphins restructure social system after reduction of commercial fisheries. Animal BehaviourAnimal Behaviour, 84:575-581. Australian High Court Judgement. Available at http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/judgment- summaries/2013/hca47-2013-11-06.pdf. Banks, R., Stokes, K. and Dews, G. (Intertek Moody Marine) (2011). MSC Assessment report for Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Public Certification Report. https://cert.msc.org/FileLoader/FileLinkDownload.asmx/GetFile?encryptedKey=Nb2dEJ39TJw8cAWwvlzu 9Jeofe5be/+F/5/LxLpPO57Eiben3HvNBretFwFVQ8U5 Banks, R., McLoughlin, K. and Zaharia, M. (2016). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery MSC Public Certification Report. Prepared for Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer-gulf-king-prawn/@@assessments Banks, R., Zaharia, M., Dixon, C. (2018). South Australian Sardine Fishery MSC Fishery Assessment. Public Certification Report. MRAG Americas Inc. October 2018. https://cert.msc.org/FileLoader/FileLinkDownload.asmx/GetFile?encryptedKey=LMopnxzmtGnmzDY7Oo u82K0Ec+nTMhmo0VCySmtfhNOLaJDJIwcxatgfj10xOkaF Beckmann, C. L. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Blue Crab (Portunus armatus) Fishery 2017/18. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000729-15. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1015. 55pp. Retrieved from https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/343092/Blue_Crab_Fishery_Assessment_Report_2017- 18_-_12_June_2019.pdf Borthwick, D (2012). Review of Commonwealth Fisheries: Policy, Legislation and Management, DAFF, https://www.google.com.au/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Review+of+the+operation+of+the+Fisheries+ Act&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&gferd=cr&ei=d7J-WI6LNsbr8Af37PACw Browne, R.K., Baker, J.L., Connolly, R.M. (2008). Syngnathids: sea dragons, seahorses, and pipefish of Gulf St. Vincent, in: Shepherd, S., Bryars, S., Kirkegaard, I., Harbison, P., and J.T. Jennings, (Eds.) Natural History of Gulf St. Vincent. Royal Society of South Australia, Inc., South Australia, pp.281-305. Burnell, O.B., Barrett, S.L., Hooper, G.E., Beckmann, C.L., Sorokin, S.J. and Noell, C.J. (2015). Spatial and temporal reassessment of by-catch in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/270932/Spatial_and_temporal_reassessment_of_by- catch_in_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Fishery._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Carlyle, C. & Pollom, R. 2016. Stigmatopora argus (errata version published in 2017). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species2016: e.T88342897A115514252. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016- 3.RLTS.T88342897A88342927.en. Downloaded on 17 July 2020. Carrick, N. (1997). A preliminary assessment of by-catch from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Assessment Series 97/02. 57 pp. Find the hard copy at: http://www.worldcat.org/title/preliminary- assessment-of-the-by-catch-from-spencer-gulf- prawn-fishery/oclc/224840692&referer=brief_result Carrick, N. (2003) Spencer Gulf Prawn (Melicertus latisulcatus) fishery. Fishery assessment report to Primary assessment report to PIRSA for the Prawn Fishery Management Committee, SARD, RD 03/0079-2 Chilvers BL, Corkeron PJ (2001) Trawling and bottlenose dolphins’ social structure. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London B 268: 1901–1905. Clark, S. and Lukin, A. (2019). Nordmøre grid industry extension trial report. Provided by client.

202 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Commonwealth of Australia (2013). Recovery plan for the White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias). http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery-plans/recovery-plan-white-shark-carcharodon- carcharias. Currie, D.R., Dixon, C.D., Roberts, S.D., Hooper, G.E., Sorokin, S.J. and Ward, T.M. (2009). Fishery-independent by- catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEw jgh9vPva3qAhXgxDgGHVWkBPEQFjAAegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fp ublication%2F284730626_Fishery-independent_by- catch_survey_to_inform_risk_assessment_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_Prawn_Trawl_Fishery&usg=AOvVaw3xB 9t1yIbAEDNvkRNzCk6L DoA (1999), The National Policy on Fisheries By-Catch; available at http://www.agriculture.gov.au/fisheries/environment/bycatch/nat_by_policy_1999. DoAEW (2015), Ecologically Sustainably Managed Fishery under part 13 and 13(A) of the EPBC Act 1999. Available at https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl DEH (2009). A technical report on the outer boundaries of South Australia’s marine parks network. Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia. https://www.environment.sa.gov.au/files/sharedassets/public/marine_parks/tech_report_lowres.pdf DoE (1992). The Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment; available at http://www.environment.gov.au/about-us/esd/publications/intergovernmental-agreement

DoE (1999) Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries; available at http://www.environment.gov.au/resource/guidelines-ecologically-sustainable-management-fisheries The Environment Protection And Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; available at http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc DoE (2015). Amendment of List of Exempt Native Specimens – gazetted Friday 4 December 2015, C2015G01993, F2015L01924 DoE (2018). Accreditation for a Plan of Management for the purpose of Part 13- December 2018. http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/3701e00d-8e83-447d-9598-9800ee8b0a74/files/part-13- 2018.pdf Dichmont, C., Review of Draft SGPF Management Plan 2013 July 2013. Emery, T., Woodhams, J. and Curtotti, R. (2019). Shark Gillnet and Shark Hook sectors. Fisheries Status Reports. ABARES. Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment. https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research- topics/fisheries/fishery-status/shark-gillnet-shark-hook-sectors EPA (2018). Nearshore marine aquatic ecosystem condition reports: Northern Spencer Gulf bioregional assessment report. Environmental Protection Agency. 55pp. https://www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/13333_marine_nsg2012.pdf Evans, K., Rogers, P. and Goldsworthy, S. (2017). Theme 4: Ecology of iconic species and apex predators. Theme Report. Great Australian Bight Research Program, GABRP Research Report Series Number 34, 19pp. http://www.misa.net.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/301923/GABRP_Research_Report_Series_Number_34 _31072018.pdf Flood, M, Stobutzki, I, Andrews, J, Ashby, C, Begg, G, Fletcher, R, Gardner, C, Georgeson, L, Hansen, S, Hartmann, K, Hone, P, Horvat, P, Maloney, L, McDonald, B, Moore, A, Roelofs, A, Sainsbury, K, Saunders,T, Smith, T, Stewardson, C, Stewart, J & Wise, B (eds) (2014). Status of key Australian fish stocks reports 2014, Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra Fujii, I. & Pollom, R. 2016. Histiogamphelus cristatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T65368242A67622410. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016- 1.RLTS.T65368242A67622410.en. Downloaded on 17 July 2020.

203 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Fowler, A.J., Steer, M.A., McGarvey, R., Smart, J. (2019). Snapper (Chrysophrys auratus) Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. F2019/000331-1. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1031. 68pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/349269/Snapper_Fishery_Assessment_Report.pdf Government of Australia, The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999, Available at https://www.environment.gov.au/epbc Government of South Australia, Fisheries Management Act 2007, Available at https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/FISHERIES%20MANAGEMENT Government of South Australia, Fisheries Management (General) Regulations 2017. Available at https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/R/FISHERIES%20MANAGEMENT%20(GENERAL)%20REGULATIONS %202017.aspx Government of South Australia, Fisheries Management (General) Regulations 2017. Available at http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/R/Fisheries%20Management%20(General)%20Regulations%202007.asp Government of South Australia, Fisheries Management (Demerit Points) Regulations 2017. Available at https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/R/FISHERIES%20MANAGEMENT%20(DEMERIT%20POINTS) %20REGULATIONS%202017/CURRENT/2017.223.AUTH.PDF Government of South Australia (2018), Contract for Fisheries Co-Management Services MoU between PIRSA and the Association. Government of South Australia, Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, (Draft) PIRSA, 2020. Available at https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/community_engagement/spencer_gulf_prawn_fishery_management_plan_ consultation Gillanders BM, Z Doubleday, P Cassey, S Clarke, SD Connell, M Deveney, S Dittmann, S Divecha, M Doubell, S Goldsworthy, B Hayden, C Huveneers, C James, S Leterme, X Li, M Loo, J Luick, W Meyer, J Middleton, D Miller, L Moller, T Prowse, P Rogers, BD Russell, P van Ruth, JE Tanner, T Ward, SH Woodcock, M Young (2013) Spencer Gulf Ecosystem & Development Initiative. Report on Scenario development, Stakeholder workshops, Existing knowledge & Information gaps. Report for Spencer Gulf Ecosystem and Development Initiative. The University of Adelaide, Adelaide. 94 pages. Gillanders, BM, Goldsworthy, S, Prowse, TAA, Doubell, M, Middleton, J, Rogers, P, Tanner, JE, Clisby, NA, James, C, Luick, J, van Ruth, P, Bradshaw, CJA and Ward TM (2015). Spencer Gulf research initiative: Development of an ecosystem model for fisheries and aquaculture. University of Adelaide and SARDI Aquatic Sciences, Adelaide Hannah, R. W., Lomeli, M. J. M., & Jones, S. A. (2015). Tests of artificial light for bycatch reduction in an ocean shrimp (Pandalus jordani) trawl: Strong but opposite effects at the footrope and near the bycatch reduction device. Fisheries Research, 170, 60-67. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2015.05.010 Harvey A. S., Harvey R. M., Merton E. (2016) The distribution, significance and vulnerability of Australian rhodolith beds: a review. Marine and Freshwater Research 68, 411-428. https://doi- org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/10.1071/MF15434 Hobday, A.J., Smith, A.D.M., Webb, H., Daley, R., Wayte, S., Bulman, C., Dowdney, J., Williams, A., Sporcic, M., Dambacher, J., Fuller, M., Walker, T. (2007). Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing: Methodology. Report R04/1072 for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra. Jones, A.R., Ward, T., Prowse, T.A.A., Doubleday,! Z.A., Deveney, M.R., Scrivens, S.L., Gillanders, B.M., O’Connell, L.G.,Wiltshire, K.H., Cassey, P., 2018. Capturing expert uncertainty in spatial cumulative impact assessments. Sci. Rep. 8, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598`018`19354`6 Lucieer V, Walsh P, Flukes E, Butler C, Proctor R, Johnson C (2017). Seamap Australia - a national seafloor habitat classification scheme. Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS), University of Tasmania (UTAS). https://seamapaustralia.org/map/#WyJeICIsIn46ZGlzcGxheSIsWyJeICIsIn46c2lkZWJhciIsWyJeICIsIn46c2 VsZWN0ZWQiLCJ0YWItaGFiaXRhdCJdLCJ+OmNhdGFsb2d1ZSIsWyJeICIsIn46dGFiIiwib3JnIiwifjple HBhbmRlZCIsWyJ+I3NldCIsW11dXV0sIn46dHJhbnNlY3QiLFsiXiAiLCJ+OnNob3c/IixmYWxzZSwifjp xdWVyeSIsbnVsbF0sIn46bWFwIixbIl4gIiwifjpjZW50ZXIiLFstMzQuMjk5MzE2NDA2MjUsMTMzLjg3

204 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

MzkwMTM2NzE4NzVdLCJ+Onpvb20iLDYsIn46YWN0aXZlIixbIn4jbGlzdCIsWzk1XV1dLCJ+OmxlZ2 VuZC1pZHMiLFsiXj4iLFs5NSw2NSw5NCw0XV1d Mackay, A.I. (2018) Operational Interactions with Threatened, Endangered or Protected Species in South Australian Managed, ARDI Publication No. F2009/000544-8 SARDI Research Report Series No. 981isheries Data Summary: 2007/08 – 2016/17 Manning, C.G., Foster, S.J. & Vincent, A.C.J. (2019). A review of the diets and feeding behaviours of a family of biologically diverse marine fishes (Family Syngnathidae). Rev Fish Biol Fisheries 29, 197–221. https://doi- org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/10.1007/s11160-019-09549-z Mayfield, S., Ferguson, G.J., Chick R.C., Dixon, C.D. and Noell, C. (2014) A reporting framework for ecosystem- based assessment for Australian prawn trawl fisheries: A Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery case study. Final report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Prepared by the South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Science), Adelaide. FRDC Project No 2011/063 https://www.frdc.com.au/project/2011-062 McLoughlin, K., Banks, R. and Zaharia, M. (2019). MSC 3rd Annual Surveillance Report ‘Review of Information’ for Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. MRAG Americas, September 2019. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer-gulf-king-prawn/@@assessments MSC (2018a). MSC Fisheries Standard, v.2.1, 31 August 2018. Marine Stewardship Council, London, 133 pp. Available at: https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program- documents/fisheries-program-documents/msc-fisheries-standard-v2-01.pdf?sfvrsn=8ecb3272_11 MSC (2018b). MSC Guidance to Fisheries Standard, v.2.1, 31. August 2018. Marine Stewardship Council, London, 156 pp. Available at: https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for- business/program-documents/fisheries-program-documents/msc-fisheries-standard-v2- 01.pdf?sfvrsn=8ecb3272_11 MSC (2018c). MSC Fisheries Certification Process, v.2.1, 31 August 2018. Marine Stewardship Council, London, 88 pp. Available at: https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program- documents/fisheries-program-documents/msc-fisheries-certification-process-v2.1.pdf MRAG (2017). MSC 1st Annual Surveillance Report ‘Review of Information’ for Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. MRAG Americas, August 2017. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer-gulf-king-prawn/@@assessments. MRAG (2018). MSC 2nd Annual Surveillance Report ‘Review of Information’ for Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. MRAG Americas, August 2018. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer-gulf-king-prawn/@@assessments. Noell, C. J. (2017). Determining the trawl footprint of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2016/000565-1. SARDI Research Report Series No. 939. 21pp. Noell, C.J. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Recommendations for an Ecological Monitoring Program. SARDI Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Prvoided by client. Noell, C.J., Broadhurst, M.K. and Kennelly, S.K. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences). (2017). Refining a Nordmøre-grid to minimise the incidental catch of cuttlefish and crabs in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Adelaide, October. Noell CJ, Broadhurst MK, Kennelly SJ. (2018). Refining a Nordmøre-grid bycatch reduction device for the Spencer Gulf penaeid-trawl fishery. PLOS ONE 13(11): e0207117. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207117 Noell CJ and Beckmann, CL (SARDI Aquatic Sciences). (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (Revised). Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. 22pp. Noell, C. J. and Hooper, G. E. (2017). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture (PDF 6.8 MB). South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000770-9. SARDI Research Report Series No. 950 Noell, C. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Recommendations for an Ecological Monitoring Program. SARDI Aquatic Sciences. Advice to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture.

205 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Noell, C. J. and Hooper, G. E. (2019). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery. Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2007/000770-10. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1029. 67pp. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/294526/SPG_Prawn_2017-18_Fishery_Assessment_- _FINAL_20190814.pdf Ocean Watch Australia (2004) Hoppers in Australian Trawl Fisheries – A handbook for fishers. Ocean Watch Australia Ltd, Pyrmont, NSW. O'Connell, L. G., James, N. P., Doubell, M., Middleton, J. F., Luick, J., Currie, D. R., . . . Della Porta, G. (2016). Oceanographic controls on shallow‐water temperate carbonate sedimentation: Spencer gulf,south australia. Sedimentology, 63(1), 105-135. doi:10.1111/sed.12226 PIRSA (2003). Ecological assessment of the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Gulf St Vincent Prawn Fishery and West Coast Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Management Series. PIRSA (2007). Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Management Series Paper N0 54 PIRSA (2013). Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Marine Scalefish Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/12920/Final_Commercial_MSF_Management_Plan_2013.pdf PIRSA (2014a). Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Spencer Gulf Fishery. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/57954/Prawn-Spencer_Gulf-Fishery-Management_Plan.pdf PIRSA (2014b). ESD risk assessment of South Australia’s Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Adelaide. https://pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/232477/FINAL_ESD_risk_assessment_of_South_Australia s_SGPF_July_2014.pdf PIRSA (2017). Implementation of Licence conditions relating to the bycatch of Gummy and School Shark. Notice to fishers, 27 Oct 2017. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/299801/Notice_to_fishers_- _Implementation_of_School_and_Gummy_Shark_licence_con....pdf PIRSA (2017b), Compliance Risk Assessment, 2015/2016 PIRSA (2019a). Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Prawn Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/348839/SGPF-draft-Management-Plan-for-public- consultation_19.pdf PIRSA (2019b). Draft Management Plan for the South Australian Commercial Blue Crab Fishery. https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/352072/Draft_Management_Plan_for_Blue_Crab_Fishery_publ ic_consultation.pdf PIRSA (2019c). Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishery 18/19 Compliance Report. 01 July 2018 to 30 June 2019. Provided by client. PIRSA (2019d). A3986198 Attachment C - Letter to Simon Clark re revised s115 Ministerial exemption to permit prawn trawling in the snapper closure areas. PIRSA (2019e). Attachment B - Letter to Simon Clark re s115 Ministerial exemption to permit prawn trawling in the snapper closure areas. PIRSA (2019f) The Memorandum of Understanding between the SGWCPFA and SARDI PIRSA (2016 and 2020), Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishery Compliance Updates, 2014-2015 -2018/2019 PIRSA, Fishwatch http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/About-Us/Contact-Us/Pages/Fish-watch.aspx Pitcher, C.R., Rochester, W., Dunning, M., Courtney, T., Broadhurst, M., Noell, C., Tanner, J., Kangas, M., Newman, S., Semmens, J., Rigby, C., Saunders T., Martin, J., Lussier, W. (2018) Putting potential environmental risk of Australia's trawl fisheries in landscape perspective: exposure of seabed assemblages to trawling, and inclusion in closures and reserves — FRDC Project No 2016‐039. CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Brisbane, 71 pages. Retrieved from: http://www.frdc.com.au/Archived-Reports/FRDC%20Projects/2016-039-DLD.pdf Pollom, R. 2016a. Filicampus tigris. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T65367453A67624788. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016- 1.RLTS.T65367453A67624788.en. Downloaded on 17 July 2020.

206 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Pollom, R. 2016b. Leptoichthys fistularius (errata version published in 2017). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T65369313A115425337. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016- 3.RLTS.T65369313A67624170.en. Downloaded on 17 July 2020. Pollom, R. 2017a. Phycodurus eques. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T17096A67622420. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-2.RLTS.T17096A67622420.en. Downloaded on 17 July 2020. Pollom, R. 2017b. Phyllopteryx taeniolatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T17177A67624517. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-2.RLTS.T17177A67624517.en. Downloaded on 17 July 2020. Pollom, R. 2017c. Hippocampus abdominalis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T10057A54903879. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-3.RLTS.T10057A54903879.en. Downloaded on 17 July 2020. Roberts, S. and Steer, M. (2010). By-products assessment in Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery with an emphasis on developing management options for Balmain Bug. SARDI Report 439. https://fish.gov.au/Archived- Reports/2014/Documents/2014_refs/Roberts%20and%20Steer%202010.pdf SARDI (2015). Spencer Gulf Bycatch. SGbycatch (version1).xlsb (Excel file) SARDI (2018a). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – Evaluating Proposed Modifications to Stock Assessment Surveys. 30 July 2018 SARDI (2018b). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – 2017/18 Stock Status Determination. 20 August 2018 SARDI (2019). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – 2018/19 Stock Status Determination. 11 October 2019 SARDI (2020). Advice Note from SARDI Aquatic Sciences to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery – 2019/20 Stock Status Determination. 14 July 2020 SGWCPFA (2009), Committee at Sea Code SGWCPFA (2017). Self-imposed permanent closure policy. Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Assoc. Inc. Provided by client. SGWCPFA (2019a). Brief Nordmøre grid trial update. Provided by client. SGWCPFA (2019b). Research Plan 2019. Provided by the client. SGWCPFA (2019c), Research Committee Minutes SGWCPFA (2019d), Committee at Sea Reports SGWCPFA and PIRSA (2019). Implementation of Industry-Based Research in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Memorandum of Understanding between Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc (“SGWCPFA”) and Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, acting through the South Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences (“SARDI”). Provided by the client. SGWCPFA, 2020. Management Committee Circular from 13 January 2020. Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Assoc. Inc. Provided by client. Sorokin, S.J., Connolly, R.M. & Currie, D.R. (2009). Syngnathids of the Spencer Gulf – morphometrics and isotopic signatures. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide, 30pp. SARDI Publication No. F2009/000655-1 (9) (PDF) Syngnathids of the Spencer Gulf – morphometrics and stable isotope signatures. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263388887_Syngnathids_of_the_Spencer_Gulf_- _morphometrics_and_stable_isotope_signatures [accessed Jul 12 2020]. Steer, MA, AJ Fowler, PJ Rogers, F Bailleul, J Earl, D Matthews, M Drew and A Tsolos. (2020). Assessment of the South Australian Marine Scalefish Fishery in 2018. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2017/000427-3. SARDI Research Report Series No. 1049. 214 pp.

207 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery https://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/360589/Assessment_of_the_South_Australian_Marine_Scalefis h_Fishery_in_2018._Report_to_PIRSA_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture.pdf Stewardson, C., Andrews, J., Ashby, C., Haddon, M., Hartmann, K., Hone, P., Horvat, P., Mayfield, S., Roelofs, A., Sainsbury, K., Saunders, T., Stewart, J., Nicol S., and Wise, B. (eds) (2018). Status of Australian fish stocks reports (2018), Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra. www.fish.gov.au Svane, I. (2003). Prawn fishery by-catch and discard: fates and consequences for a marine ecosystem. FRDC Report 1998/225. 130 pp. Svane, I. (2005). Occurrence of dolphins and seabirds and their consumption of by-catch during trawling in Spencer Gulf, South Australia. Fisheries Research. 76: 317-327. Svane, I., Rodda, K. and Thomas, P. (2007). Prawn fishery by-catch and discards: marine ecosystem analysis - population effects. FRDC Report 2003/023. 404 pp. Svane, I., Hammett, Z. and Lauer, P. (2009). Impacts of trawling on benthic macro-fauna and – flora of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishing grounds. Fisheries Research. 90: 158-169. (SWG) Scientific Working Group, 2011. The vulnerability of coastal and marine habitats in South Australia. Marine Parks, Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources South Australia. Tsolos, A. and Boyle, M. (2014). Interactions with Threatened, Endangered or Protected Species in South Australian Managed Fisheries – 2012/13. Report to PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2009/000544-4. SARDI Research Report Series No. 755. 70pp. Vaidyanathan, T. & Pollom, R. 2017. Hypselognathus rostratus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species2017: e.T65368759A67624456. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017- 3.RLTS.T65368759A67624456.en. Downloaded on 17 July 2020.

208 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

10 Appendices 10.1 Assessment information 10.1.1 Previous assessments The Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery was first assessed in 2010/2011 (https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer- gulf-king-prawn/@@assessments) and attained 7 Conditions. These were all met within the first three years of the assessment timeline.

The Fishery was reassessed in 2015/2016 (https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/spencer-gulf-king- prawn/@@assessments) and no conditions were set.

10.2 Evaluation processes and techniques 10.2.1 Site visits The Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery surveillance audit will be held offsite the week of 14-18 September 2020.

A list of stakeholders contacted are provided in Table below. Prior to the site visit and in receipt of the ACDR additional information was provided by PIRSA/SARDI and the SGWCPA.

A wide range of stakeholders were contacted including Government organisations, NGOs, and indigenous groups, and invited to submit comments. The report text above provides details which address the points raised.

10.2.2 Stakeholder participation The report shall include:

- Details of people interviewed: local residents, representatives of stakeholder organisations including contacts with any regional MSC representatives. - A description of stakeholder engagement strategy and opportunities available.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.16

10.2.3 Evaluation techniques In the Fishery Standard v2.1 default assessment tree used for this assessment, the MSC has 28 ‘performance indicators’, six in Principle 1, 15 in Principle 2, and seven in Principle 3. The performance indicators are grouped in each principle by ‘component.’ Principle 1 has two components, Principle 2 has five, and Principle 3 has two. Each performance indicator consists of one or more ‘scoring issues;’ a scoring issue is a specific topic for evaluation. ‘Scoring Guideposts’ define the requirements for meeting each scoring issue at the 60 (conditional pass), 80 (full pass), and 100 (state of the art) levels.

Note that some scoring issue may not have a scoring guidepost at each of the 60, 80, and 100 levels. The scoring issues and scoring guideposts are cumulative; this means that a performance indicator is scored first at the SG60 levels. If not all of the SG scoring issues meet the 60 requirements, the fishery fails and no further scoring occurs. If all of the SG60 scoring issues are met, the fishery meets the 60 level, and the scoring moves to SG80 scoring issues. If no scoring issues meet the requirements at the SG80 level, the fishery receives a score of 60. As the fishery meets increasing numbers of SG80 scoring issues, the score increases above 60 in proportion to the number of scoring issues met; performance indicator scoring occurs at 5-point intervals. If the fishery meets half the scoring issues at the 80 level, the performance indicator would score 70; if it meets a quarter, then it would score 65; and it would score 75 by meeting three-quarters of the scoring issues. If the fishery meets all of the SG80 scoring issues, the scoring moves to the SG100 level. Scoring at the SG100 level follows the same pattern as for SG80.

Principle scores result from averaging the scores within each component, and then from averaging the component scores within each Principle. If a Principle averages less than 80, the fishery fails.

209 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Scoring for this fishery followed a consensus process in which the assessment team discussed the information available for evaluating performance indicators to develop a broad opinion of performance of the fishery against each performance indicator. Review of the background and scoring sections by all team members assured that the assessment team was aware of the issues for each performance indicator. Subsequently, the assessment team member responsible for each principle filled in the scoring table and provided a provisional score. The assessment team members reviewed the rationales and scores, and recommended modifications as necessary, including possible changes in scores.

210 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

10.3 Peer Review reports To be drafted at Public Comment Draft Report The report shall include unattributed reports of the Peer Reviewers in full using the relevant templates. The report shall include explicit responses of the team that include:

- Identification of specifically what (if any) changes to scoring, rationales, or conditions have been made; and, - A substantiated justification for not making changes where peer reviewers suggest changes, but the team disagrees.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.14

211 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

10.4 Stakeholder input To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report To be completed at Public Certification Report The CAB shall use the stakeholder input template to include all written stakeholder input during the stakeholder input opportunities and provide a summary of verbal stakeholder input received during the site visit. Using the stakeholder input template, the team shall respond to all written stakeholder input identifying what changes to scoring, rationales and conditions have been made in response, where the changes have been made, and assigning a ‘CAB response code’. The team may respond to the verbal summary.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.15

212 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

10.5 Conditions – delete if not applicable To be drafted from Client and Peer Review Draft Report The report shall document all conditions in separate tables. The CAB shall include rationale for exceptional circumstances in the summary of conditions in the Client and Peer Review Draft Report and all subsequent reports.

For reassessments, the CAB shall note:

- If and how any of the new conditions relate to previous conditions raised in the previous assessment or surveillance audits. - If and why any conditions that were raised and then closed in the previous assessment are being raised again in the reassessment. - If any conditions are carried over from a previous assessment, including an explanation of: - Which conditions are still open and being carried over. - Why those conditions are still open and being carried over. - Progress made in the previous assessment against these conditions. - Why recertification is being recommended despite outstanding conditions from the previous assessment. - If any previous conditions were closed after the 4th Surveillance Audit and reassessment site visit (i.e. in Year 5), including the rationale for re-scoring and closing out of the condition.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.18

Table X – Condition 1

Performance

Indicator

Score State score for Performance Indicator

Cross reference to page number containing scoring template table or copy Justification justification text here. If condition relates to a previous condition or one raised and closed in the previous assessment include information required here

Condition State condition

Milestones State milestones and resulting scores where applicable

Consultation on Include details of any verification required to meet requirements in FCP v2.1 7.19.8 condition

10.6 Client Action Plan To be added from Public Comment Draft Report The report shall include the Client Action Plan from the fishery client to address conditions.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.19

213 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

10.7 Surveillance To be drafted from Client and Peer Review Draft Report The report shall include the program for surveillance, timing of surveillance audits and a supporting rationale.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Section 7.28

Table X– Fishery surveillance program

Surveillance level Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

e.g. On-site e.g. On-site e.g. On-site e.g. On-site surveillance audit & e.g. Level 5 surveillance audit surveillance audit surveillance audit re-certification site visit

Table X – Timing of surveillance audit

Anniversary date of Proposed date of Year Rationale certificate surveillance audit e.g. Scientific advice to be released in June 2018, proposal to postpone e.g. 1 e.g. May 2018 e.g. July 2018 audit to include findings of scientific advice

Table X – Surveillance level rationale

Year Surveillance activity Number of auditors Rationale

e.g. From client action plan it can be deduced that information needed to verify progress towards conditions 1.2.1, 2.2.3 and 3.2.3 can be provided remotely in year 3. Considering that milestones e.g. 1 auditor on-site with indicate that most conditions will e.g.3 e.g. On-site audit remote support from 1 be closed out in year 3, the CAB auditor proposes to have an on-site audit with 1 auditor on-site with remote support – this is to ensure that all information is collected and because the information can be provided remotely.

214 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

10.8 Harmonised fishery assessments To be drafted at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage To be completed at Public Certification Report stage Harmonisation is required in cases where assessments overlap, or new assessments overlap with pre- existing fisheries.

If relevant, in accordance with FCP v2.1 Annex PB requirements, the report shall describe processes, activities and specific outcomes of efforts to harmonise fishery assessments. The report shall identify the fisheries and Performance Indicators subject to harmonisation.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Annex PB

Table X – Overlapping fisheries Performance Indicators to Fishery name Certification status and date harmonise

South Australia Sardine Fishery Certified November 2018 3.1

South Australia Lakes and Coorong Certified August 2016 3.1 pipi

Table X – Overlapping fisheries

Supporting information - Describe any background or supporting information relevant to the harmonisation activities, processes and outcomes. This table will be completed following the offsite audit meeting Was either FCP v2.1 Annex PB1.3.3.4 or PB1.3.4.5 applied when Yes / No harmonising? Date of harmonisation meeting DD / MM / YY

If applicable, describe the meeting outcome

- e.g. Agreement found among teams or lowest score adopted.

Table X – Scoring differences Performance Fishery name Fishery name Fishery name Fishery name Indicators (PIs) PI Score Score Score Score

PI Score Score Score Score

PI Score Score Score Score

215 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

Table X – Rationale for scoring differences If applicable, explain and justify any difference in scoring and rationale for the relevant Performance Indicators (FCP v2.1 Annex PB1.3.6)

If exceptional circumstances apply, outline the situation and whether there is agreement between or among teams on this determination

216 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery

10.9 Objection Procedure – delete if not applicable To be added at Public Certification Report stage The report shall include all written decisions arising from a ‘Notice of Objection’, if received and accepted by the Independent Adjudicator.

Reference(s): FCP v2.1 Annex PD

217 MRAG Americas – US1630 Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery