FISHERIES RESEARCH REPORT NO. 181, 2008 Developing Long-Term

FISHERIES RESEARCH REPORT NO. 181, 2008

Developing long-term indicators for the sub-tidal embayment communities of Cockburn Sound Swan Catchment Council Project – 01-0506 T 2006 – 2008 program

D. J. Johnston, C. B. Wakefield, A. Sampey, J. Fromont and D. C. Harris

Fisheries Research Division Western Australian Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories PO Box 20 NORTH BEACH Western Australia 6920 Fisheries Research Reports Titles in the Fisheries Research Report series present technical and scientific information for use in management processes. Research Reports are subject to full internal refereeing by senior scientists of the Fisheries Research Division, and in many cases, elements of the work are published in international scientific literature.

Correct citation: Johnston, D. J., Wakefield, C. B., Sampey, A., Fromont, J. & Harris, D. C. 2008. Developing long-term indicators for the sub-tidal embayment communities of Cockburn Sound. Swan Catchment Council Project, 01-0506 T. Fisheries Research Report No. 181, Department of Fisheries, Western Australia, 113p.

Enquiries: WA Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories, PO Box 20, North Beach, WA 6920 Tel: +61 8 9203 0111 Email: [email protected] Website: www.fish.wa.gov.au ABN: 55 689 794 771

A complete list of Fisheries Research Reports is available online at www.fish.wa.gov.au

2 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Forward

Progress towards developing explicit metrics for Resource Condition Targets. This project is one of three that has been undertaken by the Department of Fisheries (DOF), and funded by the Swan Catchment Council (SCC), that aim to gain a better understanding of the biodiversity and community structure within the Swan region. Ultimately, the goal of the SCC projects is to provide information that will allow development of effective and efficient resource condition targets (RCTs). While fishing is one of the significant factors that needs to be considered when managing coastal marine ecosystems it is not the only driver of change in these communities. Therefore, the various SCC-funded projects undertaken by DOF not only included a focus on targeted species (e.g. Category 1 angling species, blue swimmer crabs, western rock lobster) but they all (including some other non-SCC projects) have focussed on the most appropriate sampling method (in terms of time, accuracy and cost) to generate information on biodiversity so as to provide a measure for general ecosystem health. They have all provided information on the abundance (or relative abundance) and diversity of species from particular categories (e.g. fish, macro-invertebrates), from particular habitats or regions and at particular time intervals (e.g. seasonal comparisons). They have also addressed one of the key issues pertaining to the development of RCTs for biodiversity and community structure, which is to provide baseline information on natural levels of variability. It has been widely acknowledged that there is a dearth of broad scale ecological studies within the marine ecosystems of WA. This means that these current, or recently completed, studies are essentially establishing baseline descriptions of these communities or assemblages. Consequently, it is not yet possible to set explicit reference points for the management of marine biodiversity because no adequate metrics have been established. This is in contrast to the generally agreed metrics that are now used for the management of individual stocks of exploited fish. For this, the biomass level of a species is often the metric against which the resource condition target (often termed biological reference points, BRPs) is set (e.g. maintain biomass above 40% of the unfished level). The lack of a common metric for measuring biodiversity (or ecosystem health) limits our ability to set meaningful and defensible RCTs. While aspirational RCTs can be developed, to achieve pragmatic management outcomes it is critical that even these are based on a credible scientific understanding or hypothesis if they are to have any real impact on managing marine systems. In the near future it is likely that the achievable goals for management might include objectives such as to ensure: - no loss of biodiversity; - no change in the community assemblage for a particular group such as fish or algae; - an improvement in habitats or ecosystems deemed to be degraded. Therefore this current suite of studies should be considered as the starting point for the management of biodiversity, not as the end point. Further work will be required to develop metrics that can “describe” biodiversity and ecosystem structure in a pragmatic and measurable manner. The scope of the current projects did not include the types of comparative tests required to ascertain with confidence which data sets and analyses are most appropriate for developing the required metrics for biodiversity or community structure. Therefore, each of the projects undertaken by DOF for the SCC could undertake further analytical work on the data already available. Data collected by these three complimentary studies within the Swan region indicates that the

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 3 habitats within this ecosystem can differ significantly. For example, different categories of benthic cover and demersal scalefish occur at each of the locations examined, which included some areas closed to fishing. Similarly, different beaches along the coast have different assemblages of fish despite the habitats often superficially appearing similar. The ongoing challenge for managing marine ecosystems, therefore, is not only what to measure/monitor, but also at what spatial and temporal scales. DOF in association with DEC and broader membership of the State Marine Policy Stakeholders Group has been addressing this significant challenge through the development of a risk assessment approach, which is being undertaken within the WAMSI project on ecosystem- based fisheries management (EBFM). This project is identifying all the natural assets within the entire West Coast Bioregion, including the region of specific interest to the SCC. The EBFM project builds on the considerable work undertaken over the past decade to develop a practical system to implement ESD across Australian fisheries. This system, which has full support from all Australian state and federal agencies involved in managing natural marine assets, critically recognises that not all issues (or species, habitats, problems etc) can be dealt with at a highly detailed level, so the only practical solution is to prioritise issues based on their risks (see www.eafm.com.au for more details). The risk assessment approach, which forms the basis of the EBFM project, follows nationally agreed standards and methods to help identify priorities. The outcomes from this and the other SCC projects (and other activities focussed on assessing baseline of biodiversity) are now being utilised within the context of the EBFM project, the state’s regional marine planning process and any other relevant planning processes. This is being done to ensure the newly acquired information is used to help assess risk status for different habitats within ecosystems as well as to help develop pragmatic metrics for RCTs to underpin the effective management of our marine resources.

Dr Rick Fletcher Director Research Leader- Node 4 WAMSI

4 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Contents Executive Summary...... 8 1.0 Introduction...... 11 1.1 Background...... 11 1.1.1 Cockburn Sound...... 11 1.1.2 Studies of biodiversity...... 11 1.1.3 Blue swimmer crab...... 14 1.1.4 Snapper ...... 15 1.2 Objectives...... 16 2.0 General methods...... 17 2.1 Sampling gear...... 17 2.2 Sites and periodicity of sampling...... 17 2.3 Processing, identification and storage of specimens...... 19 3.0 Objective 1...... 20 3.1 Introduction...... 20 3.2 Methods...... 21 3.2.1 Analysis of community structure...... 21 3.2.2 Commercially and/or recreationally important species...... 22 3.2.3 Blue swimmer crab...... 22 3.2.4 Snapper...... 23 3.3 Results...... 24 3.3.1 Species composition, biomass and abundance...... 24 3.3.2 Diversity measures...... 27 3.3.3 Community groupings and discriminating species...... 28 3.3.4 Commercial and/or recreational species collected...... 39 3.3.5 Blue swimmer crab...... 42 3.3.6 Snapper...... 46 3.4 Discussion...... 49 3.4.1 Community structure...... 49 3.4.2 Commercial and/or recreational species collected...... 50 3.4.3 Blue swimmer crab...... 51 3.4.4 Snapper...... 52 4.0 Objective 2...... 53 4.1 Introduction...... 53 4.2 Methods...... 54 4.2.1 Trawl sampling...... 54 4.2.2 Data analysis...... 54 4.3 Results...... 55 4.3.1 Blue swimmer crab...... 55 4.3.2 Snapper...... 58 4.4 Discussion...... 59 4.4.1 Blue swimmer crab...... 59 4.4.2 Snapper...... 59

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 5 5.0 Objective 3...... 61 5.1 Marine ecosystem targets...... 61 5.1.1 Indicator species...... 61 5.1.2 Species richness and diversity...... 62 5.1.3 Ecological considerations associated with commercially and/or recreationally important species...... 63 5.1.4 Blue swimmer crab...... 64 5.1.5 Snapper...... 65 5.2 Future monitoring...... 65 5.2.1 Temporal sampling regime...... 65 5.2.2 Spatial sampling regime...... 66 6.0 General discussion...... 67 6.1 Summary...... 67 6.1.1 Objective 1...... 67 6.1.2 Objective 2...... 69 6.1.3 Objective 3...... 70 6.2 Future research...... 71 7.0 Acknowledgements...... 73 8.0 References...... 74 9.0 Appendices...... 81 9.1 Appendix 1...... 81 9.2 Appendix 2...... 85

6 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Developing long-term indicators for the sub-tidal embayment communities of Cockburn Sound Swan Catchment Council Project – 01-0506 T 2006 – 2008 program

Principal Investigator: Dr Danielle Johnston Address: WA Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories PO Box 20 North Beach WA 6920 Telephone: 08 9203 0248 Fax: 08 9203 0199 Email: [email protected] Co-investigators: Wakefield C., Harris D., StJohn J., Keay I. (Department of Fisheries) Sampey A., Fromont J. (WA Museum)

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 7 Executive Summary The geomorphology of Cockburn Sound is unique to the lower west coast of Australia due to the relative paucity of sheltered nearshore marine embayments along this coastline. Numerous studies on many of the commercially and/or recreationally important species that inhabit Cockburn Sound have demonstrated that for many of them this marine embayment constitutes an integral part of their life history. Since the commencement of industrial and urban development in the mid 1950s, in the waters and along the shores of Cockburn Sound, the marine fauna utilising this area have been exposed to ongoing changes in environmental quality. These detrimental, anthropogenic influences have impacted on many attributes that affect the faunal composition, including, for example, habitat alteration and/or loss. Recent data has also revealed that blue swimmer crab stocks in Cockburn Sound are more vulnerable than previously thought with this fishery collapsing in 2005/06. The broader impacts of the declining numbers of crabs on the ecology, i.e. predator-prey relationships, are unknown. Likewise, adult populations of snapper in the lower west coast region have been identified as being low/depleted. Recent studies on the biology of snapper have identified the nearshore marine embayments of Owen Anchorage, Cockburn and Warnbro Sounds as important sources of recruitment for the adult population. Until recently, very little research had been done on the structure of the faunal community in these embayments to which blue swimmer crab, snapper and other commercially and/or recreationally important species belong. A broader understanding of the diversity of fauna that resides in this marine embayment will provide insights into their ecological interactions and thus aid in their sustainable management. The objectives of this study were: 1. Describe the trawled community structure associated with the key indicator species, i.e. blue swimmer crabs and snapper, in Cockburn Sound. 2. Assess changes in the distribution and abundance of blue swimmer crab and snapper by comparison with the Department of Fisheries long-term dataset. 3. Establish a system to monitor the abundance and distribution of sub-tidal embayment faunal communities in Cockburn Sound. The marine fauna was sampled from three trawl surveys at approximately six monthly intervals in April/May and October/December 2007 and February 2008 from six sites in Cockburn Sound and one site in Owen Anchorage. An additional survey was conducted in April 2008 to collect data for blue swimmer crabs and snapper. Trends in the abundances of blue swimmer crab and snapper were compared from historic trawl surveys undertaken since February 2000. A total of 216 taxa from six phyla were identified in the sub-tidal faunal communities sampled. These communities were dominated by small benthic predators and detritivores. The majority of these species were well within their known geographic distributions and have previously been collected in Cockburn Sound or Owen Anchorage. Faunal communities differed significantly among sites and surveys, but the differences were more apparent among sites. With the exception of Jervois Bay, all sites sampled in Cockburn Sound during the current study were located in an area previously identified to have a distinct assemblage, i.e. the central basin area. The area sampled in Jervois Bay had a different community from the other sites due in part to the presence of sponges and their associated fauna. Differences in the faunal community structure at Jervois Bay largely caused an east to west gradient in sites evident on the MDS ordinations. This was a result of a different community composition at this site compared with other sites, i.e. generally lower total abundance and species richness, but higher abundance of some component species, e.g. southern calamari squid Sepioteuthis australis and western smooth boxfish Anoplocapros amygdaloides. A north to south gradient was also evident on the ordinations and this was driven by higher species richness, diversity, and evenness of the faunal community sampled at Owen Anchorage. All these diversity measures decreased moving southwards into the Sound with the lowest values being recorded at Mangles Bay. These patterns may be related to an environmental impact gradient but this was not investigated in the current study. Mean abundance and biomass differed between survey times with some sites having a higher mean abundance in February 2008 and others in May 2007, and there were similar variations in biomass through time. As sampling in this study occurred during different seasons in 2007 and 2008, interannular variation in the seasonal composition of the community structure could not be determined. Recreational fishers in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage retain approximately 14 % of the taxa collected. Commercial fishers in this area retain fewer species (ca 7 %) due to permanent spatial closures to the South West Trawl Managed Fishery and West Coast Estuarine Fishery. Numbers of blue swimmer crab recruits were significantly higher in 2008 than 2007. This was most likely due to greater recruitment success on account of a slow recovery of spawning stock following the collapse of this fishery in 2006, evident from abundances in historic trawls, and subsequent closure to commercial and recreational fishing in December 2006 to presently in Cockburn Sound. The abundances of blue swimmer crab recruits (0+) were highest at James Point, Jervois Bay and Mangles Bay. A lack of significant interaction between year and site further confirmed these sites are important crab recruitment areas, irrespective of year. There did not appear to be any site preference by residual (≥ 1+) blue swimmer crabs with abundances highest in 2007 at the Research Area, Garden Island South and Mangles Bay, compared to higher abundances at Jervois Bay, James Point and Mangles Bay in 2008. Only juvenile snapper less than six months of age (0+) were collected in this study. There have been two strong years of recruitment of juvenile snapper in Cockburn Sound in recent years, i.e. the 1999 and 2007 year-classes. There was no site selectivity displayed by the 0+ snapper between surveys. However, the numbers of snapper caught were consistently higher for Garden Island North and James Point, and consistently lower for Garden Island South and Jervois Bay between February and April 2008. The remaining three sites showed large fluctuations in abundance between these two periods. The only site where 0+ snapper were collected in each survey was James Point. The frequency required to monitor the structure of the trawled faunal community in this area would benefit from a periodical approach of at maximum every five years, as ecological processes associated with changes in the community structure could occur within this period, e.g. the large-scale loss of seagrass from the eastern shelf of Cockburn Sound between 1967 and 1972. In addition, the structure of the trawled faunal community would need to be described prior to any potential disturbance from a major development in the area, e.g. the proposed Outer Harbour facility for the Port of Fremantle and then monitored afterward to document any changes and recovery rates. Monitoring of commercially and/or recreationally important species would need to be more frequent for the following reasons. 1) To obtain useful estimates of the annual abundance of recruits of blue swimmer crab and snapper, annual sampling between March and June is needed. 2) To monitor the annual abundance and associated reproductive biology of residual blue swimmer crab, sampling would need to be undertaken between September and December each year. 3) To estimate the annual rates of mortality (specifically natural mortality where possible) for key indicator species and commercially and/ or recreationally important species, e.g. blue swimmer crab and snapper, sampling would need to be undertaken at least three times in a single year.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 9 Future sampling regimes would benefit from using the seven sites from this study, as changes in the structure of the trawled faunal community could be detected at a smaller/localised spatial scale than was possible prior to this study. Future trawl surveys should incorporate Jervois Bay, James Point and Mangles Bay to accurately represent crab recruits, whereas a wide range of sites is needed to accurately represent residual crabs, juvenile snapper and the fauna community. Future sampling should consider additional sites in depths less than ten metres in north-western and south-eastern areas of Cockburn Sound to determine the influence of depth and habitat on the trawled faunal community structure at Jervois Bay from other sites. Future surveys should consider sampling in Warnbro Sound to 1) allow an improved interpretation of the trawled faunal community structure described in Cockburn Sound in this study, from a similar nearby marine embayment that has not had the large-scale environmental disturbance; 2) improve our understanding of recruitment abundances of blue swimmer crab and snapper for the lower west coast, where the relative paucity of protected nearshore marine embayments results in few suitable recruitment areas; and 3) allow comparisons of the natural mortality rates of key indicator species and juvenile blue swimmer crab and snapper between Cockburn Sound and Warnbro Sound, to provide insight into the probability of survival between an environmentally impacted and non-impacted embayment/recruitment area. This study has improved our understanding of the faunal community in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage. It is unknown whether the detection of changes in the structure of the faunal community in these areas in future surveys will provide sufficient capacity to evaluate levels of environmental disturbance. However, the current status of the structure of the trawled faunal community described in this study provides sound quantitative data for which future comparisons can be made. The acquisition of information on the current demographics of the faunal community in this area is timely, considering the potential environmental changes that may occur from the high level of industrial and urban development proposed in its immediate vicinity in the very near future. KEYWORDS: Biodiversity, Cockburn Sound, trawling, indicator species, blue swimmer crabs, snapper, marine embayment

10 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 1.0 Introduction C. Wakefield, D. Johnston, A. Sampey and J. Fromont

1.1 Background

1.1.1 Cockburn Sound The geomorphology that comprises the embayment of Cockburn Sound is typically a depressed land contour between the Spearwood and Garden Island ridges that lie along the eastern and western margins, respectively. To the north, two shallow submerged sand ridges, i.e. Success and Parmelia Banks, represent the respective northern and southern boundaries of Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage (Fig. 1). The southern entrance of Cockburn Sound has been almost closed through the construction of a rock-filled causeway, built in 1971-73 to provide vehicle access to Garden Island. This construction effectively reduced water flow into Cockburn Sound by 40 % and wave energy by 75 % (D.A. Lord & Associates Pty Ltd 2001). These boundaries provide a sheltered marine embayment ca 16 by 9 km in size, with a sea surface area of ca 100.5 km2 and a maximum depth of 23 m. Large and relatively deep marine embayments, such as this, are rare on the south-western coast of Australia, with the closest areas with similar geomorphic attributes being Shark Bay to the north (ca 700 nm) and King George Sound on the south coast (Seddon 1972). The main habitat types found in Cockburn Sound include small patches of limestone reef, extensive soft sediment areas (typically silt) and seagrass meadows. These diverse habitats support a wide variety of marine fauna including numerous species of fishes, crustaceans, molluscs, marine mammals and seabirds (see Section 1.1.2). For a majority of these species Cockburn Sound has been found to constitute an important area during certain stages of their life history, i.e. spawning and/or nursery. These species include invertebrates, e.g. blue swimmer crabs (Potter et al. 2001) and western king prawns (Penn 1975; Penn 1976); fish, e.g. snapper (Lenanton 1974; Wakefield 2006), white bait (Gaughan et al. 1996) and king george whiting (Hyndes et al. 1998); marine mammals, e.g. bottlenose dolphins (Finn 2005) and Australian sea lions (Simpson et al. 1993) and seabirds, e.g. fairy penguins (Simpson et al. 1993). Thus, any changes to environmental conditions or habitat within the Sound will potentially impact on fauna from all trophic levels. Cockburn Sound’s sheltered waters and close proximity to the capital city of Western Australia, Perth (ca 20 km to the north), made it an ideal location for numerous industrial, shipping and naval ventures. Industrial development commenced in this area in 1955 and over an extended period of time has resulted in the accumulation of pollutants and nutrient enrichment in Cockburn Sound. Physical alteration of the benthos in this area also occurred with the mining of shell sand and dredging of shipping channels. The combination of these anthropogenic inputs has been detrimental to the ecosystem and this is evident through the extensive depletion of seagrass meadows, with estimates of less than 20 % of their original coverage remaining (Anon. 1996).

1.1.2 Studies of biodiversity Biodiversity encompasses all life forms (bacteria, fungi, plants and animals), and includes variability in genes, species, habitats, ecological communities, ecosystems and ecological processes (Anon. 1993; Anon. 1999). Australia is a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity (Anon. 1993), and has an international responsibility to ensure the conservation and sustainable

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 11 use of biological resources. This includes an obligation to describe and monitor biodiversity and to implement measures to manage activities (e.g. fishing, mining, and farming) and processes (e.g. nutrient runoff, species introductions, pollution, and climate change) that threaten biodiversity. The Western Australian Government has developed biodiversity conservation policies (DEC 2006; DEC 2008), State of Environment reports (D.A. Lord & Associates Pty Ltd 2001; Anon. 2005), and management plans for specific areas (Anon. 2005) in part to address these issues and undertake actions to address biodiversity loss. Published studies of the biodiversity in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage are limited and have principally focussed on seagrasses and their decline (e.g. Cambridge & McComb 1984; Cambridge et al. 1986; Walker et al. 2001; Kendrick et al. 2002). Results of taxonomic surveys of the fauna of the area are largely in unpublished reports, and the numbers of taxa reported have been influenced by sampling methods used and habitats sampled. Using a variety of sampling methods including scuba diving, shore collections and dredges, a series of surveys documenting the benthic invertebrate fauna of Cockburn Sound were undertaken by the Western Australian Naturalists’ Club (1950s) and the Western Australian Museum (1970s). These studies identified a range of fauna including 28 species of cnidarians (Marsh 1978a), 75 species of echinoderms (Devaney 1978; Marsh 1978b), and 276 species of molluscs (Wells & Threlfall 1980). A quantitative survey of soft bottom fauna conducted in 1978 using a Van Veen grab, found 138 species of invertebrates from eight phyla with molluscs (34 species) dominating these collections by biomass and abundance (Wells 1978; Wells & Threlfall 1980). Between 1977 and 1978 surveys sampled fish and large invertebrate species (crustaceans, calamari squid and cuttlefishes), using a variety of trawling and beach seining methods, and found 144 species, including 81 species (73 fishes and eight invertebrates) of commercial and recreational interest (Dybdahl 1979). Some sampling using seine nets in 1995 off six beaches around Cockburn Sound (three adjacent to seagrass meadows and three without extensive seagrass beds) yielded 55 fish species and three species of large invertebrates (Vanderklift & Jacoby 2003). Two other studies have considered fish assemblages in the Sound (Hutchins 1994; Ayvazian & Hyndes 1995), however, the results were pooled with other sites from the Perth Metropolitan area so it was not possible to determine the number of species recorded from Cockburn Sound. When a new species is first described a specimen is designated as the holotype specimen and the locality where it was collected is the type locality. Cockburn Sound is the type locality for one species of cnidaria (an anemone Bunodactis maculosa Carlgren, 1954; (Griffith & Fromont 1998) and three mollusc species (two gastropods Pseudovertagus peroni Wilson, 1975 and Nassarius cockburnensis Kool & Dekker, 2006 and one bivalve Tellina cockburnensis Brearley & Kendrick, 1984; (Wells 1977 and WAM Mollusc Database). Introduced species can have a substantial impact on native species as they can compete with them for resources. This can potentially reduce native biodiversity and impact on ecosystem function (Haas & Jones 2000; Huisman et al. 2008). The three main ways that species are introduced into areas are through ballast water discharge, hull fouling and deliberate introductions such as aquaculture (Huisman et al. 2008). Cockburn Sound has major industrial development along its shores and cargo ships regularly enter the Sound. Additionally, the largest proportion of the native Blue Mussel Mytilus planulatus that are harvested in the Sound come from aquaculture. Twenty introduced marine species (one species of algae, two bryozoans, four crustaceans, one cnidarian, four molluscs, two polychaetes, four ascidians and two fishes) have been recorded from Cockburn Sound (Huisman et al. 2008; Maddern & Morrison in press). The potential for more introductions to occur in the Sound is high and an improved understanding of its biodiversity would aid in detecting these species.

12 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Figure 1.1. Map of Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage showing the location of the 23 trawls, consisting of three replicate trawls of five minutes duration at each of the seven locations sampled (red lines), and two trawls of twenty minutes duration (green lines, RSA). OWA, Owen Anchorage; RSA, Research Area (dashed lines); GIN, Garden Island north; GIS, Garden Island south; MGB, Mangles Bay; JPT, James Point; JVB, Jervois Bay.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 13 1.1.3 Blue swimmer crab Distribution and biology The blue swimmer or blue manna crab, Portunus pelagicus, occurs in nearshore, marine embayment and estuarine systems throughout the Indo-West Pacific region (Stephenson 1962). They live in a wide range of inshore and continental shelf habitats, including sandy, muddy or algal and seagrass habitats, from the intertidal zone to at least 50 m depth (Williams 1982; Edgar 1990). Blue swimmer crabs have been recorded in all States of Australia, except Tasmania (Stephenson 1962). In Western Australia their distribution extends from Cape Naturaliste in the southwest, north along the coast to the Northern Territory. They are a highly valued species to commercial and recreational fishers, with the Shark Bay fishery the largest commercial blue swimmer crab fishery in Australia. Blue swimmer crabs are also the most important recreationally fished species in Western Australia in terms of community participation rate. The reproductive cycle of blue swimmer crabs is influenced strongly by water temperature. In Cockburn Sound mating occurs in late summer – autumn (January to April), when females have finished spawning and recently matured recruits are soft-shelled (Kangas 2000). These females store the sperm for a number of months over winter, after which eggs are extruded and fertilised, with females becoming ovigerous and spawning between October and January (Penn 1977; Smith 1982). Incubation takes 10 to 18 days, depending upon water temperature, with each female releasing up to one million eggs during this period (Kangas 2000). The larval phase, i.e. egg, zoea, megalopa, extends for up to six weeks in coastal waters, with larvae drifting as far as 60 km out to sea in some locations, before settling in inshore waters (Kangas 2000). Rapid growth occurs over summer during the juvenile phase with recruits entering the fishery between March and June after which they move into deeper water. The size at which maturity occurs can vary with latitude or location and between individuals at any location. In Cockburn Sound, most (50 %) are mature in less than 12 months at a carapace width (CW) of between 86 and 96 mm. Blue swimmer crabs in estuaries and embayments in southwestern Australia typically start to attain minimum legal size (130 mm CW commercial and 127 mm CW recreational) in late summer, when they are approximately 12-16 months of age. Most animals in exploited crab stocks have died either through natural or fishing mortality by the time they are 20 months old (Potter et al. 2001), but without fishing pressure, blue swimmer crabs can live for three to four years. Genetic studies have indicated that the population of blue swimmer crabs in Cockburn Sound is generally independent of other stocks in the State, such as the Peel-Harvey Estuary (Chaplin et al. 2001). This implies that it is unlikely there would be pronounced recruitment of blue swimmer crabs from outside Cockburn Sound into this embayment. Hence, adverse changes in environmental conditions or high levels of fishing pressure in the embayment could have highly detrimental and long-term effects on crab stocks in Cockburn Sound (Chaplin et al. 2001). Further research is currently assessing the genetic relationship between crab populations in Cockburn Sound, Swan River and Warnbro Sound (Chaplin & Sezmis 2008). Preliminary data has suggested that these populations are genetically similar so it appears migration between the stocks has occurred in the past and may also be occurring currently. As a result, the implications for the management of these stocks are currently being assessed.

Status Historically, commercial blue swimmer crab catches in Cockburn Sound have shown large fluctuations, e.g. 92 t in 2001/02 vs. 362 t in 1996/97. These fluctuations have previously been

14 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 attributed to changes both in commercial fishing practices and normal variations in recruitment strength. In recent years, commercial catches have declined significantly from 231 tonnes in 2002/03 to 42 tonnes in 2005/06. Recruitment surveys in 2006 revealed the abundance of 0+ crabs was the lowest on record, with numbers in 2007 only marginally higher. It was concluded that high levels of fishing pressure, coupled with three years of reduced recruitment due to unfavourable environmental conditions, namely lower than average water temperatures, resulted in significantly reduced levels of relative egg production in 2004/05. Recruitment data has been used to generate an index from which catch prediction for the following year can be made. Based on these indices the predicted catch for the 2006/07 and 2007/08 seasons were 59 and 80 tonnes, respectively. On this basis the fishery has been closed to commercial and recreational fishing for the 2006/07 and 2007/08 seasons to allow levels of spawning stock and subsequent recruitment to recover. Current assessments during 2008 have indicated that recovery is slower than expected, despite warmer water temperatures, and that blue swimmer crabs have perhaps been more vulnerable than previously thought. Past reliance on minimum size limits (130 mm CW commercial and 127 mm CW recreational), set well above the size at sexual maturity (98 mm CW), clearly do not provide adequate protection to breeding stock if there are a number of years of adverse environmental conditions. Future management arrangements will focus on protecting the spawning stock under all environmental conditions to ensure recruitment is at an acceptable level. Although blue swimmer crabs are found in reasonable numbers throughout southwestern Australian waters, they are at the southernmost extreme of their temperature tolerance. This inherent vulnerability to subtle changes in water temperature has revealed that blue swimmer crabs are an excellent potential indicator species for monitoring the environmental health of Cockburn Sound. The importance of this system throughout all aspects of their life cycle (with recruitment in the Sound responsible for rebuilding the spawning stock due to their relative independence from other stocks), highlights that monitoring these stocks as part of a wider study to assess faunal abundance and distribution, will be an integral part of assessing environmental health.

1.1.4 Snapper Snapper, Pagrus auratus, is a widely distributed sparid found predominantly in the temperate waters of the Indo-Pacific region, from New Zealand and Australia to China and Japan (Paulin 1990). This species is highly valued by commercial and recreational anglers throughout its distribution, which in Western Australia includes marine waters from Exmouth Gulf (ca 18°S) southwards along the entire west and south coasts. Within this extensive distribution the species occurs in habitats ranging from shallow coastal lagoons and nearshore embayments to depths exceeding 200 m on the continental slope. This species is highly vulnerable to overexploitation given its predictable reproductive strategy of forming large spawning aggregations in protected nearshore areas at the same time and location each year. It is believed that high levels of fishing pressure targeting spawning aggregations of this species contributed to the serious depletion of stocks in the eastern gulf of Shark Bay (Stephenson & Jackson 2005) and in the oceanic waters off the coast of Carnarvon in Western Australia (Moran et al. 2004). The hydrodynamics of a large majority of these nearshore areas, which are utilised by spawning aggregations of snapper, result in the retention of progeny as eggs and pre-settled larvae (Nahas et al. 2003; Doak 2004). As a consequence, these areas are important nursery or recruitment locations for this species. Some examples of these nearshore embayments include Gulf St Vincent and Spencer Gulf in South Australia

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 15 (Fowler et al. 2005), Port Phillip Bay in Victoria (Hamer et al. 2005) and Hauraki Gulf in New Zealand (Crossland 1980; Francis 1995). Although this species occurs along a large area of the Western Australian coast, recent studies on the biology of this species have identified very few spawning and nursery/recruitment areas (Wakefield 2006; Jackson 2007; St John et al. in press). The locations identified for recruitment of snapper from these three studies include three self-replenishing areas within the inner gulfs of Shark Bay; Koks, Bernier and Dorre Islands and Turtle Bay for the oceanic stocks off Carnarvon; Cockburn and Warnbro Sounds in the Perth metropolitan area; the area surrounding and including the Blackwood River on the lower west coast; and Wilsons Inlet and King George Sound along the south coast. Cockburn Sound was first identified as a nursery area for snapper in 1971 from monthly trawl surveys conducted by the Department of Fisheries, from which juvenile snapper were found to remain in the area for at least the first 14 months of their life (Lenanton 1974). In addition, Cockburn Sound was recognised as an important location for annually occurring spawning aggregations of snapper as a result of catches of large mature fish taken during the spawning period by commercial fishers since 1979 (from compulsory catch statistics provided by commercial fishers to the Department of Fisheries Western Australia). To reduce fishing mortality on the spawning aggregations of this species, a seasonal closure (currently 1 October to 31 January) prohibiting the fishing of snapper by commercial and recreational anglers in Cockburn Sound during their vulnerable spawning period, was first introduced in 2000. Recent studies have suggested that this marine embayment may represent an important area for spawning and recruitment for a significant portion of the west coast managed bioregion, which extends from ca 27°00'S (slightly north of Kalbarri) to ca 115°30'E (slightly south of Augusta) (Wakefield 2006; St John et al. in press). Given this demonstrated importance of Cockburn Sound for snapper, an improved understanding of the faunal composition of this marine embayment would provide key indicators of the areas environmental health and ultimately benefit the future conservation and sustainable management of this important area for snapper.

1.2 Objectives 1. Describe the trawled community structure associated with the key indicator species, i.e. blue swimmer crabs and snapper, in Cockburn Sound. 2. Assess changes in the distribution and abundance of blue swimmer crab and snapper by comparison with the Department of Fisheries long-term data set. 3. Establish a system to monitor the abundance and distribution of sub-tidal embayment faunal communities in Cockburn Sound.

16 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 2.0 General methods C. Wakefield and A. Sampey

2.1 Sampling gear Sampling was undertaken by trawling using the RV Naturaliste (21.6 m in length) with surveys commencing at approximately 30 minutes after sunset. The vessel was equipped with port and starboard deployed otter-board nets configured with a headrope length of 6 fathoms (ca 11 m) and 50 mm mesh (stretched) in the wings and 45 mm mesh (stretched) in the cod-ends. The nets were demersal with a 10 mm ground chain that was positioned two links in front of the ground rope. The effective opening of each net was ca 7.3 m wide by ca 1 m high.

2.2 Sites and periodicity of sampling A series of three trawl surveys aimed at identifying all the faunal species retained in the nets were conducted at approximately six monthly intervals between April 2007 and February 2008. An additional survey was conducted in April 2008 to collect data for blue swimmer crabs and snapper. Each survey consisted of sampling at seven locations over two nights. However, due to the limited availability of the research vessel for the first two of the four surveys, each night was sampled in different months. The survey periods were April/May 2007, October/December 2007 and February 2008. In April 2008 blue swimmer crabs and snapper only were sampled. Of the seven locations sampled in each survey, six were located in Cockburn Sound and one in Owen Anchorage (Fig. 1.1, Table 2.1). The six locations within Cockburn Sound were in the vicinity of Mangles Bay (MGB), James Point (JPT), Jervois Bay (JVB), toward the southern (GIS) and northern (GIN) ends of Garden Island and the northern part of the deeper basin area (RSA). The latter location is situated within an area historically designated as the ‘Research Area’, which has been the location of numerous trawl surveys conducted by the Department of Fisheries since 1971 (Lenanton 1974; Penn 1977). The location sampled in Owen Anchorage (OWA) was in the deeper basin area (ca 15 m, Fig. 1.1). At each of the seven locations three trawls (shots) were undertaken within close proximity and parallel to each other (Fig. 1.1, Table 2.2). This replication of sampling at each location was to allow for any inherent patchiness that may be associated with some fauna. In addition this method provided sufficient power for statistical analyses to adequately describe the composition of the fauna and compare differences among locations. All 21 trawls were five minutes in duration and ca 500 m in length, except for two trawls of 20 minutes duration (ca 1900 m in length), which were undertaken in the ‘Research Area’ (RSA) during the survey in April 2007 (Fig. 1.1, Table 2.1). Only blue swimmer crabs and snapper were sampled from the 20-minute trawls to ensure size distributions and abundances were representative in the 5-minute trawls and to facilitate comparisons with historic data (from the Department of Fisheries) from similar trawl surveys, which had used 20-minute trawls. The use of 5-minute trawls in this study were to reduce the time of sorting and processing of the entire catch but still provide a representative sample and to facilitate direct comparisons of data with a concurrent research project that used trawling to assess the biodiversity of marine fauna beyond diving depths on the west and south coasts of Western Australia (Marine Futures Biodiversity Team 2007).

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 17 Table 2.1. Latitude and longitude, average distance (m) and average depth (m) of each of the 5-minute and 20-minute trawls.

Site Code ShotNo. Latitude Longitude Latitude Longitude Av. Distance Average In Out Trawled (m)Depth (m) Trawl duration 5 minutes OWA 1 32°06.62`S 11 5°43.25È 32°06.64`S115°42.95È 491 15.0 2 32°06.53`S 11 5°43.35È 32°06.55`S115°43.04È 495 14.7 3 32°06.42`S 11 5°43.36È 32°06.45`S115°43.06È 487 14.4 RSA 4 32°09.63`S 11 5°43.59È 32°09.36`S115°43.58È 505 18.4 5 32°09.55`S 11 5°43.21È 32°09.27`S115°43.21È 509 19.4 6 32°09.52`S 11 5°42.66È 32°09.26`S115°42.66È 500 20.2 GIN 7 32°10.06`S 11 5°41.18È 32°10.33`S115°41.20È 505 20.8 8 32°09.87`S 11 5°41.07È 32°10.14`S115°41.10È 509 20.3 9 32°10.28`S 11 5°41.37È 32°10.02`S115°41.33È 500 20.6 GIS 10 32°12.47`S 11 5°41.40È 32°15.21'S115°41.26È 505 17.9 11 32°12.13`S 11 5°41.37È 32°12.39`S115°41.48È 505 18.2 12 32°12.14`S 11 5°41.47È 32°12.40`S115°41.56È 505 18.7 JVB 13 32°10.53`S 11 5°42.02È 32°10.79`S115°45.04È 495 9.4 14 32°10.84`S 11 5°44.82È 32°10.58`S115°44.82È 495 9.4 15 32°10.73`S 11 5°45.15È 32°10.53`S115°45.14È 495 9.4 JPT 16 32°12.99`S 11 5°44.73È 32°12.74`S115°44.66È 505 14.4 17 32°13.00`S 11 5°44.83È 32°12.74`S115°44.74È 505 14.2 18 32°12.99`S 11 5°44.61È 32°12.73`S115°44.53È 500 14.1 MGB 19 32°15.97`S 11 5°42.70È 32°15.97`S115°43.04È 505 18.0 20 32°15.84`S 11 5°42.02È 32°15.89`S115°42.64È 528 18.4 21 32°15.76`S 11 5°42.70È 32°15.70`S115°43.02È 505 18.2 Trawl duration 20 minutes RSA 22* 32°08.98`S 11 5°43.57È 32°10.02`S115°43.58È 1926 18.5 23* 32°08.78`S 11 5°43.26È 32°09.79`S115°43.22È 1870 18.9

OWA, Owen Anchorage; RSA, Research Area; GIN, Garden Island North; GIS, Garden Island south; JVB, Jervois Bay; JPT, James Point; MGB, Mangles Bay. *only blue swimmer crab & snapper were sampled.

Table 2.2. Number of replicate trawls of five minutes duration at each of the seven locations for each night during the four surveys.

Survey 1 2 3 4 Site Code 3 Apr 07 2 May 07 29 Oct 07 12 Dec 07 12 Feb 08 13 Feb 08 15 Apr 08 16 Apr 08 OWA 3 2 3 3* RSA 33 33* GIN 3 3 3* 3 3* GIS 3 3 3 3* JVB 3 33 3* JPT 3 3 3 3* MGB 3 3 3 3*

18 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 2.3 Processing, identification and storage of specimens Onboard the RV Naturaliste there were three teams of research staff responsible for collecting the data for i) fish, ii) blue swimmer crab Portunus pelagicus (Linnaeus 1758) and western king prawn Melicertus latisulcatus1 (Kishinouye 1896) and iii) all remaining invertebrates. Processing of fish specimens involved weighing (to the nearest 10 g) and measuring the total lengths (mm TL) of the larger specimens and returning them to the water at the same location they were caught. All smaller specimens were separated into plastic bags by the net they were caught in, i.e. Port and Starboard, for each trawl shot and stored frozen. These samples of smaller specimens were later processed at the Western Australian Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories (WAFMRL), where they were identified to species and a total weight for each species was obtained (to the nearest 0.01 g). The largest and smallest individuals for each species in each of those samples were measured (mm TL), with the exception of snapper, where a fork length (mm FL) was obtained for every individual. Sue Morrison at the Western Australian Museum verified the names of some species that were difficult to identify. Scientific and common names were validated with the Codes for Australian Aquatic Biota (CAAB) fish species list (CSIRO 2008). Voucher specimens of the majority of fish species collected are in permanent storage at the Western Australian Museum. Counts and weights (to the nearest 10 g) of blue swimmer crabs and western king prawns were obtained onboard the research vessel for each net, i.e. port and starboard, for each trawl shot. In addition, the carapace width (CW) was measured to the nearest 1 mm and sex of each blue swimmer crab was determined. All remaining invertebrates were sorted and identified to species where possible for all taxa except for ascidians, which were only identified to form (colonial or solitary). The number of individuals of each species was counted and a total species weight (wet weight) was obtained in the field. Counts for colonial species were more difficult to determine as colonies were frequently broken up during trawling. An effort was made to count colonies but this will be an underestimate and sometimes only reflect presence or absence. Larger specimens were weighed to the nearest 50 g, and smaller specimens to the nearest 1 g. Length measurements were taken for some species. When species identification was not possible in the field, specimens were kept and frozen, or preserved in ethanol to enable later identification. Invertebrates were identified at the Western Australian Museum (WAM) in consultation with WAM staff (see Acknowledgements) and using the available literature including field guides (Wells & Bryce 1985; Wells & Bryce 1993; Edgar 1997; Norman & Reid 2000), taxonomic texts (Hale 1929; Shepherd & Thomas 1982; Shepherd & Thomas 1989; Lamprell & Whitehead 1992; Wilson et al. 1994; Shepherd & Davies 1997; Lamprell & Healy 1998; Hooper & Van Soest 2002; Poore 2004), original species descriptions and expertly identified specimens in the WAM collections. Except for ascidians, an attempt was made to identify all specimens to species, with a particular focus on sponges, molluscs, echinoderms and crustaceans due to the available expertise. Species names were standardised according to the current accepted scientific and common names using the appropriate Australian Faunal Catalogue (e.g. Rowe & Gates 1995; Davie 2002) or web resource (ABRS 2008; CSIRO 2008). At least one of each invertebrate species was retained and these are permanently kept in the Western Australian Museum Collections (see Appendix 1).

1 In the scientific literature the western king prawn is also known as Penaeus latisulcatus and Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus. Pérez Farfarnte & Kensley (1997) revised the genus Penaeus and upgraded Melicertus to full generic status and although this has caused considerable controversy the name has not been rescinded. Hence, we use the current valid scientific name.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 19 3.0 Objective 1 A. Sampey, J. Fromont, C. Wakefield, and D. Johnston

Objective 1. Describe the trawled community structure associated with the key indicator species, i.e. blue swimmer crabs and snapper, in Cockburn Sound.

3.1 Introduction The structure of a community is determined largely by the relative abundances of its constituent species. Biological surveys that aim to describe the diversity of a community are expensive to undertake and identifying the species present is time consuming, labour intensive and requires specialised expertise. The resulting dataset is large and difficult to analyse using standard methodology as the assumptions of the statistical models such as normality and homogeneity of variances are rarely met. Finding patterns in such a large dataset and generating a useful summary of complex relationships is challenging, however, over the last decade there has been development and refinement of statistical tools and methodological approaches (Quinn & Keough 2002) that now make this task much simpler. A community that has equal abundances of all species is considered to be more diverse than one which has higher abundances of a few species and lower abundances for the majority of species, i.e. few common and many rare species (Clarke & Warwick 2001). The most widely used univariate measure for estimating diversity is species richness, which is simply the number of species found. However, this measure is strongly influenced by sampling effort and gives equal weighting to rare and abundant species. Diversity indices, e.g. Shannon diversity index, provide information on both the number of species and their proportional abundance, but are also sensitive to sampling effort and should only be compared across equivalent sampling designs (Clarke & Warwick 2001). Species evenness measures, e.g. Pielou’s evenness index, provide information on whether species of a community have similar abundances or if the community is dominated by one or a few species with the rest comparatively rare. In combination these measures provide some useful information on the numbers and proportional representation of the species in a community. However, they do not allow us to determine which species are abundant or rare or how component species abundance and distribution varies in space and time. A variety of multivariate statistical tools exist to enable exploration of how species in a community relate to each other. All these methods have various strengths and weaknesses in highlighting aspects of the community structure. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) is an unconstrained ordination that is useful for the visual interpretation of a multidimensional dataset (Clarke & Warwick 2001). Cluster analysis aims to find groupings in samples, but as it is hierarchical it forces grouping of samples and does not detect gradients. If the data forms a gradient then an ordination also needs to be examined (Clarke & Warwick 2001). During an unconstrained ordination such as MDS the patterns of overall dispersion in the data may mask real patterns in the factors being tested. Thus, using a constrained ordination, such as canonical analysis of principal coordinates (CAP, Anderson & Willis 2003), enables detection of patterns in the community due to predetermined factors such as a disturbance, spatial and/ or temporal gradients. This method also allows the species that are correlated to these patterns to be detected. When used in combination, these univariate and multivariate statistical tools enable the detection of relationships among species, how they vary in space and time, and an overall interpretation of the community structure.

20 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 As species of commercial and/or recreational importance are subjected to additional levels of mortality associated with fishing practices, their biomass typically fluctuates from naturally occurring levels more so than other species. Currently, the stock levels of some commercially and recreationally important species are low/depleted, e.g. blue swimmer crab (Johnston et al. 2007) and snapper (Wise et al. 2007), and for many others their stock levels are unknown, e.g. octopus and squid. Thus, although commercially and/or recreationally important species may not be statistically significant indicator species, their fluctuations in biomass may have broader ecological impacts and thus should be considered in community analysis.

3.2 Methods

3.2.1 Analysis of community structure The counts and weights for each taxa from each trawl shot were standardised to abundance (individuals.m-2) and biomass (grams.m-2) using the swept area of the net. The swept area was calculated as the product of the size of the openings of the two nets (m), the effective spread of each net (ca two thirds the headrope length) and the distance trawled (m). Some univariate and all multivariate analyses were carried out in PRIMER v6.1.11. Three univariate measures of diversity were calculated using the standardised abundance data of all taxa, i.e. species richness (S), Shannon diversity index (H') and Pielou’s evenness index (J'). S is the number of th species or taxa, H'= ∑i pi loge(pi), where pi is the proportional abundance of the i species, and J' = H' / log S. Univariate analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used to test for differences in these diversity measures, total abundance and biomass among sites, surveys and their interaction using the software ‘R’ (R Development Core Team 2008). Data were transformed prior to analyses to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances based on the gradient of the lineal relationship between the logarithms of standard deviation and mean for each diversity measure according to Clarke and Warwick (1994). Consequently, the following transformations were performed, abundance – square root, biomass – log, H' – not transformed, S and J' – 4th root. The sampling design was a crossed design with site and survey being random factors. Multivariate analyses were conducted using two main approaches: 1) pattern exploration in order to reveal how the samples grouped and 2) testing for differences between the predetermined factors of site and sample period. Both sets of analyses were conducted on the species only dataset by first removing taxa that included mixed species, e.g. ascidians. For both approaches the data was square root transformed so that rare species would contribute to the patterns observed and the Bray–Curtis distance measure was used as this preserved the abundance structure of the dataset (Clarke & Warwick 2001). Non-metric multidimensional scaling (nMDS) and cluster analyses were used to explore how the faunal community grouped with the significance of the groupings assessed using the similarity profile test (SIMPROF) (Clarke & Gorley 2006). The species that contributed to these groupings were then identified using similarity percentages (SIMPER, Clarke & Warwick 2001). Species that could discriminate between sites or sampling periods were determined by the dissimilarity to standard deviation ratio (Diss/SD) and the average abundance in each group. Species that typified a group were determined from Diss/SD, with species with a Diss/SD > 2 being selected. This cut off value was determined as the intercept of the lineal regression of Diss/SD values. Two groups of species were then identified as 1) those that typify the groups being compared (high Diss/SD but equal average abundance) and 2) those that are able to discriminate between the groups (high Diss/SD but different average abundances between groups).

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 21 The second approach tested the significance of differences between the predetermined factors of site and survey using analysis of similarities (ANOSIM) and permutation multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) and canonical analysis of principal coordinates (CAP). The species that contributed to these differences were assessed using SIMPER and also by plotting species on the CAP biplot if they had a Pearson’s correlation coefficient ≥ 0.5. ANOSIM and SIMPER can only test for differences among sites across all surveys and among surveys across all sites, but does not allow for a testing of the interaction between these factors. ANOSIM was used to test for differences between sites and surveys based on their rank similarity, with the significance assessed using the R statistic. R statistic values range between negative one and one, with values of one indicating all replicate tows within a site are more similar to each other in community composition than any replicates from different sites. The Global R was first examined to see if there was a difference in the entire dataset. If there was a significant difference, pairwise comparisons were done for each site and survey combination to identify where the differences occurred. PERMANOVA tested for differences in the entire community among sites and surveys and the interaction of these factors against an ANOVA model using the distance between samples in a similarity matrix. PERMANOVA was undertaken as a permutation of the residuals under a reduced model using type III sum of squares.

3.2.2 Commercially and/or recreationally important species The species of marine fauna collected during this study were compared to those that are commercially and recreationally retained by fishers over two spatial scales that included the larger West Coast Bioregion (WCB, between Kalbarri at 27o00' S and Augusta at 115o30' E) and the nearshore embayment area sampled in this study of Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound (see Fig. 1.1). Information on species retained by commercial fishers for these two spatial scales were obtained from compulsory catch statistics provided by commercial fishers to the Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. Information on species that were retained by recreational fishers in the WCB was obtained from a recent 12-month study of recreational boat- based fishing in this area in 2005-06 (Sumner et al. 2008). Consultation with the investigators of this study on recreational boat-based fishing provided information on the species that were retained in Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound (Sumner et al. unpub.). In some cases species that were retained by either commercial or recreational fishers were only identified to family. Thus, to compare the lists of species that were collected from this study with those that are retained by commercial and recreational fishers, we assumed that at least one species had been collected from each of the families. For example, skates and rays were only identified to family in the commercial and recreation catch statistics, so we assumed that at least one of the species we had collected from these families were the same species collected by commercial and recreational fishers, i.e. pooled our results at family. In the case of families that were identified as being commercially and/or recreationally retained by fishers and that also had species within that family identified, only the counts of identified species were used.

3.2.3 Blue swimmer crab Length frequency analysis of blue swimmer crab Modality in the length frequency distributions from all historic trawls were used to distinguish age cohorts of blue swimmer crabs, i.e. recruit or residual. These age cohorts were estimated by fitting a probability model that allocates an individual to an age cohort, assuming this frequency follows a normal probability density function. A chi-squared statistic was then used

22 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 to decide which competing solution to the model best fits the data (Schnute & Fournier 1980). Numbers of recruit and residual crabs were then determined for each trawl during a survey to develop mean abundances for each modal class for that survey date.

Analysis of site selectivity of blue swimmer crab Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to determine whether there were any significant differences in the number of recruit and residual blue swimmer crabs between sites in Cockburn Sound. The factors in the model included site, year and month, with the interaction between site and year also considered. The number of recruits (0+) was transformed using Log(recruits + 0.0025) to better meet the assumption of normality required for ANOVA. The number of residuals (≥ 1+) did not need to be transformed. Type III sum of squares were used due to the unbalanced nature of the data. When site was significant, the least-squared means were presented (and back-transformed if required) to identify the influence of each site on the numbers of blue swimmer crab recruits. Least-squared means are to an unbalanced design as the mean is to the balanced design. Statistically significant results were presented with F values, degrees of freedom and p values.

3.2.4 Snapper Selectivity of trawl gear and site preference To achieve a better representation of the size distribution of snapper in each trawl, snapper were categorised into sequential 1 cm FL size classes and their numbers were adjusted to allow for the selectivity of the fishing gear according to Wakefield et al. (Table 3.10, 2007). The adjusted numbers of snapper for each trawl were used to identify the size composition for each survey and to compare their abundance at each site for each survey. Differences in the number of snapper caught at each site, sampling period and the interaction between site and sampling period were tested using analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the software ‘R’ (R Development Core Team 2008). The data was first tested for normality and homogeneity of variance and transformed accordingly (Clarke & Warwick 2001).

Table 3.10. Percentage of snapper retained in the trawl gear for each sequential 1 cm size class (from Wakefield et al. 2007).

Fork Length (cm) Retention by trawl gear (%) 38.33 421.50 537.67 669.29 787.83 895.09 998.04 10 99.62 11 100.00 12 100.00 13 100.00 14 100.00 15 100.00

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 23 3.3 Results

3.3.1 Species composition, biomass and abundance A total of 216 taxa from 6 phyla were identified during the study (see Appendix 2). This included 141 invertebrate taxa and 75 fish taxa (Porifera: 32 species and 1 taxa; Cnidaria: 2 species and 5 taxa; Crustacea: 30 species and 1 taxa; Mollusca: 37 species and 1 taxa; Echinodermata: 28 species; Chordata: Ascideacea: 3 taxa; Chordata: Pisces: 73 species and 2 taxa). All identified species have either previously been collected in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage or are well within their expected range. The only exceptions to this were a snapping shrimp Alpheus cf. rapax and asymmetric goatfish Upeneus cf. asymmetricus, which are both considered to be predominantly tropical species, but these identifications need to be confirmed with in depth taxonomic study, which is beyond the scope of this project. The only introduced species collected was the streaked goby Acentrogobius pflaumii, at GIN and RSA during the October/December 2007 survey. Many of the species were rare and only collected at one site on one sampling occasion (52 species, ca 24 % of the total). Only 35 species (ca 16 %) could be considered common and widespread, occurring at all sites and in most surveys (Table 3.1). Taxa of mixed species that occurred at all sites were orange sea pens Cavernularia spp., all ascidians, both colonial and solitary forms, and the lefteye flounder Arnoglossus spp. The seastar Stellaster inspinosus was common at the three northern most sites (OWA, RSA & GIN) but absent from the other sites. Some species were generally common across sites and surveys, but missing from one site only. For example, the sea cucumbers Cercodema anceps and Colochirus quadrangulatus, an urchin Temnopleurus michaelseni, and southern fiddler ray Trygonorrhina fasciata were all absent from MGB.

24 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Table 3.1. List of common and widespread species collected from trawling in Cockburn Sound and Table 3.1.Owen List Anchorage. of common See and Appendix widespread 2 for fullsp ecieslist of collectedtaxa collected from during trawlin theg inproject. Cockburn* Metapenaeopsis Sound and Owen spp. Anchorage. includes M. Seefusca Appendix and M. lindae 2 for. full list of taxa collected during the project. * Metapenaeopsis spp. includes M. fusca and M. lindae. Taxa Common Name OWA RSA GIN GIS JVB JPT MGB 123123123123123123123 Cnidaria Anthozoa Cavernularia spp. sea pen ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Arthropoda: Crustacea Decapoda Belosquilla laevis mantis shrimp ƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Melicertus latisulcatus western king prawn Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Metapenaeopsis fusca velvet prawn Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Metapenaeopsis lindae velvet prawn Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔ ƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Metapenaeopsis spp.* velvet prawn ƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Portunus pelagicus blue swimmer crab Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Portunus rugosus swimmer crab Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Thalamita sima four-lobed swimmer crab ƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔ ƔƔ Mollusca Gastropoda Euprymna tasmanica southern bobtail squid Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Sepia braggi Bragg's cuttlefish Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔ Ɣ Sepia novaehollandiae cuttlefish ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Sepioteuthis australis southern calamari squid ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Echinodermata Crinoidea Comatula purpurea featherstar Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Asteroidea Astropecten preissi seastar Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Luidia australiae seastar Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ ƔƔƔ Stellaster inspinosus seastar ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ophiuroidea Macrophiothrix spongicola brittlestar ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Echinoidea Temnopleurus michaelseni urchin ƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Holothuroidea Cercodema anceps sea cucumber Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Colochirus quadrangularis sea cucumber ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Chordata Ascidiacea Herdmania sp. sea squirt ƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ascidian spp. - colonial sea squirt ƔƔƔ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ascidian spp. - solitary sea squirt Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Pisces Anoplocapros amygdaloides western smooth boxfish Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ ƔƔ Apogon rueppellii western gobbleguts Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Arnoglossus spp. lefteye flounder Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔ Ɣ Diodon nicthemerus globefish ƔƔƔ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Heterodontus portusjacksoni Port Jackson shark Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔ Inegocia japonica rusty flathead Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Lepidotrigla papilio spiny gurnard Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Maxillicosta scabriceps little gurnard perch Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Monacanthus chinensis fanbelly leatherjacket Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔ Myliobatis australis southern eagle ray ƔƔƔƔ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Onigocia spinosa midget flathead Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Pagrus auratus snapper Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Parapercis haackei wavy grubfish ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Parequula melbournensis silverbelly Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔ Ɣ ƔƔ ƔƔƔƔ Pegasus volitans slender seamoth ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Pentapodus vitta western butterfish ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔ ƔƔ Pseudocalliurichthys goodladi longspine dragonet Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Pseudocaranx georgianus sand trevally Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔ ƔƔ Ɣ Pseudocaranx wrighti skipjack trevally Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔ Ɣ Pseudorhombus jenynsii smalltooth flounder Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Sillago burrus western trumpeter whiting Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔ Trygonorrhina fasciata southern fiddler ray Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ ƔƔƔƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Upeneichthys vlamingii bluespotted goatfish ƔƔƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 25 28 There were no general trends in total abundance and biomass across sites and surveys but these factors were significantly different due to a site and survey interaction (Table 3.2). The highest mean abundance occurred at some sites in February 2008 (MGB, GIS & GIN) and at others in April/May 2007 (JPT, JVB, RSA & OWA) (Fig. 3.1). The mean biomass was highest at some sites (JPT, RSA & OWA) in April/May 2007 and other sites (MGB, GIS & GIN) in October/ December 2007. The high mean biomass and standard error at GIN in October/December 2007 was due to the capture of a large (estimated to weigh ca 150 kg) smooth stingray Dasyatis brevicaudata in one tow.

Table 3.2. Univariate ANOVA results for (a) total abundance and (b) biomass, (c) species richness (S), (d) diversity (H’) and (e) evenness (J’). Significance codes, p < 0.001*** and p < 0.01**.

Sum Sq. df FPr(>F) Sig. a) total abundance site 0.1 6 18.4 3 x 10-10 *** survey 0.01 2 7.8 0.001 ** site x survey 0.08 12 7.4 5 x 10-10 *** residuals 0.03 41 b) total biomass site 2.02 6 1.3 0.27 survey 0.28 2 0.5 0.58 site x survey 8.24 12 2.7 0.008 ** residuals 10.41 41 c) species richness (S) site 0.93 6 16.2 2 x 10-9 *** survey 0.03 2 1.7 0.2 site x survey 0.18 12 1.6 0.13 residuals 0.39 41 d) species diversity (H') site 1.72 6 10.8 3 x 10-7 *** survey 0.28 2 5.2 0.009 ** site x survey 1.04 12 3.3 0.002 ** residuals 1.1 41 e) species evenness (J') site 0.14 6 22.5 2 x 10-10 *** survey 0.02 2 8.7 2 x 10-4 *** site x survey 0.08 12 6.4 3 x 10-6 *** residuals 0.04 41

26 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 April/May October/December February

Figure 3.1. Mean (± 1 SE) (a) abundance and (b) biomass of the entire community sampled for each site and survey.

3.3.2 Diversity measures Species richness (S) varied among sites and surveys but was only significantly different among sites (Table 3.2). Mean S ranged from 24 (MGB in April/May 2007) to 56 species (GIN in February 2008) and was generally highest at GIN and OWA (mean across all months 50 and 47 species, respectively) and lowest at MGB (27 species, Fig. 3.2). Species diversity (H') and evenness (J') also varied significantly among sites and months (Table 3.2). H' ranged from 2.2 (GIN & GIS in February 2008 and RSA in April/May 2007) to 3.1 (OWA in February 2008) and J' ranged from 0.5 (GIN in February 2008) to 0.8 (JVB in October/December 2007 and OWA in February 2008, Fig.3.2). OWA and GIN had similar species richness values to each other but OWA had higher diversity and evenness than GIN indicating that more species had similar abundances across the community at OWA than at GIN, where the community was dominated by a few species. RSA and GIN generally had the lowest evenness values indicating that the communities at these sites are dominated by fewer species compared to the other sites where more species have similar abundances.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 27 April/May October/December February

Figure 3.2. Mean (± 1 SE) (a) species richness, (b) diversity, and (c) evenness indexes for each site and survey.

3.3.3 Community groupings and discriminating species Clustering and unconstrained ordination of the abundance data resulted in six groups (a-f) that were significant using SIMPROF (p < 0.1 %) at 50 % similarity (Fig. 3.3). JVB (group’s d-f) was significantly different from the rest of the sites. Group d consisted of one shot that was sampled in December 2007 and the faunal community included a mixture of sponge species and associated fauna (Fig. 3.3 & Table 3.3). Group e consisted of the May 2007 samples and group f of the remaining December 2007 samples and all February 2008 samples. Group e had a higher abundance of five species, Penaeus latisulcatus, Portunus rugosus, Temnopleurus

28 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 michaelseni, Pseudocalliurichthys goodladi and Sillago bassensis, compared to group d (Table 3.3). OWA in December 2007 (group b) had a very different community from the remaining sites and this was due to a high abundance of the sea cucumber Colochirus quadrangulatus and the presence of another sea cucumber Cladolabes schmeltzii (Fig. 3.3a-c and Table 3.3). The seastar Stellaster inspinosus and bighead gurnard perch Neosebastes pandus also contributed to this separation. The remaining OWA samples formed group c, the sea cucumber Cladolabes schmeltzii and a murex gastropod Bedeva paivae separated group c from group d (Table 3.3). The remaining samples formed group a, but there was significant structure at > 50 % similarity forming groups due to sites and surveys and this is evident on the nMDS ordination where the samples form a gradient from north to south and east to west (Fig. 3.3a & b). Clustering and ordination of the biomass data resulted in nine groups (a-i) that were significant using SIMPROF (p < 0.1 %) at 50 % similarity (Fig. 3.4). The patterns were broadly similar to the abundance data with groupings according to the site collected and displaying a north/ south and east/west gradient visible on the nMDS ordination (Fig. 3.4b). Within these trends were groupings according to survey that indicated seasonal variation in the biomass of the community. Groups d and g formed due to the high biomass of a single individual of a black stingray Dasyatis thetidis (25.2 kg) at GIS in October 2007 (group d) and a smooth stingray Dasyatis brevicaudata (estimated to weigh ca 150 kg) at GIN in October 2007 (group g). Dasyatis brevicaudata also contributed to group a as one of the top ten species by weight, and is the main species that separates group g from all other groups, except a (Table 3.4). The presence of four species of sponge and their associated fauna also separates group g from all other groups (Table 3.4). The higher biomass of silverbelly Parequula melbournensis at OWA in May 2007 separated this group from all other groups (Fig. 3.4, Table 3.4). Dasyatis thetidis was the main species that drove the separation of one sample at GIS in October 2007 from the rest of the groups, but the triton Cymatium cf. exaratum, the sea slug Pleurobranchus peroni and little weed whiting Neoodax balteatus also contributed to this separation (Fig. 3.4, Table 3.4). Community composition was significantly different among sites and months for estimates of both abundance and biomass (Tables 3.5 & 3.6). In almost all cases, abundance was a better discriminator of these differences than biomass (sites: global R = 0.913 vs. 0.793 for sites and months: global R = 0.931 vs. 0.636, abundance and biomass, respectively, at 0.01 % significance, Table 3.5). All site groups were significantly different from each other, with the least difference between GIS and RSA (R = 0.827 for abundance and R = 0.358 for biomass, Table 3.5). The similarity between RSA and GIS is also evident on the nMDS plots where most of the samples from these two sites are very close together (Fig. 3.3b). The community was most different between February 2008 and April/May 2007 (R = 0.725 and R = 0.704, for abundance and biomass, respectively). Estimates of abundance and biomass of the fauna was most similar in February 2008 and October/December 2007 (R = 0.9 and R = 0.561). Based on the biomass of the fauna, JVB was significantly different from GIN, GIS and OWA, and OWA was significantly different from GIS and MGB (all pairs having R = 1). In general, no species typified a survey, except for Sepia novaehollandiae, which was more abundant in February 2008 than in October/December 2007 and Portunus rugosus, which had a higher biomass in April/May 2007 than October/December 2007 (Table 3.7). The abundance and biomass of the seastar Stellaster inspinosus and bluespotted goatfish Upeneichthys vlamingii was higher at OWA than the other sites (Table 3.7). The sponge Holopsamma sp. C1 separated GIN from all other sites. The mantis shrimp Belosquilla laevis was more abundant at JPT than GIN, OWA and JVB.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 29 c) 70

n 50 o i it 40

ompos 30 C

% 20

0 abcdef 50% SIMPROF Groups Pseudocalliurichthys goodladi Portunus rugosus Portunus pelagicus Colochirus quadrangularis Melicertus latisulcatus Lepidotrigla papilio Apogon rueppellii Sepioteuthis australis Anoplocapros amygdaloides Cercodema anceps

Figure 3.3. Dendrogram (a) and two-dimensional ordination (b) of abundance (individuals.m-2) of species only for each site and survey. Groups (a-f) at 50 % similarity are identified on the dendrogram as significant (black lines) and non-significant (red lines) as determined by SIMPROF, p < 0.1 %. The top ten species that contributed to these groupings are displayed (c).

30 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Table 3.3. Discriminating species for each 50 % similarity SIMPROF grouping based Tableon abundance3.3. Discriminating (Ɣ) determined species forfrom each SI 50MPER % similarity analysis, SIMPROF where groupingDiss/SD based > 5.7, on r2 abundance= 0.4. 2 1 1all species( ) aredetermined in higher from abundance SIMPER analysis, in the indicated where Diss/SD group > except 5.7, r =where 0.4. all indicated, species are in 2 higher abundance in the indicated group except where indicated, 2abundance is higher abundancein this is higher group, *Speciesin this group, are in *Speciesequal abundance are in equalin both abundance groups so not in bothable togroups discriminate so not able tobetween discrim them.inate Groups between not them.listed hadGroups no species not listed fitting had the nocriteria species used. fitting the criteria used.

1 1 1 1 1 1 a b b b b c d d vs.vs. vs.vs. vs.vs. vs.vs. 1 2 2 2 1 2 Indicator Species b c d e f d e f Phylum Porifera Echinodictyum clathrioides ƔƔƔ Igernella sp. C1 ƔƔƔ Semitaspongia sp. C1 ƔƔ Tedania sp. C1 ƔƔƔ Tethya cf. ingalli ƔƔ Phylum Arthropoda Fultodromia nodipes ƔƔ Hyastenus sebae ƔƔ 2 Melicertus latisulcatus Ɣ Pilumnus fissifrons ƔƔ Portunus pelagicus Ɣ* 2 2 Portunus rugosus Ɣ Ɣ Thalamita sima Ɣ Phylum Mollusca Bedeva paivae ƔƔ Sepioteuthis australis Ɣ* Phylum Echinodermata Astropecten preissi ƔƔ Cercodema anceps Ɣ Cladolabes schmeltzii ƔƔ Ɣ Ɣ Colochirus quadrangularis Ɣ ƔƔƔ Coscinasterias muricata ƔƔ Luidia australiae ƔƔ Stellaster inspinosus Ɣ ƔƔƔ 2 Temnopleurus michaelseni Ɣ Ɣ Phylum Chordata Gymnapistes marmoratus ƔƔ 2 2 Lepidotrigla papilio Ɣ Ɣ Neosebastes pandus ƔƔƔ Omegophora armilla Ɣ Pagrus auratus Ɣ Pegasus volitans Ɣ Pentapodus vitta Ɣ 2 Pseudocalliurichthys goodladi Ɣ 2 Sillago bassensis Ɣ Sillago burrus ƔƔ

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 31 34 c) 100

80 n io t i 60 os mp o

C 40 % %

0 abcdefgh i 50% SIMPROF Groups Portunus pelagicus Dasyatis spp. Anoplocapros amygdaloides Melicertus latisulcatus Diodon nicthemerus Pseudocalliurichthys goodladi Heterodontus portusjacksoni Myliobatis australis Pseudocaranx wrighti Belosquilla laevis

Figure 3.4. Dendrogram (a) and two-dimensional ordination (b) of mean biomass (g.m-2) of species only, for each site and sampling period. Groups (a-h) are identified on the dendrogram as being significant (black lines) and non-significant (red lines) as determined by SIMPROF, p < 0.1 %. The top ten species that contributed to these groupings are displayed (c).

32 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Table 3.4. Discriminating species for each 50 % similarity SIMPROF grouping based Tableon 3.4.biom assDiscriminating (ż) determ speciesined from for each SIMPER 50 % analysis,similarity SIMPROF where Diss/SD grouping > 3.7,based r2 on= 0.2.biomass 1all species are( ) determinedin higher abundance from SIMPER in thanalysis,e indicated where group Diss/SD except > 3.7, where r2 = 0.2. indicated, 1all species are in 2 2abundancehigher is higherabundance in this in the group, indicated *Species group ar excepte in equal where abundance indicated, inabundance both groups is higher so in this group, *Species are in equal abundance in both groups so not able to discriminate not able betweento discrim them.inate Groups between not them.listed had Groups no species not listed fitting had the no criteria species used. fitting the criteria used.

1 1 1 1 1 1 a a a bbbbc c c d d d d e ffg g vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. vs. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 Indicator Species d g h d g h i d g h efh i g g h h i Phylum Porifera Ciocalypta sp. C1 żż ż ż ż ż Holopsamma sp. C1 ż żż ż Leucosolenida sp. C1 żż ż ż ż ż Tethya cf. ingalli ż ż Phylum Arthropoda Belosquilla laevis ż Hyastenus sebae ż żż ż ż Metapenaeopsis fusca żż ż ż ż Metapenaeopsis lindae żż ż ż Melicertus latisulcatus żż ż ż ż Pilumnus fissifrons ż ż ż Portunus pelagicus żż ż ż Thalamita sima ż Phylum Mollusca Aplysia dactylomela żż ż ż Cymatium cf. exaratum ż ż ż żżż 2 Euprymna tasmanica ż ż Pleurobranchus peroni żż żż ż ż żżż ż ż ż Sepiadarium austrinum żż ż ż Sepioloidea lineolata ż ż Phylum Echinodermata Cercodema anceps żż ż Colochirus quadrangularis ż żż Comatula purpurea żż* Echinocardium cordatum żż ż Luidia australiae ż Macrophiothrix spongicola ż Peronella lesueuri ż ż Stellaster inspinosus żż ż ż Temnopleurus michaelseni ż żż Phylum Chordata 2 Anoplocapros amygdaloides ż Brachaluteres jacksonianus żż ż ż ż Dasyatis brevicaudata żż ż ż ż ż Dasyatis thetidis żż ż ż ż ż Engraulis australis żż Eubalichthys mosaicus żż ż ż ż Gymnapistes marmoratus ż 2 Heterodontus portusjacksoni ż Hippocampus subelongatus żż ż Hyporhamphus melanochir żż Inegocia japonica żż Lepidotrigla papilio ż Monacanthus chinensis ż ż Neoodax balteatus żż ż ż Onigocia spinosa ż 2 2 Parequula melbournensis żż ż ż żż 2 Pentapodus vitta żżż Platycephalus longispinis żżż ż ż Pomatomus saltatrix żż ż ż ż Pseudocalliurichthys goodladi ż 2 Pseudocaranx wrighti żżż ż ż ż Sillago bassensis ż Sillago burrus żż ż* Spratelloides robustus żż ż ż ż ż ż Trygonorrhina fasciata żż Upeneichthys vlamingii ż

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 33 36 The constrained ordination (CAP) separated all of the sites based on abundance, with JVB being most different from the other sites due to the abundance of the western smooth boxfish Anoplocapros amygdaloides and southern calamari squid Sepioteuthis australis (Fig. 3.5). The globefish Diodon nicthemerus was more abundant at JVB and JPT. The mantis shrimp Belosquilla laevis was associated with JPT and MGB and this was also indicated by the SIMPER results (Fig. 3.5 & Table 3.7). Stellaster inspinosus was associated with the northern sites OWA, RSA and GIN. Species that were positively correlated with different survey periods and thus indicated higher abundance and biomass in those respective periods, included the cuttlefish Sepia novaehollandiae in February 2008 and a swimmer crab Portunus rugosus in April/May 2007 (Fig. 3.6). The two key indicator species, snapper and blue swimmer crab were not strong discriminating species in either the SIMPER or CAP analysis. Blue swimmer crab Portunus pelagicus was equally abundant at OWA and JVB in October/December 2007, and was able to discriminate groups d and g from groups c and h. However, as groups d and g were formed from a single trawl shot, and are thus outliers, this is not particularly useful (Tables 3.3 & 3.4). This species had higher biomass at GIN compared to OWA, and higher abundance at MGB compared to GIN, and JVB compared to OWA (Table 3.7), but it was not strongly correlated with any site or survey period (Figs 3.5 & 3.6). Snapper Pagrus auratus only discriminated between group d and e and this was due to a higher abundance at JVB in October 2007 (Table 3.7, see Section 3.3.7). This species also showed a positive correlation with survey 3, due to a higher abundance and biomass during February 2008 (Fig. 3.6, see Section 3.3.7). The results from these two statistical approaches concur and were beneficial in describing slightly different features of the community structure. Sites were generally different from each other in contrast to survey periods, which with a few exceptions were very similar. Overall, the trends exhibited by the diversity and evenness of the faunal community were highest at the northern site, i.e. Owen Anchorage (OWA), and decreased to their lowest at the southernmost site, i.e. Mangles Bay (MGB).

34 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Figure 3.5. CAP results on a) abundance and b) biomass for differences among sites. Species with a Pearson’s correlation coefficient > 0.5 are plotted. Length of the lines represents the strength of the correlation and the direction in relation to each axis represents a negative or positive correlation.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 35 Figure 3.6. CAP results on a) abundance and b) biomass for differences among surveys (1 refers to April/May 2007, 2 to October/December 2007 and 3 to February 2008). Species with a Pearson’s correlation coefficient > 0.5 are plotted. Length of the lines represents the strength of the correlation and the direction in relation to each axis represents a negative or positive correlation.

36 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Table 3.5. Pairwise Tests from ANOSIM analysis based on 9999 permutations, for each site and sampling period.

AbundanceBiomass RSignificanceRSignificance Groups Statistic Level %Statistic Level % GIN, GIS10.10.802 0.1 GIN, JPT10.10.975 0.1 GIN, JVB10.1 10.1 GIN, MGB1 0.10.889 0.1 GIN, OWA1 0.10.959 0.1 GIN, RSA0.852 0.1 0.481 0.1 GIS, JPT10.1 0.654 0.1 GIS, JVB10.110.1 GIS, MGB 1 0.1 0.716 0.2 GIS, OWA1 0.110.1 GIS, RSA0.827 0.1 0.358 0.9 JPT, JVB0.889 0.1 0.679 0.1 JPT, MGB0.988 0.1 0.568 0.6 JPT, OWA1 0.1 0.986 0.1 JPT, RSA0.926 0.1 0.7040.2 JVB, MGB0.975 0.10.926 0.1 JVB, OWA1 0.110.1 JVB, RSA10.1 0.988 0.1 MGB, OWA1 0.110.1 MGB, RSA0.951 0.1 0.667 0.2 OWA, RSA1 0.1 0.903 0.1

Feb, Apr/May0.974 0.01 0.7250.01 Feb, Oct/Dec 0.9 0.01 0.561 0.01 Apr/May, Oct/Dec 0.950.01 0.6440.01

Table 3.6. Results of PERMANOVA based on 999 permutations on the residuals under a reduced model, a) abundance and b) biomass. P was constructed by permutation and also a Monte Carlo test, both procedures yielded the same results.

Source df SS MS Pseudo-F P a) Site 635700 5949.9 12.849 0.001 Survey 211524 5762 12.443 0.001 Site x Survey 12 160671338.9 2.8914 0.001 Residuals4118985 463.05 Total6182039

b) Site 636269 6044.9 7.8928 0.001 Survey 29044.84522.4 5.9049 0.001 Site x Survey 12 185251543.7 2.0157 0.001 Residuals 41 31401765.87 Total6195351

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 37 41 itting the c 1 . . D e b s / Ɣ t v pecies f Fe the SIMPER Oc 1 ay om r . abundancehigheris in ż l/M t/Dec vs 2 ri Oc Ap abundance is higher in this 1 B 2 . ined f s v Ɣż RSA MG 1 2 2 B . 2 ż ż ż Ɣ ż vs Ɣ Ɣ Ɣż Ɣż Ɣż MG OWA 1 . ), determ s ż v JPT ż MG B 2 1 . 2 ), determined from the SIMPER analysis, Ɣ vs Ɣ Ɣż JPT JV B ass ( 1 2 . 2 ż ż ż s ż ż Ɣ v Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ JPT OWA 1 2 2 B ż ż ż Ɣ vs. Ɣż Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣż JV B n them. Groups not listed had no s MG 1 2 . ) and biom 2 B A ż ż s Ɣ ) and biomass ( Ɣ v Ɣ Ɣ Ɣż Ɣ JV RS 1 2 2 . 2 ż ż ż vs Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ Ɣż Ɣż JV B OWA 1 . ż ż s G B v Ɣ Ɣ nate betwee nate GIS M i 1 . S * e indicated group except where indicated, where except group indicated e ż vs ż Ɣ JPT GI 2 1 . 2 ż s Ɣ v Ɣ Ɣ Ɣż GIS JVB 1 . Ɣ vs GIS RSA 1 2 A 2 2 * ż s. ż Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ v Ɣ Ɣ ż Ɣ GIS able to discrim to able OW 2 1 2 B . 2 N ż ż Ɣ Ɣ vs Ɣ Ɣ Ɣż Ɣż Ɣż GI MG 1 2 2 . 2 N ż ż ż s ż Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ v Ɣ Ɣ Ɣż JPT GI 1 p ling period based on abundance ( . ż Ɣ ż * ż ż Ɣ Ɣ Ɣ vs Ɣż Ɣ Ɣż Ɣż JV B Ɣ GIN 1 2 . 2 s ż ż ż ż v Ɣż Ɣż Ɣż GIS GIN 1 . N all species are in higher abundance in the indicated group except where indicated, ƔƔ vs 1 Ɣż Ɣż Ɣż RSA GI 1 . N s ż ż ż ż Ɣ v Ɣż Ɣż GI O WA 1 > 0.8. 2 A . Ɣ all species are in higher abundance in th in abundance higher in are species all vs Ɣż Ɣż 1 RSA OW o r each site and sam i i > 0.8. s on 2 es oodlad i laris i loides i g sis g s n sjack n ispinis i y rnensis s s g u ndiae m u a p s rangu r ighti ine a rSpec llii h v is chth o w lbo gic i amygda t a s sp. C1 sp. x pe s c s portu s onica odermata la gosu n p where Diss/SD > 2, r Discriminating species for each site and sampling period based on abundance ( group, *Species are in equal abundance in both groups so not able to discriminate between them. Groups not listed had no species fitting the criteria used. e r ys vl ance litans lus lon lus eholla e o a th ordata u rif hin

v la me la thisaustralis inspinosusr /SD > 2, r v pes c nating species f iaspinosa u ch bassensis burru Indica u dontu i epha nus ru nus ertuslatisulcatus e i locapros psamma ro un a no a Pom gon r gon p i nacanthu igoc e n llaste um Ch um um Arthropod um u um E um um Mollusca um r t rcodema pidotrigla papilio piote p l l l l l o e lic n e gasus vitta e ntapodus e losquillalae o y y y y Parequu P P Sillago M O Platyc Pseudocalliur Up Pseudocara Sillago Le Inegocia jap Inegocia Apo Holo B M Portu Se Se Ce quad Colochirus Ano Hete Ste Luidiaaustraliae P h h h P P Ph P Phy . Table 3.7. Table Discrim

[ ] 38 is, where Diss Fisheries Research Report Western Australia No. 181, 2008 criteria used this group, *Species are in equal abundance both groups so not Table 3.7. analys 3.3.4 Commercial and/or recreational species collected Taxa from this study were identified from six phyla of which only taxa belonging to Arthropoda, Mollusca and Chordata were of commercial and/or recreational significance. Of the 216 taxa collected ca 13 % (ca 28 species from 24 families) were reported to be retained by commercial fishers from the WCB (Table 3.8). The number of species that are retained by commercial fishers in Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound was markedly less, with only ca 15 species from 13 families (Table 3.8). Those species that were not reported as being retained by commercial fishers in Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound were two species of Penaeidae (prawns, including western king prawn Melicertus latisulcatus), Ballot’s saucer scallop Amusium balloti, western butterfish Pentapodus vitta and species belonging to the families Rhinobatidae (guitarfishes), Atherinidae (hardyheads), Triglidae (sea robins and gurnards), Platycephalidae (flatheads), Mullidae (goatfishes), Sillaginidae (whitings) and Bothidae (lefteye flounders). In the WCB, recreational fishers were reported to retain a slightly higher number of species than commercial fishers, which is ca 14 % (ca 30 species from 24 families, Table 3.8) of the 216 taxa collected from this study. The numbers of species retained by recreational fishers in Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound were slightly less than that of the WCB with the differences being Australian pilchard Sardinops neopilchardus, bighead gurnard perch Neosebastes pandus and the family Bothidae (Table 3.8).

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 39 Table 3.11. List of all species caught with their retention by commercial and Tablerecreational 3.11. List of fishersall species in thecaught We withst Coast their retentionBioregion by (WCB)commercial and and Cockburn recreational Sound fishers (CS) in and Owenthe AnchorageWest Coast Bioregion(OA) noted (WCB) (x). and 1 from Cockburn compulsory Sound (CS) catch and statistics Owen Anchorage provided by commercial(OA) notedfishers (• ).to 1 thfrome De compulsorypartment catchof Fisheries. statistics 2provided Sumner by commercial 2008. 3fishers from ato the 2 3 et al. boat-basedDepartment recreational of Fisheries. fishing surveySumner byet al.the 2008. Departm frome nta boat-basedof Fisheries recreational (Sumner fishing survey by the Department of Fisheries (Sumner et al. unpub.). et al. unpub.).

Commercial Recreational Taxa WCB1 CS & OA1 WCB2,3 CS & OA3 Arthropoda, SubPhylum Crustacea Malacostraca Decapoda Penaeidae Metapenaeopsis spp. x Melicertus latisulcatus x Portunidae Portunus pelagicus x x x x Mollusca Bivalvia Ostreoida Pectinidae Amusium balloti x Cephalopoda Octopoda Octopodidae ?Grimpella sp. Hapalochlaena sp. Octopus sp. x x x x Sepiida Sepiidae x x x x Sepia apama Teuthida Loliginidae Sepioteuthis australis x x x x Chordata Pisces Rhinobatiformes Rhinobatidae x x x Aptychotrema vincentiana Trygonorrhina fasciata Rajiformes Urolophidae x x Trygonoptera mucosa Trygonoptera testacea Urolophus paucimaculatus Myliobatidae Myliobatis australis x x x x Clupeiformes Clupeidae Sardinops neopilchardus x x x Spratelloides robustus x x Engraulidae Engraulis australis x x Beloniformes Hemiramphidae x x Hyporhamphus melanochir x x x x Atheriniformes Atherinidae x Atherinomorus vaigiensis

40 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 43 TableTable 3.11. 3.11 Continued.. Continued.

Commercial Recreational Taxa WCB1 CS & OA1 WCB2,3 CS & OA3 Scorpaeniformes Triglidae x x x Chelidonichthys kumu Lepidotrigla papilio Neosebastidae Maxillicosta scabriceps Neosebastes pandus x Platycephalidae x x x Inegocia japonica Onigocia spinosa Platycephalus endrachtensis x Platycephalus longispinis Platycephalus speculator x Perciformes Carangidae x Pseudocaranx georgianus x x x Pseudocaranx wrighti x x Seriola hippos x x x x Trachurus novaezelandiae x x x x Labridae x x x Notolabrus parilus x x Mullidae x x x Upeneichthys vlamingii x Upeneus asymmetricus Upeneus spp. Upeneus tragula Nemipteridae Pentapodus vitta x x x Pomatomidae Pomatomus saltatrix x x x x Sillaginidae x x x Sillago bassensis x x Sillago burrus x x Sillago vittata x x Sparidae Pagrus auratus x x x x Terapontidae x x x x Pelates octolineatus x x Pelsartia humeralis x x Pleuronectiformes Bothidae x x Arnoglossus spp. Paralichthyidae Pseudorhombus jenynsii x x Pleuronectidae x Ammotretis elongatus x x Tetraodontiformes Monacanthidae x x x x Acanthaluteres spilomelanurus Acanthaluteres vittiger x Brachaluteres jacksonianus Eubalichthys mosaicus Monacanthus chinensis Scobinichthys granulatus x

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 41

44 3.3.5 Blue swimmer crab Site selection of blue swimmer crab A temporal comparison of the abundance of all blue swimmer crabs sampled from seven sites in Cockburn Sound is presented in Figures 3.9 & 3.10. Blue swimmer crabs were found at all sites sampled throughout 2007 and 2008. Their numbers were relatively similar between sampling times, although numbers increased significantly in April 2008. Overall, the sites where the highest numbers of crabs were recorded included Jervois Bay, James Point and Mangles Bay, whereas very few crabs were recorded at Owen Anchorage.

Separation of blue swimmer crabs into recruits (0+) and residuals (≥ 1+, Fig. 3.8) revealed trends in abundance that were not previously apparent. The abundance of recruits were significantly different between sites (F(6,12) = 3.37; p = 0.035) with recruit numbers highest at James Point, Jervois Bay and Mangles Bay (least squared means 0.022, 0.020 and 0.019, respectively). Recruit numbers differed significantly between 2007 and 2008 (F(1,12) = 16.69; p = 0.002) with numbers significantly higher in 2008. There was no significant interaction between year and site indicating that numbers of recruits were consistently higher at specific sites, i.e. James Point, Jervois Bay and Mangles Bay, irrespective of year. No recruits were sampled in October/ December 2007 but this was most likely due to the trawl gear on the RV Naturaliste being unable to sample recent recruits for that season (females spawn in September/October).

There was a significant site*year interaction for the abundance of residuals (F(6,12) = 4.72; p = 0.01), where in 2007, sites with the highest numbers of residuals included the Research Area, Garden Island South, and Mangles Bay, whereas in 2008, the highest numbers of residuals were found at Jervois Bay, James Point and Mangles Bay which are the areas with high abundance of recruits as well.

42 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Figure 3.8. Length frequency histograms of blue swimmer crabs (grey bars) fitted with expected frequency distributions plots using Schnute & Fournier (black dashed line, 1980), to determine recruit (0+) and residual ( 1+) modal classes. The dashed red lines represent the size limit for commercial fishers of 130 mm carapace width.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 43 Figure 3.9. Numbers of recruitment (0+) blue swimmer crabs per m2 for each location during the four survey periods. OWA, Owen Anchorage; RSA, Research Area; GIN, Garden Island North; GIS Garden Island South; JVB, Jervois Bay; JPT, James Point; MGB, Mangles Bay.

44 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Figure 3.10. Numbers of residual ( 1+) blue swimmer crabs per m2 for each location during the four survey periods. OWA, Owen Anchorage; RSA, Research Area; GIN, Garden Island North; GIS Garden Island South; JVB, Jervois Bay; JPT, James Point; MGB, Mangles Bay.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 45 3.3.6 Snapper The numbers of snapper caught in the April/May and October/December trawl surveys in 2007 were markedly lower than those in the February and April surveys in 2008 (Fig. 3.11). The sizes of snapper in each sampling period displayed a unimodal distribution. Snapper caught in the April/May survey in 2007 ranged in size between 75 and 116 mm FL with a mean of 98 mm FL (NB mean lengths have been adjusted for the selectivity of the trawl gear). The snapper caught during the following survey approximately six months later in October/December 2007, were much smaller ranging from 43 to 75 mm FL with a mean size of 57 mm FL. The sizes of the snapper in the next two surveys increased progressively in size with means of 75 mm FL (ranging from 47 to 130 mm FL) and 100 mm FL (ranging from 70 to 130 mm FL) in February and April 2008, respectively. Thus, the mean size for snapper was the same for both surveys in April 2007 and 2008. There was a significant difference between the abundances of snapper at each site, sampling period and the interaction between site and sampling period (p < 0.001, Fig. 3.12). The only site where snapper were caught in each survey was James Point (Fig. 3.11). In the surveys in 2007, when the numbers of snapper caught were markedly lower, the sites that had the highest catches were James Point and Jervois Bay. In the February and April surveys in 2008, when the numbers of snapper caught were significantly higher, the numbers of snapper at Garden Island North and James Point consistently had the highest catches. In contrast, Garden Island South and Jervois Bay consistently had the lowest catches. The numbers of snapper caught at the remaining three sites during the 2008 surveys, i.e. Owen Anchorage, Research Area and Mangles Bay, varied greatly within this two-month period (Fig. 3.12). This suggests that the distribution of snapper may vary temporally within Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage and would need further investigation.

46 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Figure 3.11. Frequency histograms of the number of snapper caught (observed, white bars) for each 1 cm size class from each survey period (sample sizes shown). Grey bars represent frequencies adjusted to allow for the selectivity of the sample gear calculated for each sequential 1 cm size class (Table 3.10, Wakefield et al. 2007).

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 47 Figure 3.12. Numbers of snapper per m2 adjusted for each 1 cm size class to allow for selectivity of sampling gear (Table 3.10, Wakefield et al. 2007) and pooled for each location during the four survey periods. OWA, Owen Anchorage; RSA, Research Area; GIN, Garden Island North; GIS Garden Island South; JVB, Jervois Bay; JPT, James Point; MGB, Mangles Bay.

48 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 3.4 Discussion

3.4.1 Community structure Most of the 216 taxa found in this study were either previously known from Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage or they were within their known geographic range in Western Australia. The three exceptions were two tropical species that require confirmation of their identification and an introduced species. Fifty-two species (24 %) were rare, i.e. reported at one site in one survey, and only 35 species (16 %) could be considered common, i.e. found at all sites in most surveys. This large component of rare species in biological faunal communities is common and has been reported from a variety of habitats and locations (Krebs 1994). Mean abundance and biomass differed between survey times with some sites having a higher mean abundance in February 2008 and others in May 2007, and there were similar variations in biomass through time. These variations are most likely due to biological factors such as recruitment variability and/or aggregation behaviour (e.g. schooling) of some species resulting in clustered distributions. We found that no species was typical of a particular survey period except for the cuttlefish Sepia novaehollandiae, which was more abundant in February 2008 and the swimmer crab Portunus rugosus, which had a higher biomass in April/May 2007. As sampling in this study occurred during different seasons in 2007 and 2008, interannular variation in the seasonal composition of the community structure could not be determined. It would be important for future surveys to compare results from previous surveys undertaken at the same time of year to account for possible differences in abundance and biomass as a result of population variation due to seasonality. Species richness and community diversity varied among sites with the southernmost site at Mangles Bay (MGB) having the lowest diversity (27 species) and two of the northernmost sites GIN and OWA, having the highest diversity (50 and 47 species, respectively). Owen Anchorage (OWA) also had the highest evenness value suggesting that this site was more diverse than the other sites, i.e. consisting of more species with similar abundances. The factors responsible for these differences are unknown and were not examined in this study, but could be related to industrial discharges that have influenced water quality in the area (Cambridge et al. 1986; Anon. 1996). Alternatively, intrinsic differences in habitat composition among the sites may have contributed to the differences seen in community structure. Owen Anchorage (OWA) had a different trawled community compared to the other sites, mainly due to a higher number of rare species, e.g. sea cucumber Cladolabes schmeltzii (in October/December 2007), and the higher abundance of common species, e.g. the seastar Stellaster inspinosus, sea cucumber Colochirus quadrangulatus, bighead gurnard perch Neosebastes pandanus and silverbelly Parequula melbournensis. Owen Anchorage is subjected to fewer impacts and to a lesser extent than Cockburn Sound. Thus, the water quality of Owen Anchorage is not considered to be as compromised as Cockburn Sound (Oceanica 2007), and there is evidence of seagrass recovery at the Success and Parmelia Banks (Kendrick et al. 2000; Kendrick et al. 2002), which border Owen Anchorage to the north and south respectively. The seagrass beds at Success Bank are known to have higher species richness than adjacent bare sand areas (Brearley & Wells 1998). The close proximity of these banks to Owen Anchorage may mean species can move between seagrass and sand, and increase species diversity at this site. Larger amounts of seagrass and wrack were collected in trawls in OWA as compared to all other sites in Cockburn Sound thus supporting the suggestion that seagrass proximity could influence the species diversity at this site.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 49 Jervois Bay (JVB) was significantly different from all other sites. This was partly due to a single trawl shot in December 2007 that collected a mixture of sponges and associated fauna, and partly due to the higher abundance of specific species at JVB compared to other sites. For example, higher abundances of the following species were found at JVB, western smooth boxfish Anoplocapros amygdaloides compared to GIS and RSA, southern calamari squid Sepioteuthis australis compared to MGB and JPT, and swimmer crabs Portunus pelagicus and P. rugosus compared to OWA. JVB was shallower than all other sites sampled and had some hard substrate associated with it that provided attachments for sponges and ascidians, which were not found as extensively at the other sites. Earlier studies within Cockburn Sound identified five main benthic habitats or biotypes, including 1) peripheral sills, spits and banks, 2) the central Basin, 3) slopes, 4) hard substrates and 5) the NE shelf (Devaney 1978; Marsh 1978a; Marsh 1978b; Wells 1978; Wilson et al. 1978; Wells & Threlfall 1980); each of these biotypes had a distinguishing faunal assemblage. Five of the sites sampled in Cockburn Sound in this study were located in the central basin biotype (i.e. RSA, GIN, GIS, JPT & MGB), whereas JVB was located within the NE shelf biotype. The seastar Stellaster inspinosus previously had a more widespread distribution and was common throughout the Sound during surveys in the 1950s and 1970s when it was found at JPT (1950s) and GIS (1950s and 1970s) (Marsh 1978b), but was absent from these sites during the current study. This may indicate altered substrate and or water quality at these latter sites as the species is a deposit feeder. However, seastars are known to have variable recruitment and longer term monitoring would be required to ascertain if the current absence of this species at the southernmost sites was due either to poor recruitment in recent years or a decline in the population due to anthropogenic induced changes to the ecosystem. Biomass patterns were heavily influenced by the occasional presence of single large individuals such as the smooth stingray Dasyatis brevicaudata at GIN in one tow (ca 150 kg). Multivariate analyses indicated that abundance was a better discriminator of the differences among sites and surveys in community composition than biomass. Analysis comparing biomass and abundance simultaneously, e.g. abundance-biomass comparison curves (ABC, Warwick & Clarke 1994), can provide valuable information about a community and provide insights into their corresponding environmental health, and would be a useful analysis to undertake on this data. In summary, the findings from the univariate and multivariate analyses supported each other and highlighted some characteristic features of the community composition at various sites. In general, the sites differed from each other with a gradient in community composition from higher diversity and evenness in the north at Owen Anchorage (OWA) than the south at Mangles Bay (MGB), where the community was dominated by a few species. A west to east gradient was also present, although this was largely determined by the differences in the community composition at Jervois Bay (JVB), compared to the other sites sampled.

3.4.2 Commercial and/or recreational species collected The differences in the lists of species that are retained by commercial fishers between the WCB and Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound are representative of the commercial fisheries that operate in the two areas. The fisheries (and their main target species) that operate in the waters of Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound include the West Coast Purse Seine Fishery (targeting mainly Clupeidae (herrings & ilishas) including the Australian sardine Sardinops neopilchardus), Cockburn Sound Fish Net Fishery (mainly Australian herring Arripis georgianus

50 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 and southern garfish Hyporhamphus melanochir), Cockburn Sound Line and Pot Fishery (including blue swimmer crab Portunus pelagicus, snapper Pagrus auratus, octopus, squid and various skates and rays Rhinobatidae and Myliobatidae) and the West Coast Beach Bait Fishery (mostly sandy sprat Hyperlophus vittatus). The two main differences between the two lists of species retained by commercial fishers are due to 1) the permanent closure to trawling in Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound resulting in no commercial fishing exploitation of Penaeidae (including western king prawns) and Ballot’s saucer scallop Amusium balloti and 2) the West Coast Estuarine Fishery that only operates in the Swan/Canning and Peel/Harvey estuaries, ca 20 km north and ca 50 km south of Cockburn Sound, respectively, despite some of the main target species of this fishery also occurring in Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound. In contrast to the commercially retained species, the species that were caught in this study that are retained by recreational fishers were very similar between the WCB and Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound. This is due to no permanent spatial closures for these species (only seasonal for some species) for recreational fishers. Cockburn Sound represents a very popular recreational fishing area within the West Coast Bioregion. In 1996/97, Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage had the second highest level of fishing effort in the West Coast Bioregion (Sumner & Williamson 1999). The area with the highest level of fishing effort in that study was adjacent to Hillarys marina. In 2005/06, Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage remained one of the most intensely fished areas in the WCB, with the fishing effort estimated to be between 10,000-100,000 boat-based fishing hours per year (Sumner et al. 2008).

3.4.3 Blue swimmer crab A significant increase in the abundance of blue swimmer crab recruits in 2008, compared to 2007, was most likely due to greater recruitment success on account of higher numbers of spawning stock and better environmental conditions. The Cockburn Sound blue swimmer crab fishery was closed to all fishing in December 2006 due to a significant decline in stock levels in preceding years. Recovery of this fishery has been relatively slow with crab recruitment in 2007 very poor due to the very low levels of spawning stock in 2006. However, in the absence of fishing for two years, spawning stock levels in 2007 increased resulting in an improvement in recruitment in 2008. This trend is demonstrated by the significant increase in recruit numbers between 2007 and 2008. Interestingly, there was no significant difference in the abundance of residuals (1+) between 2007 and 2008, suggesting that recovery of juveniles and sub-adults has been slow. Trends in recruit (0+) abundance have revealed that Mangles Bay, James Point and Jervois Bay are the best recruitment sites sampled in this study. Lack of an interaction between year and site further confirms that these sites in Cockburn Sound are consistently important recruitment areas irrespective of year. However, further validation of this interannual trend is needed using longer-term datasets. Nevertheless, anecdotal evidence has suggested that these areas may drive the recruitment of blue swimmer crabs in Cockburn Sound. Hence sampling regimes targeting recruits in Cockburn Sound should incorporate Mangles Bay, Jervois Bay and James Point to accurately represent this proportion of the crab population. Site analysis of residuals has revealed that sub-adult (1+) blue swimmer crabs are located throughout Cockburn Sound and do not appear to favour specific areas between years. It is likely that these crabs are transitory and migrate from defined recruitment areas throughout all areas of the Sound. Consequently, future sampling regimes need to include a wide range of sites per year to accurately represent the numbers of residual crabs in the population. Longer- term datasets would be useful in further validating these trends.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 51 3.4.4 Snapper The unimodal size distribution of snapper in each survey corresponded to the sizes expected of 0+ aged snapper (Lenanton 1974; Wakefield 2006; Wakefield et al. 2007). The smallest 0+ snapper were caught during the October/December survey in 2007. This survey coincided with the spawning period of snapper in Cockburn Sound that occurs between September and January each year (Wakefield 2006). Snapper eggs are pelagic and take approximately 24 to 36 hours to hatch depending on water temperature (McGlennon 2004). The snapper larvae then remain pelagic for approximately 17 to 31 days before transitioning to demersal juveniles at a length less than 20 mm (Neira et al. 1998). Thus, the fish collected in October/December were most likely progeny from spawning that occurred early in the 2007 spawning period. It is also likely that the majority of early post-settled juvenile snapper were too small for capture by the trawl gear during this period. This would also explain why the numbers of 0+ snapper caught in the October/December survey were markedly lower than those of the February and April surveys for the same cohort. The contrasting abundances of snapper collected in the trawls in 2008 with those of 2007 and historic data (see Section 4.0) suggests that the spawning of snapper in this area in spring/summer in 2007 was highly successful and may have resulted in a strong recruitment year for this population. The modal size distribution of 0+ snapper from each survey facilitated the estimates of growth of this cohort during this period. The mean size of 0+ age snapper increased by ca 18 mm FL between the October/December 2007 and February 2008 surveys, and a further 25 mm FL by the April 2008 survey. Therefore, these juveniles were growing at an overall rate of ca 10.8 mm per month over approximately their first four months of life. It is difficult to compare these growth rates of snapper in Cockburn Sound with those found by Lenanton (1974) as the first appearance of 0+ snapper was in April in that study, despite sampling occurring over all calendar months using the same mesh size for the trawl nets as this study. However, the mean size of 0+ snapper in April 1974, from this earlier study, was similar at eight to nine cm FL to that in April 2007 and 2008, from this study. Snapper were found to occur, without any obvious preference, at all seven sites in Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound at various abundances independent of the sampling period. The only site to yield snapper for every sampling period was James Point. There were similarities in the abundances of snapper for some sites between the February and April 2008 surveys, but they were not consistent with the two surveys in 2007. This may suggest there is interannual variation in the temporal and spatial distribution of 0+ snapper, which in this instance, could be a reflection of poor and strong recruitment years. Alternatively, these differences could reflect that the home range of 0+ snapper is extensive in Owen Anchorage and Cockburn Sound, with possibly some connectivity between the two locations. The substrate at each of the seven sites was predominantly soft sediment (typically silt), which has been found to be the preferred habitat for juvenile snapper that are less than two years of age, at numerous locations in Australia and New Zealand (e.g. Francis & Williams 1995; Thrush et al. 2002; Fowler & Jennings 2003; Sumpton & Jackson 2005; Wakefield et al. 2007). At approximately 18 to 24 months of age snapper are thought to move from areas of predominantly soft sediment to areas closer to reef margins (Moran & Kangas 2003; Wakefield et al. 2007). Snapper older than approximately six months were not caught during this study. This was surprising considering Lenanton (1974) found snapper to remain in this area for the first 14 months of their lives. However, their absence may be related to the low abundance of the 0+ age cohort sampled in the April/May 2007 survey, which would have been approximately 15 and 17 months old in the surveys in February and April 2008, respectively.

52 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 4.0 Objective 2 C. Wakefield, D. Johnston and D. Harris

Objective 2. Assess changes in the distribution and abundance of blue swimmer crab and snapper by comparison with the Department of Fisheries long-term data set.

4.1 Introduction The Department of Fisheries has been conducting trawl surveys in Cockburn Sound since the early 1970s (Penn 1975; Penn 1977). The location of these trawl surveys, termed the ‘Research Area’ by Lenanton (Fig. 1, 1974), is situated in the deeper waters (ca 19 m) towards the north end of Cockburn Sound and has remained consistent over the years. However, data on blue swimmer crabs and snapper have only been collected since February 2000, except for that published for snapper from trawls conducted in 1971 and 1972 (Lenanton 1974). These historic trawls were always ca 20 minutes and ca 1 nm in duration. Due to the potential range and density of invertebrate species collected during this study it was concluded that 20-minute shots would require a prohibitive timeframe to process and thus were not feasible for a biodiversity study (Kangas et al. 2007). It was also important to assess multiple locations within the Sound to examine the distribution of faunal species and identify ‘representative’ sites for future studies. Therefore, replicated 20-minute trawls at multiple sites would have been logistically difficult in terms of the time that was available for each night of sampling. It was considered that 5-minute trawls would be more appropriate, however, it was unknown whether this time period would provide representative data on blue swimmer crab and snapper abundance and size distributions. Consequently, the abundance and size distributions of crabs collected in three 5-minute trawls were compared to two 20-minute trawls at the RSA site in April 2007 to assess whether 5-minute trawls were an acceptable sampling regime for blue swimmer crabs and snapper. This would also facilitate the comparisons of catch rates from this study with historic trawls to identify any changes in abundance. Originally the objective for this part of the research was to assess changes in distribution, as well as abundance, from the Department of Fisheries long-term data set. This was not possible, as previous trawling by the Department of Fisheries has only occurred in the Research area. However, the greater number of locations sampled in this study can be used to determine an appropriate spatial scale for future surveys to obtain more useful estimates of, for example, catch rates and natural mortality, that are more representative of the home ranges of blue swimmer crabs and juvenile snapper.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 53 4.2 Methods

4.2.1 Trawl sampling There have been a total of 12 trawl surveys, in addition to those from this study, over a period of approximately eight years, i.e. from February 2000 to April 2008, with at least one survey per year (Table 4.1). The trawl surveys during this period have consisted of between four and eight 20-minute trawls (Table 4.1). The fishing gear used during all trawls has remained constant and is identical to that described in Section 2.1.

Table 4.1. Description of trawl surveys conducted by the Department of Fisheries between February 2000 and April 2008 in the Research Area (RSA) of Cockburn Sound.

Number Trawl Date of trawls Duration (mins) Feb 00 820 May 01 420 Feb 02 420 Feb 03 420 Apr 03 520 Jul 03 420 Feb 04 420 Sep 04 520 Dec 04 520 Dec 05 520 May 06 520 Nov 06 520 Apr 07* 3, 25, 20 Dec 07* 35 Feb 08*3 5 Apr 08* 35 * Trawl surveys from the current study

4.2.2 Data analysis Blue swimmer crab The analysis of modality relating to age cohorts for blue swimmer crabs is outlined in Section 3.2.1. To compare the abundances of blue swimmer crabs from trawls in this study with those from previous years, the differences in abundances of recruits and residuals between five and twenty minute trawls needed to be assessed. During the trawl survey in April 2007 two additional 20-minute trawl shots were added at the RSA site (Fig. 1, Tables 2.1 & 4.1). Only abundances of blue swimmer crabs were compared as insufficient numbers of snapper were caught. Blue swimmer crabs caught in the three 5-minute and two 20-minute trawls were pooled to provide a more robust sample size. The mean catch rates of recruit and residual cohorts were compared, with 5-minute trawls expected to yield abundances ca 25 % less than that of 20-minute trawls.

54 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Comparison of blue swimmer crab data from this study with the Department of Fisheries historic data was only possible for the RSA site, as this was the only site sampled historically from May 2001 through to April 2008. While mature blue swimmer crabs at the RSA site are susceptible to capture by the trawl gear throughout the year, juvenile blue swimmer crabs can only be reliably sampled in this area from April to October. Mature females spawn in Cockburn Sound between September and January. Before April, the juveniles are either too small to be captured in the 2-inch mesh of the cod- ends or have yet to recruit to the RSA site from nursery grounds. By November, the recruits are approximately 12 months old and form part of the residual stock. Consequently, data from surveys carried out in February and December 2004, December 2005, November 2006 and December 2007 were not analysed for recruit abundance. Analysis of data from surveys in February 2002 and 2008, however, produced a distinct and unambiguous recruit mode so these samples have been included. It should nevertheless be noted that these data points are likely to underestimate the overall juvenile abundance for that year, as can be seen by the February and April data points in 2008.

Snapper The fork lengths of juvenile (0+) snapper caught from each trawl were categorised into sequential 1 cm size classes and their numbers were adjusted to allow for the selectivity of the fishing gear according to Wakefield et al. (Table 4.2, 2007). The catch rate for each trawl was calculated as the adjusted number of snapper per m-2. Changes in the abundance of juvenile snapper were analysed from the average catch rates (± 1 SE) for each survey from February 2000 to April 2008, for only those sites that were within the ‘Research Area’ (RSA, Fig.1.1). However, to facilitate the comparisons of sampling over a wider area of Cockburn Sound, the average catch rates for those surveys from this current study were estimated using all trawl shots from the seven locations sampled. Estimates of the rate of natural mortality (M.year-1) were obtained and compared from regression analysis of the natural logarithms of the catch rates of juvenile (0+) snapper from the RSA site and all sites combined from the surveys in February and April 2008.

4.3 Results

4.3.1 Blue swimmer crab 20-minute vs. 5-minute trawls A comparison of the numbers of crabs collected in 5-minute versus 20-minute trawls at the RSA site is presented in Table 4.3. The mean abundance of crab recruits and residuals sampled during the 5-minute trawls were 20 % and 27 %, respectively, of the numbers of recruits and residual crabs collected during 20-minute trawls (Table 4.3). The combined mean number of blue swimmer crabs collected during the 5-minute trawls was 25 % of numbers collected during 20-minute trawls. This proportion is the same as was expected for blue swimmer crabs, given that 5-minute trawls are one quarter the length of time and distance of 20-minute trawls. Size distributions obtained during 5-minute trawls provided significantly lower numbers of crabs compared with 20-minute trawls, with the majority of size categories not sampled (Fig. 4.1). This was particularly evident by the relatively low abundance of blue swimmer crabs less than 130 mm CW in 5-minute than 20-minute trawls.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 55 Table 4.3. Comparison of numbers of recruit (0+, Rec.) and residual ( 1+, Res.) blue swimmer crabs caught in three 5-minute and two 20-minute trawls aboard the RV Naturaliste at the RSA site in April 2007.

5-minute trawls 20-minute trawls Observed proportion Rec. Res. All Rec. Res. All Rec. Res. All Trawl 1 5 16 21 20 33 53 Trawl 2 2 7 9 26 38 64 Trawl 3 7 6 13 - - -

Mean 4.67 9.67 14.33 23.0 35.5 58.5 20 % 27 % 25 % (SD) (2.52) (5.51) (6.11) (4.24) (5.45) (7.78) Expected 5 minutes vs. 20 minutes 25 % proportion

3 5-minute trawl

2 n(Female) = 34

1 n(Male) = 9

y 2

3 15 20-minute trawl Frequenc 10 n(Female) = 78

5 n(Male) = 39

15 50 60 70 80 90 100110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Carapace length (mm)

Figure 4.1. Length frequency histograms of the mean number of female (above) and male (below) blue swimmer crabs caught in three 5-minute (above) and two 20-minute (below) trawls at the Research Area (RSA, see Fig. 1.1) in April 2007.

Trends in abundance The mean abundance of recruitment blue swimmer crabs (0+) sampled from the RSA site was relatively constant between 2001 and 2003 (Fig. 4.2). However, recruit abundance declined significantly between 2003 and 2006, with their abundance in May 2006 the lowest measured between 2001 and 2008. Recruit numbers marginally increased in April 2007 and February 2008 with a more marked improvement in numbers in May 2008. Comparison of recruit abundance between the RSA site and the three highest recruitment sites from this study, i.e.

56 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 James Point, Jervois Bay and Mangles Bay, revealed that recruit numbers at the RSA site are substantially lower.

A similar pattern in residual (≥ 1+) blue swimmer crab abundance is evident at the RSA site with numbers declining significantly between February 2003 and November 2006 (Fig. 4.2). Residual blue swimmer crab numbers improved marginally in April 2007 with a significant increase in December 2007. However, this point may be anomalous as residual abundance declined in 2008 to numbers similar to 2006. The comparison of residual (≥ 1+) blue swimmer crab abundances between the RSA site and all sites sampled revealed that the numbers of residuals at the RSA site are consistent with, and therefore representative of, residual abundances in Cockburn Sound.

0.0300 -2

.m 0.0200 (recruits) 0.0050

immer crabs 0.0025 Blue sw Blue 0.0000 Jan 01 Jan 02 Jan03 Jan 04 Jan 05 Jan06 Jan 07 Jan08 Jan 09

0.010 -2 .m

0.008

(residuals) 0.006

0.004 immer crabs 0.002

Blue sw Blue 0.000

Jan 01 Jan 02 Jan 03 Jan 04 Jan 05 Jan 06 Jan 07 Jan08 Jan 09 Date

Figure 4.2. Average number of recruit (0+, above) and residual ( 1+, below) blue swimmer crabs per m2 (± 1 SE), for each trawl survey from March 2001 to April 2008 in the ‘Research Area’ (RSA, white circles), compared with the average number of recruits from the primary recruitment sites of Mangles Bay (MGB), Jervois Bay (JVB) and James Point (JPT, black triangles, above) and the average number of residuals from all sites (black triangles, below) for each of the four trawl surveys from this study.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 57 4.3.2 Snapper The average catch rates of juvenile (0+) snapper (m-2) were relatively low or zero for all trawl surveys with the exception of one in 2000 and two in 2008 (Fig. 4.3). The average catch rates of snapper, from trawl surveys in this current study, for the RSA site were zero in April/May and October/December 2007. They then increased to 0.0076 snapper (m-2) in February 2008, which was the highest amount recorded for all trawl surveys during this period, before a precipitous decline to 0.00043 snapper (m-2) in April 2008 (Fig. 4.3). In comparison, the average catch rates of the seven trawl locations combined, from this current study, were also relatively low or zero in April/May and October/December 2007. These catch rates then also increased in February 2008, to 0.005 snapper (m-2), but did not decline as rapidly in the following survey, i.e. 0.0024 snapper (m-2). This decline in catch rates from the February to April surveys in 2008 is reflected in the estimates of natural mortality (M) where, the estimate of M was much higher for the RSA trawls than all trawl locations combined, i.e. 94.4 %.yr-1 compared to 51.8 %.yr-1 (Fig. 4.3, inset).

0.009 ) -4 -2 m -5 0.008 . -1 M = 0.731 (51.8% . yr ) adj. -6

-2 0.007 m -7 . . 0.006 (Snapper

e -8 0.005 g

Lo -1 M = 2.881 (94.4% . yr ) -9 0.004 Feb Mar Apr May (adjusted) 2008 0.003

Snapper 0.002

0.001

0.000

Jan00 Jan 01 Jan 02 Jan03 Jan 04 Jan05 Jan 06 Jan 07 Jan 08 Jan 09 Date

Figure 4.3. Average number of 0+ juvenile snapper per m2 (± 1 SE), adjusted for each 1 cm size class to allow for selectivity of sampling gear (Table 4.1, Wakefield et al. 2007), for each trawl survey from February 2000 to April 2008 in the ‘Research Area’ (RSA, white circles) and all locations from this study (black triangles). Inset, regression of natural logarithms of the catch rates (± 1 SE) from the trawl surveys in February and April 2008, with their respective estimates of rates of natural mortality (M) shown.

58 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 4.4 Discussion

4.4.1 Blue swimmer crab 5-minute vs. 20-minute trawls The overall number of recruit and residual blue swimmer crabs combined that were caught in the 5-minute trawls was one quarter (25 %) of the number caught in the 20-minute trawls. This is consistent with the expected value as the time and distances sampled were reduced by approximately three quarters. However, it should be noted that the numbers of blue swimmer crabs from 5-minute trawls were less than expected (20 %) for recruits and more than expected (27 %) for residuals. This could reflect small sample sizes or a patchy distribution resulting from the inherent aggressive behaviour between individuals. Thus, it is likely that 5-minute trawls would show more variation in catch rates. Although the catch rates of blue swimmer crabs from 5-minute trawls was similar to the expected value, the size distribution data of males and females maybe inadequate for distinguishing modes in age. It is possible that this trend has been exacerbated by the very low levels of crabs in Cockburn Sound at present (refer introduction) and that in years where crab numbers are more typical, a 5-minute trawl may be satisfactory to obtain representative size distribution data. It is clear that future trawling programs will need to take crab stock levels into consideration when determining appropriate sampling strategies and shot lengths. Given that crabs in Cockburn Sound are currently recovering from years of very low recruitment, an acceptable compromise may be to use 10-minute trawls to achieve desired size distribution information for this species, or sampling more areas using 5-minute trawls.

Trends in abundance Given the sporadic nature of historical sampling at the RSA site it is difficult to ascertain defined trends in recruit and residual abundance (Fig. 4.2). However, with respect to recruits, the marked overall decline in numbers from 2003 to 2006 is consistent with commercial fisheries and research data collected during this time. The slow recovery of recruits in 2007 and 2008, following the closure of the Cockburn Sound blue swimmer crab fishery in December 2006, is also apparent and reflects the overall status of the fishery at this time. Comparison of recruit abundance between the RSA site and known recruitment sites, i.e. James Point, Jervois Bay and Mangles Bay, confirms that recruits are less abundant at the RSA site. Consequently, conclusions on abundance based on recruitment data at the RSA site should be cautious, as it is clearly not a favoured location for juvenile crabs. This however, is less of a concern for residual crab abundance where numbers at the RSA site are similar to numbers collected elsewhere in Cockburn Sound. Numbers of residuals (1+) show a marked decline in abundance between 2003 and 2006, with recovery of residuals in 2007 and 2008 less apparent. The comparison of residual (≥ 1+) blue swimmer crab abundances between the RSA site and all study sites sampled in Cockburn Sound revealed that residual numbers at the RSA site are representative of residual abundances in Cockburn Sound. Nevertheless, given the patchy distribution of crabs it is important to sample a large number of sites to ensure that data is representative of the residual crab population. This is consistent with findings from the site analysis where, unlike recruits, residual crabs were found over a wide spatial area and did not appear to favour specific sites.

4.4.2 Snapper As trawling for snapper in Cockburn Sound occurred in different months each year there are

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 59 two factors that need to be considered that could influence their catch rates, the selectivity of the fishing gear and natural mortality. There is very little if any associated fishing mortality of juvenile snapper in this area. The selectivity of the fishing gear was accounted for by adjusting the abundances of snapper caught in each trawl with respect to their size, according to the selectivity estimates derived by Wakefield et al. (Table 4.2, 2007). Estimates of the rate of natural mortality were not accounted for in the catch rates of snapper; however, it was considered that a decline in catch rates of a single cohort over time would provide these estimates. As the catch rates of snapper from years of relatively poor recruitment were low or zero, estimates of natural mortality could not be obtained. However, two estimates of the rate of natural mortality of snapper were calculated from trawl surveys from February and April 2008, during a year of strong recruitment. These estimates should be treated with caution given the limited number of data points. The two estimates of natural mortality, i.e. 51.8 % and 94.4 % year-1, were vastly different and are most likely an artefact of the spatial scale they were derived from. The larger estimate was for the trawls from the RSA site, whereas the smaller estimate was from the mean catch rate of seven locations covering a wide area of Cockburn and Warnbro Sounds. Given the small size of the RSA site, it is highly likely that snapper could move out of this area, which would result in an overestimate of natural mortality. It is thought that the sample area used to derive the smaller estimate of natural mortality is adequate given the relatively small home range of 0+ snapper (Hartill et al. 2003), coupled with the fact that Lenanton (1974) found them to occur in this marine embayment for at least the first 14 months of their lives. Notwithstanding this, the larger estimate of the rate of natural mortality is within the range of that found for 0+ snapper from Freycinet Estuary in Shark Bay, W.A., i.e. 86 % to 95 % year-1 (Wakefield et al. 2007). To improve this estimate of natural mortality of 0+ snapper in Cockburn Sound further trawl surveys should be conducted in the last half of 2008. The catch rates of 0+ snapper from trawling in Cockburn Sound have provided some insight into the relative strength of annual recruitment. As a large majority of the catch rates since February 2000 were relatively low or zero, it appears that these estimates are not useful for comparing recruitment abundances between years. However, given the relatively higher catch rates from trawls conducted in 2000 and 2008 it does appear that these estimates may be useful in identifying years of strong recruitment of juvenile snapper. Given that the spawning period of snapper in Cockburn Sound occurs mainly between October and December (Wakefield 2006), these relatively high catch rates correspond to high levels of survival of progeny that were spawned in 1999 and 2007. Thus, the period between years of strong recruitment of snapper from Cockburn Sound may be as long as eight years. The marked difference in the abundance between strong and poor recruitment years and the period between strong recruitment years of snapper in Cockburn Sound concurs with that found for snapper from other locations. Variations in annual recruitment have been found to range from four fold in NSW (Ferrell 2004), eight fold in New Zealand (Francis 1993; Francis et al. 1997) and twenty fold in South Australia (Fowler & Jennings 2003). These studies have also noted the period between years of strong recruitment is indiscriminate but may be related to water temperatures during early life (Francis 1993; Francis et al. 1997; Fowler & Jennings 2003). Future trawl surveys for juvenile snapper in Cockburn Sound should consider the high rates of natural mortality, and thus be scheduled within the first few months of the calendar year to obtain the highest possible catch rates. Furthermore, to avoid extremely low or zero catch rates that are unable to provide useful values for recruitment abundance, sampling should incorporate a wider area of Cockburn Sound, such as that sampled in this current study.

60 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 5.0 Objective 3 C. Wakefield, A. Sampey, D. Johnston and J. Fromont

Objective 3. Establish a system to monitor the abundance and distribution of sub-tidal embayment faunal communities in Cockburn Sound.

5.1 Marine ecosystem targets

5.1.1 Indicator species Long term monitoring of an entire biological community is rarely undertaken as identifying all species in a community is time consuming, expensive and requires specialised expertise. For this reason the use of indicator species is often suggested as a means to monitor the health of an ecosystem and to act as surrogates for the entire community. The identification of appropriate indicator species can be difficult and frequently requires some prior knowledge of the system to be monitored and some background information on the species that occur there. Before suitable indicator species can be identified the particular attribute of the environment to be monitored needs to be defined as this will determine what species or suite of species are chosen as indicators. For example, indicator species can be used to monitor long-term change in habitat composition or water quality. Ideally a species needs to have a widespread distribution within the area being monitored and also to be common to ensure sufficient numbers of individuals can be counted so changes in abundance over time can be tracked. Some species that are specific to certain sites are also useful however they need to be in relatively high numbers. Rare species are of limited value as they are too easily missed and the number of replicates required to sample them effectively would be cost prohibitive. The seasonality of variations in abundance needs to be taken into account for many species so monitoring should be scheduled for certain times of the year. Both species that are targeted by commercial and recreational fishers and non-targeted species need to be included to separate the effects of changes in abundances due to natural variation, from variation due to fishing pressure. The species chosen need to capture a range of ecosystem functions such as filter feeders, scavengers, and carnivores. Based on the analyses done to date some suggested species for ongoing monitoring that fit the above criteria are listed in Table 5.1. All these species were widespread and reasonably common and were able to discriminate between sites and times. They also include a mix of targeted and non-targeted species and a mix of ecosystem function and trophic levels.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 61 Table 5.1. List of some possible indicator species, their trophic level and whether they are targeted by commercial and/or recreational fishers. Species were selected based on the CAP and SIMPER analyses. Snapper and blue swimmer crab are not listed, as ongoing monitoring of these species is assumed due to their importance as species targeted by fishers in the area.

SpeciesTaxa Trophic Level Targeted Portunus rugosus crab detritivoreNo Belosquilla laevis crustacean carnivoreYes Metapenaeopsis spp. prawn carnivore/detritivore No Melicertus latisulcatus prawncarnivore/detritivore Yes Sepia novaehollandiae cuttlefish carnivore Yes Sepioteuthis australis squid carnivore Yes Stellaster inspinosus seastardetritivoreNo Anoplocapros amygdaloides fish omnivore No Lepidotrigla papilio fish carnivore Possibly Pseudocalliurichthys goodladi fish carnivore No Note, is not targeted by commercial fishers in Cockburn Sound and Owen Note, MelicertusMelicertus latisulcatus latisulcatu is not targeteds by commercial fishers in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage. Anchorage.

The timeframes of the current project did not allow for all analyses that could have been done on the current dataset to be completed. An example of a potential analysis that was not undertaken is BVStep, a routine available in PRIMER, that is a forward selection backward elimination procedure that examines the entire dataset sequentially removing species to generate a subset of species that provide high correlation (assessed by the Spearman correlation coefficient, ρ) to the entire species dataset (Clarke & Warwick 2001; Mistri et al. 2001; Clarke & Gorley 2006). These results are then checked by plotting an MDS ordination to confirm if the patterns are similar to the entire species dataset. This objective process could have been compared with the analyses presented in this report to confirm the adequacy of the selected indicator species. The process can also be applied in conjunction with environmental data to select indicator species for specific environmental conditions.

5.1.2 Species richness and diversity The structure of the trawled faunal community at each of the seven sites in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage displayed a general decreasing trend in species richness and abundance from north to south. To a much lesser extent there was an east west gradient in the communities. This was predominately due to the community trawled at Jervois Bay (JVB), which encompassed a different habitat from all other sites. JVB was the shallowest site sampled (ca 10 m) and the only site located within the NE shelf biotype, compared to the five other sites in Cockburn Sound which were located in the central basin biotype (Devaney 1978; Marsh 1978a; Marsh 1978b; Wells 1978; Wilson et al. 1978; Wells & Threlfall 1980). This decrease in species richness from north to south has been reported previously for benthic infaunal invertebrates in Cockburn Sound (Anon. 1996). Considerable disturbance to the benthic environment in Cockburn Sound has been reported previously (Cambridge et al. 1986; Cary et al. 1995; Anon. 1996; Walker et al. 2001; Kendrick et al. 2002). One study on the benthic infaunal invertebrate assemblages in Cockburn Sound described a gradient of increasing levels of environmental disturbance from north to south based on abundance-biomass curves (Cary et al. 1995; Anon. 1996). Although this current

62 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 study did not specifically target benthic infaunal invertebrates and abundance-biomass curves were not included in our analysis, this would certainly be a useful approach to undertake on the existing datasets available for Cockburn Sound. This would enable us to see if the north to south trend is evident for different components of the communities (infaunal versus benthic) and how these might have changed over time. These combined results could then form a framework for suggesting future monitoring programmes. Disruption to the benthic environment in Cockburn Sound is most obvious from the large-scale loss of seagrass throughout the shallow subtidal areas (depths < 10 m). The largest loss of seagrass occurred predominantly on the eastern and southern margins between 1967 and 1972 (ca 46 %, 1587 ha), with further losses of 681 ha up to 1999 (totalling ca 77 %, Kendrick et al. 2002). The only site sampled in this study that was in a depth ≤ 10 metres was Jervois Bay on the eastern shelf, where the largest loss of seagrass was reported (Kendrick et al. 2002). This site was found to be markedly different from all others based on a significant difference in the abundance and diversity of its constituent species. The sediments on the north eastern shelf are different from the central basin being composed of course grained calcareous sand compared to the central basin where sediments ranged from fine calcareous sand in the north of the Sound to thick grey mud in the south (Wilson et al. 1978). Whether these differences in this community are merely the result of differences in the habitat, depth or bottom type, or are a result of this seagrass loss cannot be determined from the analyses we have presented in this report. However, the molluscan community on the northeastern shelf was reported as being different from the central basin even in the 1950s prior to the large-scale loss in seagrass (Wilson et al. 1978). How the community at Jervois Bay has changed over time and what factors may be driving these changes can only be determined by analysis of historic datasets in conjunction with environmental datasets. Any hypotheses arising from such analyses would need to then be tested from surveys with an appropriate sampling design such as beyond BACI. It would be beneficial for future monitoring of the trawled community of Cockburn Sound to sample more sites with depths less than 10 metres in both the eastern/southern and northern/ western areas, to increase our understanding of the influence of depth and/or habitat (such as sparsely distributed limestone outcrops on the eastern shelf) on the community structure. This study has comprehensively described the structure of the trawled communities of marine fauna throughout Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage and therefore provided a relative baseline to enable future monitoring to detect changes in their structure. It is recommended that future monitoring should include the seven sites sampled in this study to facilitate consistent comparisons to generate a useful long-term dataset, which has been lacking for many studies of this nature in Cockburn Sound. Furthermore, to facilitate comparisons of the trawled community structure of the marine fauna between disturbed and undisturbed environments, sampling should include sites in unimpacted areas. Warnbro Sound is a nearshore marine embayment with very similar geomorphology (Seddon 1972; Anon. 1996), water circulation (Steedman & Craig 1983; Gersbach 1993) and benthic habitats to Cockburn Sound, but without historic and current intensive anthropogenic usages, and consequently would be a suitable control site.

5.1.3 Ecological considerations associated with commercially and/or recreationally important species As species of commercial and/or recreational importance are subjected to additional levels of mortality associated with fishing practices, their biomass may fluctuate in addition to naturally viability caused by environmental fluctuations. A majority of the commercially and/or recreationally important species identified in this study represent medium to high

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 63 trophic-level species. Thus, changes in their abundance may have broader ecological impacts. Currently, the stock levels of some commercially and recreationally important species are low/ depleted, e.g. blue swimmer crab (Johnston et al. 2007) and snapper (Wise et al. 2007), and for many other species stock levels are unknown, e.g. octopus and squid. The descriptions of the trawled faunal community structure presented in this study represent the current levels of the stocks of commercially and/or recreationally important species in this area. Therefore, if any changes in this trawled community structure are identified in future monitoring, the stock levels of commercially and/or recreationally important species need to be considered. Changes may reflect increases or decreases in predators and prey, respectively, or further flow-on effects associated with commercial and/or recreational fishing practices. In recognition of the low stock levels of adult blue swimmer crab and snapper the Department of Fisheries has recently introduced regulations to further reduce the commercial and recreational effort on adults of these species. If these new regulations are successful an increase in abundance of blue swimmer crab and snapper populations may alter the community structure of the marine fauna in this area.

5.1.4 Blue swimmer crab The findings outlined in this study are based on a low/depleted stock level of adults (≥ 1+, residuals) and a lower than expected recruitment abundance for juveniles (0+, recruits) of blue swimmer crabs. Thus, site selectivity displayed by recruits, i.e. consistently higher abundances at Jervois Bay, James Point and Mangles Bay, may be more widespread as the population size increases. Although the Research Area was found to be representative of trends in abundances for residual blue swimmer crab, the larger area sampled in this study provided improved spatial information and allowed for more accurate estimates of abundance for this embayment. In addition, sampling over a wider area will facilitate the assessment of smaller scale localised changes in abundances for future monitoring. This is especially significant given the north/ south and west/east gradient in community structure previously described. It should also be noted that the preferred locations of recruit blue swimmer crabs were identified to be in the eastern and southern areas of Cockburn Sound, i.e. Jervois Bay, James Point and Mangles Bay, where the largest loss of seagrass has been reported (Kendrick et al. 2002). This suggests that the large-scale disturbance and subsequent loss of seagrass that occurred in these areas may have been beneficial for recruits of this species. Alternatively, given that seagrass meadows are important nursery areas for blue swimmer crab (Orth & van Montfarns 1987; Lipcius et al. 2005; Svane & Cheshire 2005), the large-scale loss of seagrass may have reduced the recruitment capacity from these areas. As there were no sites sampled in seagrass in this study, it is not possible to determine the population structure of blue swimmer crabs associated with this habitat and its influence on recruitment. These are suggestions only and need further investigation. Recruit (0+) blue swimmer crabs were not fully selected by the trawl gear used in this study until approximately March, ca three to four months after spawning. In addition, by the end of June their modal distribution in carapace width, used to define age cohorts, became difficult to distinguish from residual blue swimmer crabs (see Fig. 3.8). This merging of cohort size is most likely due to the slowing of growth of larger/older individuals. In future, sampling to obtain estimates of annual recruitment abundance for this species needs to occur between March and June each year. The analysis of the abundances of residual blue swimmer crabs would therefore need to consider two time periods separately, as overlaps in the size distribution of age cohorts may influence estimates of abundance. These times periods include 1) from January to June when residuals can be easily distinguished from the younger 0+ age cohort and 2) September to December when age cohorts can no longer be distinguished and are all considered to be

64 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 residuals. This period also coincides with the spawning period of this species in this area.

5.1.5 Snapper Only juvenile snapper less than six months of age were collected during this study. Trawling has been able to distinguish between poor and strong recruitment years for this species in Cockburn Sound. Estimates of the annual recruitment abundance of snapper in the Sound were more accurate in this study due to sampling occurring over a wider area, which more accurately reflects the home range of juveniles of this species. Populations of snapper commonly display large fluctuations in annual recruitment (Francis 1993; Francis et al. 1997; Fowler & Jennings 2003; Ferrell 2004). Presently, the adult stock of snapper are at a low/depleted level along the lower west coast of Western Australia and annual estimates of their recruitment abundance from Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage could provide managers with knowledge of expected abundances prior to their vulnerability to fishing, which would be useful information to assess the time required for stock rebuilding. Recent studies on the biology of snapper have identified the relative paucity of recruitment sources for snapper along the lower west coast of Western Australia (Wakefield 2006; St John et al. in press). These origins of recruitment are typically associated with protected nearshore embayments, with juveniles from these embayments found to recruit to stocks over a wide area of coastline (Fowler et al. 2005; Hamer et al. 2005). In South Australia, snapper from a 9+ year old age class collected from > 2000 km of coastline were traced back to two points of origin/nursery areas, i.e. the northern waters of Gulf St Vincent and Spencer Gulf, based on their otolith chemistry (Fowler et al. 2005). Future trawl studies investigating the recruitment of snapper on the lower west coast of Western Australia should strongly consider including Warnbro Sound as well as Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage to assess input to the population from Warnbro Sound. The decrease in abundance of 0+ snapper from the February to April trawl surveys in 2008 between all sites sampled, and the Research Area only, provided contrasting estimates of natural mortality. It is highly likely that the lower estimate (51.8 %) recorded for all sites better represented the home range of juveniles of this species and incorporated any immigration, and was thus a more accurate assessment. However, the higher estimate (94.4 %) was similar to estimates of natural mortality for 0+ snapper from Freycinet Estuary in Shark Bay, Western Australia (Wakefield et al. 2007). To improve the estimate of natural mortality of 0+ snapper, it would be necessary to do an additional trawl survey in the last half of 2008 (which is outside the scope of this report), and in the future at least three surveys a year are needed.

5.2 Future monitoring

5.2.1 Temporal sampling regime As the structure of the trawled faunal community was only described for autumn (April/ May) and spring to early summer (October/December) in 2007 and late summer (February) in 2008, interannual variation in the community structure was not evaluated. There were significant differences in the communities among surveys and it would be useful to track these variations for a few years to determine the consistency of these. However, as long as long term monitoring of the community is undertaken at the same time of the year, interannual variation in the community could be determined for one time period. The frequency required to monitor the trawled community structure in this area would benefit from a periodical approach up to a maximum of every five years, as ecological processes associated with changes in

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 65 the community structure could occur within this period, e.g. the large-scale loss of seagrass from the eastern shelf of Cockburn Sound between 1967 and 1972 (Kendrick et al. 2002). Notwithstanding this, sampling of the trawled community structure of the marine fauna should occur sooner in the event of a potential impact/disruption, e.g. further industrial development such as the proposed Outer Harbour facility for the Port of Fremantle to be positioned in the area slightly north of James Point. Monitoring of commercially and/or recreationally important species, such as blue swimmer crab and snapper, would need to be more frequent. The stock assessment of both blue swimmer crab and snapper would benefit from annual estimates of recruitment abundance, for which sampling would need to be undertaken between March and June for both species, considering issues associated with gear selectivity and mortality. Monitoring of the abundance of residual blue swimmer crabs using trawl gear similar to this study, would need to be kept consistent temporally due to the previously mentioned overlap in modal distributions in carapace width from June onwards. However, monitoring of blue swimmer crab during September to December would provide additional information on their reproductive biology. Thus, sampling of blue swimmer crabs should be undertaken at least twice a year between March to June and September to December. If sampling were to be undertaken three times in a single year than estimates of mortality could be obtained for both blue swimmer crab and snapper. For juvenile snapper that are subject to very little if any fishing mortality (and possibly other indicator species), estimates of natural mortality would provide additional information on the environmental health for this area.

5.2.2 Spatial sampling regime The wider area sampled in this study compared to historic trawl surveys conducted by the Department of Fisheries provided improved estimates of abundances of recruit and residual blue swimmer crabs and recruitment of juvenile (0+) snapper. In addition, it allowed spatial trends in the trawled community structure to be determined. Furthermore, any changes in these species abundances or the community structure in future surveys will be noticeable at a smaller/localised spatial scale. It is recommended that sampling include Warnbro Sound, located ca 5 km south of Cockburn Sound; to 1) describe the trawled community structure of the marine fauna from a very similar nearshore marine embayment that has not had large-scale environmental degradation. This would allow for an improved interpretation of the trawled community structure described in Cockburn Sound. 2) Provide estimates of the recruitment abundance of juvenile snapper from an additional source, as Warnbro Sound is also the location of an annually occurring spawning aggregation (Wakefield 2006), and there is a relative paucity of origins of recruitment of this species along the lower west coast of Western Australia (Wakefield 2006; St John et al. in press). 3) Provide additional estimates of natural mortality for snapper and other indicator species, which would allow for an improved interpretation of estimates from Cockburn Sound. Although trawling can be detrimental to benthic habitats, the central basin of Warnbro Sound is very similar to Cockburn Sound, i.e. largely flat and comprising soft sediment (silt composition). Thus, the benefits of the information gained about the faunal community through the use of short research trawls in the central basin of Warnbro Sound could outweigh the potential impact to the benthos. However, further analysis of existing datasets should occur first to allow a framework for testing of specific hypotheses to be developed prior to more surveys being undertaken.

66 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 6.0 General discussion C. Wakefield, A. Sampey, D. Johnston and J. Fromont

6.1 Summary This study has provided a description of the trawled faunal community at six sites in Cockburn Sound and one site in Owen Anchorage from autumn and spring/early-summer in 2007 and late summer in 2008. The key indicator species that have statistically described differences among these faunal communities have been identified. This study has also provided information on important aspects of the faunal community associated with commercial and/or recreational species in this area. This information will assist managers in their assessment of future Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) in this area through an ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) approach, which considers human impacts on target species, by-catch species and habitats, and any potential indirect impacts of their removal or alteration on the broader ecosystem (Department of Fisheries W.A. 2005). It is unknown whether the detection of changes in the structure of the trawled faunal community from future surveys will provide sufficient capacity to evaluate levels of environmental disturbance. However, the current status of the structure of the trawled faunal community described in this study provides sound quantitative data for which future comparisons can be made. The main findings of each objective in this study were as follows.

6.1.1 Objective 1 Describe the trawled community structure associated with the key indicator species, i.e. blue swimmer crabs and snapper, in Cockburn Sound.

Community structure • The sub-tidal faunal communities sampled by trawls in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage were dominated by small benthic predators and detritivores. • The majority of the species were well within their known geographic distributions and/or have previously been collected in Cockburn Sound or Owen Anchorage. • Sites and surveys were significantly different from each other but the differences in the faunal community were more apparent among sites than among surveys. • With the exception of Jervois Bay, all sites sampled in Cockburn Sound during the current study were located in an area previously identified to have a distinct assemblage, the central basin (Devaney 1978; Marsh 1978a; Marsh 1978b; Wilson et al. 1978; Wells & Threlfall 1980). • The area in Jervois Bay that we sampled had a different community from the other sites due to the presence of sponges and their associated fauna. In previous studies, this area was also identified to have different faunal assemblages. • Differences in the faunal community structure at Jervois Bay largely caused the east to west gradient in sites evident on the MDS ordinations. This was a result of a different community composition at this site compared with other sites, i.e. generally lower total abundance and species richness, but higher abundance of some component species, e.g. southern calamari squid Sepioteuthis australis and western smooth boxfish Anoplocapros amygdaloides.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 67 • A north to south gradient was also evident on the ordinations and this was driven by the higher species diversity, richness and evenness of the faunal communities sampled at Owen Anchorage. All these diversity measures decreased moving southwards into the Sound with the lowest values being recorded at Mangles Bay. These patterns may be related to an environmental impact gradient but this was not investigated in the current study.

Commercially and/or recreationally important species • Only taxa belonging to three of the six phyla that were collected from trawls in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage were retained by commercial and/or recreational fishers in either the west coast bioregion (WCB) or Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage, i.e. Arthropoda, Mollusca and Chordata. • Approximately 13 % (ca 28 species from 24 families) of the taxa collected in this study are retained by commercial fishers in the WCB. • Only ca 15 species from 13 families of these taxa are retained by commercial fishers in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage, due to the permanent closure to trawling and the restriction of the West Coast Estuarine Fishery to the Swan/Canning and Peel/Harvey estuaries. • The number of taxa retained by recreational fishers was slightly higher than that of commercial fishers in the WCB of ca 14 %, comprising ca 30 species from 24 families.

Blue swimmer crab • The abundance of blue swimmer crab recruits (0+) differed significantly between sites with recruit numbers highest at James Point, Jervois Bay and Mangles Bay. A lack of significant interaction between year and site further confirmed these sites are important crab recruitment areas, irrespective of year. • Blue swimmer crab recruit numbers differed significantly between 2007 and 2008, with numbers significantly higher in 2008. This was most likely due to greater recruitment success on account of a slow recovery of spawning stock following the collapse of this fishery in 2006 and subsequent closure to commercial and recreational fishing in Cockburn Sound. • There did not appear to be any site selectivity by residual (≥ 1+) crabs with abundances highest in 2007 at the Research Area, Garden Island South and Mangles Bay, compared to Jervois Bay, James Point and Mangles Bay in 2008.

Snapper • Only juvenile snapper less than six months of age, i.e. 0+ age cohort, were collected in this study. • There was a marked difference in the overall abundances of 0+ snapper between the 2006 and 2007 year classes. • There was no site selectivity displayed by the 0+ snapper between surveys. However, there were some consistencies in abundances between the February and April surveys in 2008, where the numbers of snapper caught were consistently higher for GIN and JPT and consistently lower for GIS and JVB. The remaining three sites, i.e. OWA, RSA and MGB, showed large fluctuations in abundance between these two sampling periods. • The only site where 0+ snapper were collected in each survey was JPT.

68 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 • Estimates of growth of 0+ snapper were obtained from the 2007 year-class. The mean growth rate was estimated as 10.8 mm per month for their first four months of life.

6.1.2 Objective 2 Assess changes in the distribution and abundance of blue swimmer crab and snapper by comparison with the Department of Fisheries long-term data set.

Blue swimmer crab • The total number of blue swimmer crab recruits (0+) and residuals (≥ 1+) sampled during 5-minute trawls was one quarter (25 %) of that in the 20-minute trawls, which was consistent with expected catch rate comparisons (25 %). • Size distributions obtained during 5-minute trawls provided significantly lower numbers of blue swimmer crabs compared with 20-minute trawls, with the majority of size categories not sampled. This trend may be exacerbated by very low blue swimmer crab abundance in Cockburn Sound at present, so future trawling programs will need to take current stock levels into account when determining appropriate shot lengths. • Historic trawls undertaken by the Department of Fisheries since 2000 at RSA showed a decline in blue swimmer crab recruitment and residual abundance between 2003 and 2006 which is consistent with commercial fisheries and research data collected during this time. Slow recovery of recruits during 2007 and 2008 is also apparent and reflects the overall status of the fishery at this time. • Comparison of recruit abundances between the RSA site and known blue swimmer crab recruitment sites, i.e. James Point, Jervois Bay and Mangles Bay, confirmed that recruits are less abundant at the RSA site and thus have not provided useful estimates of recruitment historically. • Trends in the mean abundance of residual blue swimmer crabs at the RSA site are similar to the mean abundance of residuals from all other sites combined in Cockburn Sound.

Snapper • The mean abundances of juvenile snapper from historic trawls undertaken by the Department of Fisheries since February 2000 at the RSA site were able to distinguish between strong and poor recruitment years. • There have been two strong years of recruitment of juvenile snapper in Cockburn Sound in recent years, i.e. the 1999 and 2007 year-classes. • The mean abundances of juvenile snapper from these historic trawls during poor recruitment years have been low or zero, most likely resulting from the home range of juvenile snapper being larger than the RSA site, along with this site not being highly selected/preferred by juvenile snapper, evident from relatively low abundances caught at this site during this study. • Limitations in the historic data being from one site were also evident in two contrasting estimates of natural mortality that were based on two spatial scales for the 2007 year-class. Natural mortality was estimated to be 51.8 % for juvenile snapper using all seven sites in Cockburn and Owen Anchorage compared to 94.4 % using RSA only. Although the spatial scale used for the lower estimate encompasses the home range of juvenile snapper and is therefore considered more accurate, the higher estimate could not be ruled out given

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 69 it is within the range for juvenile snapper from Freycinet Estuary in Shark Bay, Western Australia. However, these estimates need to be treated with caution given the limited data used, and need further investigation.

6.1.3 Objective 3 Establish a system to monitor the abundance and distribution of sub-tidal embayment faunal communities in Cockburn Sound.

Temporal sampling regime • Significant differences were found in the trawled faunal community structure among survey periods in this study. Consequently, trawled community structure needs to be described from surveys conducted at the same time of the year. However, the periodicity of sampling in this study did not allow for interannual variation of the communities to be determined, which would need further investigation. • The frequency required to monitor the trawled community structure in this area would benefit from a periodical approach of less than five years, given the timeframes of environmental changes, for example the large-scale loss of seagrass witnessed within this time frame, i.e. 1967 to 1972. Alternatively, the trawled faunal community structure would need to be described in the event of potential disturbance from a major development in the area, e.g. the proposed Outer Harbour facility for the Port of Fremantle. • Monitoring of commercially and/or recreationally important species would need to be more frequent than monitoring of the faunal community as fishing pressure on these populations is ongoing and also to detect any influence that fisheries management policies being implemented in the area would have on the stocks. • Sampling needs to be undertaken between March and June each year to obtain useful estimates of the annual abundance of recruits of blue swimmer crab and snapper. • To monitor the annual abundance and associated reproductive biology of residual blue swimmer crab, sampling would need to be undertaken between September and December each year. • To estimate the annual rates of mortality (specifically natural mortality where possible) for key indicator species and commercially and/or recreationally important species, e.g. blue swimmer crab and snapper, sampling would need to be undertaken at least three times in a single year.

Spatial sampling regime • The wider area sampled in this study, i.e. six sites in Cockburn Sound and one site in Owen Anchorage, than in historic trawl surveys was beneficial and 1) allowed for spatial trends in the trawled community structure to be determined; 2) improved our understanding of the spatial distribution of blue swimmer crab recruits; and 3) improved estimates of abundances of recruit (0+) and residual (≥ 1+) blue swimmer crab and recruitment of juvenile snapper (0+). • Future sampling regimes would benefit from using the seven sites from this study, as changes in the trawled faunal community structure could be detected at a smaller/localised spatial scale. • Future monitoring programs should incorporate Jervois Bay, James Point and Mangles Bay to accurately represent crab recruits, whereas a wide range of sites is needed to accurately represent residual crabs.

70 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 • Future sampling should consider additional sites in depths less than ten metres in north- western and south-eastern areas of Cockburn Sound to determine the influence of some important factors, i.e. depth, habitat, and relative distance from previously identified highly disturbed areas. • Future surveys should consider sampling in Warnbro Sound to 1) allow an improved interpretation of the trawled faunal community structure described in Cockburn Sound in this study, compared to the faunal community from a similar nearby marine embayment that has not had large-scale environmental disturbance; 2) improve our understanding of recruitment abundances of blue swimmer crab and snapper for the lower west coast, for which the relative paucity of protected nearshore marine embayments are an integral part of their life history, and 3) allow comparisons of the natural mortality rates of key indicator species and juvenile blue swimmer crab and snapper between Cockburn Sound and Warnbro Sound, to provide insight into the probability of survival between an environmentally impacted and non-impacted embayment/recruitment areas.

6.2 Future research The results from these surveys represent a snapshot of the status of the subtidal faunal communities collected by trawls in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage at this time, but these results alone do not enable us to interpret how the faunal communities may have changed historically. The current project did not allow for incorporation and analysis of historic datasets of the faunal communities of Cockburn Sound. Historic datasets for Cockburn Sound and adjacent areas are available from Department of Fisheries trawl studies (Penn 1977; Dybdahl 1979), Western Australian Museum and Western Australian Naturalist Club invertebrate surveys from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s (Devaney 1978; Wells 1978; Wilson et al. 1978; Marsh 1978a; Marsh 1978b; Wells and Threlfall 1980), a survey of the deep basin infaunal invertebrates of Cockburn and Warnbro Sounds (Cary et al. 1995), and a variety of studies undertaken by environmental consultants. However, these data are not readily accessible as the majority are in unpublished reports, and the older datasets are not digitised. Preliminary reading of these reports indicates that they could provide a useful insight into how the faunal communities may have changed over time, for example the absence of Stellaster inspinosus from the southern sites in Cockburn Sound (current study) when previously a widespread distribution had been reported (Marsh 1978b). Compilation and digitisation of these historic datasets would be a very useful exercise. Combining historic information with the data collected from this study would provide a comprehensive and more complete dataset that could be analysed with modern statistical methods. This would provide baseline summary information and suggest a framework for future studies. The problem with comparing species richness and diversity measures from different sampling designs can be ameliorated by calculating a measure of taxonomic distinctness which is a standardised measure of species richness and can be used to compare results from different sampling designs (Warwick & Clarke 1995; Warwick & Clarke 1998; Clarke & Warwick 1999; Price et al. 1999; Rogers et al. 1999; Clarke & Warwick 2001; Salas et al. 2006). The analyses undertaken in this report only considered components of the fauna that were identified to species, potentially missing out important members of the community including sessile invertebrates such as the orange sea pens Cavernularia spp. and colonial and solitary ascidians that could not be identified to species because of lack of expertise. The analyses undertaken could be repeated on the entire dataset at the Class and Phylum levels to determine if the patterns found from the species dataset were also found when all taxa were included.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 71 No effort was made during the current study to rank sites on their perceived level of health or pollution and, due to time constraints, no control site was incorporated into the sampling design to compare the study site with a less impacted embayment. It would be very useful to expand the sites surveyed to include a comparatively undisturbed site with similar environmental conditions and benthic habitat structure such as Warnbro Sound. This would allow an expanded spatial and temporal comparison of the faunal community of Cockburn Sound. A useful approach for future work would be to have environmental managers give site rankings to areas based on factors such as level of pollution. This approach has been employed for sites and estuaries in the Auckland region with promising results (Hewitt et al. 2005). The addition of environmental data to this biological dataset would allow explicit linking of the faunal community to environmental parameters using analyses such as LINKTree and BIOENV (Clarke & Gorley 2006). Another method not able to be undertaken in this study would be to perform an abundance- biomass comparison (ABC) for the different sites (Warwick & Clarke 1994). ABC plots two curves, one for cumulative abundance and one for cumulative biomass against species rank. For many marine macrobenthic communities a shift occurs from a higher biomass dominated community to a community dominated by higher abundance with increasing disturbance. This shift is based on the ecological theory that in undisturbed communities the species will be large bodied and longer lived (K – selected), and will dominate the community by weight (biomass). In comparison, communities with high disturbance will be dominated by small bodied, short lived species (r-selected) which will dominate the community by abundance. Changes in the abundance biomass relationship over time will also provide information for comparisons with other communities. It would be very useful to produce a regional field guide to the marine fauna of Cockburn Sound and surrounding areas. This would need to have colour photographs of the species along with a description of the fauna and key diagnostic features. Currently, there is no local field guide available that provides this information, with people interested in identifying the fauna of Cockburn Sound having to access a variety of sources, including specialised taxonomic texts, to be able to identify the species. The Department of Fisheries has collected population data, i.e. counts and carapace widths, for western king prawns (Melicertus latisulcatus) from the historic trawls outlined in Section 4.0. Although this species was not recognised as being retained by commercial and recreational fishers in Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage, there is a commercial trawl fishery that targets them nearby in Comet Bay, ca 13 km south of Cockburn Sound. Thus, information on this species from an unfished population in Cockburn Sound would provide useful comparisons with that of a fished population. The importance of recruitment of juvenile snapper from Cockburn Sound and Owen Anchorage to the adult stocks along the west coast of Western Australia needs further investigation (e.g. age related otolith microchemistry, genetics). This study has outlined some key indicator species for which little is known on their biology and the importance of Cockburn Sound in terms of their life history strategy. More detailed information on their distribution and abundance with respect to habitat, topography and anthropogenic structures (e.g. dredged channels, rock walls) within Cockburn Sound would assist in the interpretation of the faunal communities discussed in this study.

72 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 7.0 Acknowledgements We would like to extend our gratitude to the numerous staff and volunteers who assisted with this project. Thanks to the crew of the RV Naturaliste, Mark Baxter, Kim Hillier, Tim Shepherd and Richard Maddever, and all other fill-in crew members. In addition, thank you to the staff at the Department of Fisheries and volunteers from the Western Australian Museum, i.e. Glenn Moore, Jade Herwig, Rachael Arnold, for assisting during field trips. We would also like to thank the staff from the Western Australian Museum and the Department of Fisheries, whose expertise in specimen identifications were invaluable. These included Molluscs: Shirley Slack- Smith, Corey Whisson, Glad Hanson, Hugh Morrison, Clay Bryce; Echinoderms: Loisette Marsh; Porifera: Jane Fromont; Crustaceans and all other phyla: Alison Sampey; Fish: Ian Keay, Sue Morrison, Barry Hutchins. Thanks also to Roy Melville-Smith, Nick Caputi, Brett Molony and Rick Fletcher for their constructive comments on final drafts of this report. We would also like to acknowledge the contribution of Jill St John to writing the project proposal and securing funding for this project as well as her input in the early stages of the research and development of experimental design and methodology. This project was funded by National Heritage Trust, Swan Catchment Council of Western Australia and the Department of Fisheries.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 73 8.0 References ABRS (2008). Australian Biological Resources Study Fauna. [Online]. www.environment.gov.au/ biodiversity/abrs/online-resources/fauna/index.html. Anderson, M. J. & Willis, T. J. (2003). Canonical analysis of principal coordinates: an ecologically meaningful approach for constrained ordination. Ecology 84, 511-525. Anon. (1993). Convention on Biological Diversity. United Nations Treaty Series 1993. Anon. (1996). Southern Metropolitan Coastal Waters Study. Department of Environmental Protection, Government of Western Australia. Perth, Western Australia. Anon. (1999). Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Anon. (2005). State Environmental (Cockburn Sound) Policy 2005. State Environmental Policy Series 01. Government of Western Australia. Ayvazian, S. G. & Hyndes, G. A. (1995). Surf-zone fish assemblages in south-western Australia: do adjacent nearshore habitats and the warm Leeuwin Current influence the characteristics of the fish fauna? Marine Biology 122, 527-536. Brearley, A. & Wells, F. E. (1998). Cockburn Cement Ltd. environmental management plan project S1: Ecological significance of seagrass Task 8: Invertebrates Phase 3 Report. Submitted by the University of Western Australia and Western Australian Museum to Cockburn Cement Ltd., Perth. Cambridge, M. L. & McComb, A. J. (1984). The loss of seagrass in Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. I. The time course and magnitude of seagrass decline in relation to industrial development. Aquatic Botany 20, 229-243. Cambridge, M. L., Chiffings, A. W., Brittan, C., Moore, L. & McComb, A. J. (1986). Loss of seagrass in Cockburn Sound, Western Australia: II. Possible causes of seagrass decline. Aquatic Botany 24, 269-285. Cary, J. L., Simpson, C. J. & Wells, F. (1995). A comparative study of the macrobenthic invertebrate fauna of the deep basin of Cockburn Sound and Warnbro Sound, Western Australia. Technical Series No. 68. Department of Environmental Protection. Perth, Western Australia. Chaplin, J., Yap, E. S., Sezmis, E. & Potter, I. C. (2001). Genetic (microsatellite) determination of the stock structure of the blue swimmer crab in Australia. Fisheries Research and Development Corporation Report, Project No. 98/118. Chaplin, J. A. & Sezmis, E. (2008). A genetic assessment of the relationships among the assemblages of the blue swimmer crab, Portunus pelagicus, in Cockburn Sound, the Swan River Estuary and Warnbro Sound. Final Report prepared for the Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. Centre for Fish and Fisheries Research, Murdoch University. Clarke, K. R. & Warwick, R. M. (1999). The taxonomic distinctness measure of biodiversity: weighting of step lengths between hierarchical levels. Marine Ecology Progress Series 184, 21-29. Clarke, K. R. & Warwick, R. M. (2001). Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation, 2nd edition. PRIMER-E. Plymouth, United Kingdom. Clarke, K. R. & Gorley, R. N. (2006). PRIMER v6: User Manual/Tutorial. PRIMER-E. Plymouth, UK. Crossland, J. (1980). The number of snapper, Chrysophrys auratus (Forster), in the Hauraki Gulf, New Zealand, based on egg surveys in 1974-75 and 1975-76. Fisheries Research Bulletin No. 22. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries. Wellington, New Zealand. CSIRO (2008). Codes for Australian Aquatic Biota (CAAB). [Online]. www.marine.csiro.au/caab. D.A. Lord & Associates Pty Ltd (2001). The state of Cockburn Sound ‘A Pressure-State-Response- Report’. Pressure-State-Response Report No. 01/187/1. Cockburn Sound Management Council,

74 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Waters and Rivers Commission. Perth, Western Australia. Davie, P. (2002). Crustacea: Malacostraca: Eucarida (Part 2): Decapoda - Anomura, Brachyura. Zoological Catalogue of Australia 19, 1-641. DEC (2006). Draft - A 100-year Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Western Australia: Blueprint to the Bicentenary in 2029. Department of Environmental Conservation, Government of Western Australia. DEC (2008). A Strategic Plan for Biodiversity Conservation Research 2008 - 2017. Department of Environment and Conservation, Government of Western Australia. Department of Fisheries W.A. (2005). Who We Are and What We Do. Department of Fisheries annual report 2004-2005 to the Western Australian Parliament. Perth, Western Australia. Devaney, D. M. (1978). The Benthic Fauna of Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. Part III: Echinodermata: Ophiuroida. Western Australian Museum. Perth, Western Australia. Doak, C. (2004). Hydrodynamic modeling of snapper (Pagrus auratus) eggs and larvae in Cockburn Sound. [Honours Thesis]. Centre for Water Research, University of Western Australia, 81 pp. Dybdahl, R. E. (1979). Technical report on fish productivity. An assessment of the marine faunal resources of Cockburn Sound. Department of Conservation and Environment, Report No. 4. Perth, Western Australia. Edgar, G. (1997). Australian marine life: the plants and animals of temperate waters. Reed New Holland. Sydney, Australia. Edgar, G. J. (1990). Predator-prey interactions in seagrass beds. II. Distribution and diet of the blue manna crab Portunus pelagicus Linnaeus at Cliff Head, Western Australia. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 139, 23-32. Ferrell, D. J. (2004). Young-of-the-year snapper and recruitment to the NSW fishery. [Ph.D. Thesis]. School of Biological Sciences, University of Sydney, 181 pp. Finn, H. C. (2005). Conservation biology of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops sp.) in Perth metropolitan waters. [PhD Thesis]. Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Murdoch University, Western Australia. Fowler, A. J. & Jennings, P. R. (2003). Dynamics in 0+ recruitment and early life history for snapper (Pagrus auratus, Sparidae) in South Australia. Marine and Freshwater Research 54, 941-956. Fowler, A. J., Gillanders, B. M. & Hall, K. C. (2005). Relationships between elemental concentration and age from otoliths of adult snapper (Pagrus auratus, Sparidae): implications for movement and stock structure. Marine and Freshwater Research 56, 661-676. Francis, M. P. (1993). Does water temperature determine year class strength in New Zealand snapper (Pagrus auratus)? Fisheries Oceanography 2, 65-72. Francis, M. P. (1995). Spatial and seasonal variation in the abundance of juvenile snapper (Pagrus auratus) in the north-western Hauraki Gulf. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 29, 565-579. Francis, M. P. & Williams, M. W. (1995). Diel variation in trawl catch rates of Pagrus auratus (Sparidae). Fisheries Research 24, 301-310. Francis, M. P., Langley, A. D. & Gilbert, D. J. (1997). Prediction of snapper (Pagrus auratus) recruitment from sea surface temperature. In: (Eds.), Developing and sustaining world fisheries resources: The state of science and management, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organ., Collingwood (Australia). Gaughan, D. J., Fletcher, W. J., Tregonning, R. J. & Goh, J. (1996). Aspects of the biology and stock assessment of the whitebait, Hyperlophus vittatus, in south western Australia. Fisheries Research Report No.108. Fisheries Department of Western Australia.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 75 Gersbach, G. (1993). Physical oceanography of Warnbro Sound. [Honours Thesis]. Department of Environmental Engineering, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia. Griffith, J. K. & Fromont, J. (1998). A catalogue of recent Cnidaria type specimens in the Western Australian Museum of Natural Science, Perth. Records of the Western Australian Museum 19, 223-239. Haas, C. G. & Jones, D. S. (2000). Marine introductions to Western Australia, with a focus on crustaceans. Geodiversity: Readings in Australian geography at the close of the 20th century. Australian Defence Force Academy, Special Publications Series 6, 37-44. Hale, H. (1929). The Crustaceans of South Australia. Government Printer. Hamer, P. A., Jenkins, G. P. & Gillanders, B. M. (2005). Chemical tags in otoliths indicate the importance of local and distant settlement areas to populations of a temperate sparid, Pagrus auratus. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 62, 623-630. Hartill, B. W., Morrison, M. A., Smith, M. D., Boubee, J. & Parsons, D. M. (2003). Diurnal and tidal movements of snapper (Pagrus auratus, Sparidae) in an estuarine environment. Marine and Freshwater Research 54, 931-940. Hewitt, J. E., Anderson, M. J. & Thrush, S. F. (2005). Assessing and monitoring ecological community health in marine systems. Ecological Applications 15, 942-953. Hooper, J. & Van Soest, R. (2002). Systema Porifera: A Guide to the Classification of Sponges. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. New York, U.S.A.. Huisman, J. M., Jones, D. S., Wells, F. E. & Burton, T. (2008). Introduced marine biota in Western Australian waters. Records of the Western Australian Museum 25, 1-44. Hutchins, B. (1994). A survey of the nearshore reef fish fauna of Western Australia’s west and south coasts - The Leeuwin Privince. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement No. 46, 1-66. Hyndes, G. A., Platell, M. E., Potter, I. C. & Lenanton, R. C. J. (1998). Age composition, growth, reproductive biology, and recruitment of king george whiting, Sillaginodes punctata, in coastal waters of southwestern Australia. Fishery Bulletin 96, 258-270. Jackson, G. (2007). Fisheries biology and management of pink snapper Pagrus auratus, in the inner gulfs of Shark Bay, Western Australia. [PhD Thesis]. Centre for Fish and Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Western Australia. Johnston, D. J., Harris, D. C. & Syers, C. J. (2007). West Coast Blue Swimmer Crab Fishery status report. In: W. J. Fletcher and K. Santoro (Eds.), State of the Fisheries Report 2006/07, Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. Kangas, M. I. (2000). Synopsis of the biology and exploitation of the blue swimmer crab, Portunus pelagicus Linnaeus, in Western Australia. Fisheries Research Report No. 121. Department of Fisheries. Western Australia. Kangas, M. I., Morrison, S., Unsworth, P., Lai, E., Wright, I. & Thomson, A. (2007). Development of biodiversity and habitat monitoring systems for key trawl fisheries in Western Australia. Final report to Fisheries Research and Development Corporation on Project No. 2002/038. Fisheries Research Report No. 160. Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. Kendrick, G. A., Hegge, B. J., Wyllie, A., Davidson, A. & Lord, D. A. (2000). Changes in seagrass cover on Success and Parmelia Banks, Western Australia between 1965 and 1995. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 50, 341-353. Kendrick, G. A., Aylwarda, M. J., Hegge, B. J., Cambridge, M. L., Hillman, K., Wyllie, A. & Lord, D. A. (2002). Changes in seagrass coverage in Cockburn Sound, Western Australia between 1967 and 1999. Aquatic Botany 73, 75-87.

76 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Krebs, C. J. (1994). Ecology: the experimental analysis of distribution and abundance. 4th edition. Harper Collins College Publishers New York. New York, USA. Lamprell, K. & Whitehead, T. (1992). Bivalves of Australia. Vol. 1. Backhuys Publishers. Leiden, Netherlands. Lamprell, K. & Healy, J. (1998). Bivalves of Australia. Vol. 2. Backhuys Publishers. Leiden, Netherlands. Lenanton, R. C. J. (1974). The abundance and size composition of trawled juvenile snapper Chrysophrys unicolor (Quoy and Gaimard) from Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 25, 281-285. Lipcius, R. N., Seitz, R. D., Seebo, M. S. & Colon-Carrion, D. (2005). Density, abundance and survival of the blue crab in seagrass and unstructured salt marsh nurseries of Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Experimental Biology 319, 69-80. Maddern, M. G. & Morrison, S. (in press). Introduction of the streaked goby Acentrogobius pflaumii (Bleeker 1853) (Pisces: Gobiidae) into southwestern Australia. Australian Zoologist 34. Marine Futures Biodiversity Team (2007). Marine Futures Draft Biodiversity Sampling Plan. January 2007. University of Western Australia. Marsh, L. M. (1978a). The Benthic Fauna of Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. Part II: Coelenterata. Western Australian Museum. Perth, Western Australia. Marsh, L. M. (1978b). The Benthic Fauna of Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. Part IV: Echinodermata; Crinoidea, Asteroidea, Echinoidea and Holothuroidea. Western Australian Museum. Perth, Western Australia. McGlennon, D. (2004). The fisheries biology and population dynamics of snapper Pagrus auratus in northern Spencer Gulf, South Australia. [Ph.D. Thesis]. Department of Environmental Biology, University of Adelaide, Australia. 219 pp. Mistri, M., Fano, E. A. & Rossi, R. (2001). Redundancy of macrobenthos from lagoonal habitats in the Adriatic Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 215, 289-296. Moran, M. & Kangas, M. (2003). The effects of the trawl fishery on the stock of pink snapper, Pagrus auratus, in Denham Sound, Shark Bay. Fisheries Research Bulletin 31. Department of Fisheries. Western Australia. Moran, M., Stephenson, P., Gaughan, D. J., Tapp, N. & Moore, J. (2004). Minimising the cost of future stock monitoring, and assessment of the potential for increased yields from the oceanic snapper, Pagrus auratus, stock off Shark Bay. FRDC Project No. 2000/138. Department of Fisheries. Western Australia. Nahas, E. L., Jackson, G., Pattiaratchi, C. B. & Ivey, G. N. (2003). Hydrodynamic modelling of snapper Pagrus auratus egg and larval dispersal in Shark Bay, Western Australia: reproductive isolation at a fine spatial scale. Marine Ecology Progress Series 265, 213-226. Neira, F. J., Miskiewicz, A. G. & Trnski, T. (1998). Larvae of temperate Australian fishes: laboratory guide for larval fish identification. University of Western Australia Press. Perth, Western Australia. Norman, M. & Reid, A. (2000). A guide to Squid, Cuttlefish and Octopuses of Australasia. The Gould League of Australia and CSIRO Australia. Victoria, Australia. Oceanica (2007). Owen Anchorage: Pressure State Response Report. Cockburn Sound Management Council. Perth, Western Australia. Orth, R. J. & van Montfarns, J. (1987). Utilization of a seagrass meadow and tidal marsh by blue crabs Callinectes sapidus. 1. Seasonal and annual variations in abundance with emphasis on post- settlement juveniles. Marine Ecology Progress Series 41, 283-294.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 77 Paulin, C. D. (1990). Pagrus auratus, a new combination for the species known as ‘snapper’ in Australasian waters (Pisces: Sparidae). New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 24, 259-265. Penn, J. W. (1975). Tagging experiments with the western king prawn, Penaeus latisulcatus Kishinouye, I survival, growth and reproduction of tagged prawns. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 26, 197-211. Penn, J. W. (1976). Tagging experiments with the western king prawn, Penaeus latisulcatus Kishinouye, II Population parameters. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 27, 239-250. Penn, J. W. (1977). Trawl caught fish and crustaceans from Cockburn Sound. Report No. 20. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Western Australia. Pérez Farfarnte, I. & Kensley, B. (1997). Penaeoid and sergestoid shrimps and prawns of the world: keys and diagnosis for the families and genera. Mémoires du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle 175, 1-233. Poore, G. (2004). Marine Decapod Crustacea of Southern Australia: a guide to identification. CSIRO Publishing. Potter, I. C., de Lestang, S. & Melville-Smith, R. (2001). The collection of biological data required for management of the blue swimmer crab fishery in the central and lower west coasts of Australia. FRDC Project No. 97/137. Centre for Fish and Fisheries Research, Murdoch University. Western Australia. Price, A. R. G., Keeling, M. J. & Callaghan, C. J. (1999). Ocean scale patterns of ‘biodiversity’ of Atlantic asteroids determined from taxonomic distinctness and other measures. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 66, 187-203. Quinn, G. P. & Keough, M. J. (2002). Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK. R Development Core Team (2008). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org. R foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria. Rogers, S. I., Clarke, K. R. & Reynolds, J. D. (1999). The taxonomic distinctness of coastal bottom- dwelling fish communities of the North-east Atlantic. Journal of Animal Ecology 68, 769-782. Rowe, F. W. E. & Gates, J. (1995). Echinodermata. In: A. Wells (Eds.), Zoological Catalogue of Australia. Vol. 33. Melbourne, Australia, CSIRO Australia. Salas, F., Patricio, J., Marcos, C., Pardal, M. A., Pérez-Ruzafa, A. & Marques, J. C. (2006). Are taxonomic distinctness measures compliant to other ecological indicators in assessing ecological status? Marine Pollution Bulletin 52, 817-829. Schnute, J. & Fournier, D. (1980). A new approach to length-frequency analysis: growth structure. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 37, 1337-1351. Seddon, G. (1972). Sense Of Place. University of Western Australia Press. Nedlands, Western Australia. Shepherd, S. & Thomas, I. (1982). Marine Invertebrates of Southern Australia. Part 1. Government Printer. Adelaide, Australia. Shepherd, S. & Thomas, I. (1989). Marine Invertebrates of Southern Australia. Part 2. Government Printer. Adelaide, Australia. Shepherd, S. & Davies, M. (1997). Marine Invertebrates of Southern Australia. Part 3. South Australian Research and Development Institute. Adelaide, Australia. Simpson, C. J., Burt, J. S., Cary, J. L., D’Adamo, N., Masini, R. J. & Mills, D. A. (1993). Southern metropolitan coastal waters study (1991-1994): Progress report August 1993. Technical Series 53. Environmental Protection Authority. Western Australia.

78 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Smith, H. (1982). Blue crabs in South Australia - their status, potential and biology. South Australian Fishing Industry Council 6, 33-51. St John, J., Keay, I., Wise, B., Gaughan, D. J., Lenanton, R. C. J., Wakefield, C. B. & Jackson, G. (in press). Spatial scales of exploitation among populations of demersal scalefish: implications for management. Part 2: stock structure and biology of two key demersal fishes, Western Australian dhufish (Glaucosoma hebraicum) and snapper (Pagrus auratus), on the lower west coast of Australia. Fisheries Research Report No. Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. Steedman, R. K. & Craig, P. D. (1983). Wind-driven circulation of Cockburn Sound. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 34, 187-212. Stephenson, P. & Jackson, G. (2005). Managing depleted snapper stocks in inner Shark Bay, Western Australia. Fisheries Assessment and Management in Data-Limited Situations, Alaska Sea Grant Program AK-SG-05-02, 1-20. Stephenson, W. (1962). The evolution and ecology of portunid crabs, with especial reference to Australian species. In: G. W. Leeper (Eds.), The evolution of living organisms. Melbourne, Australia, Melbourne University Press. Sumner, N. R. & Williamson, P. C. (1999). A 12-month survey of coastal recreational boat fishing between Augusta and Kalbarri on the west coast of Western Australia during 1996-97. Fisheries Research Report No.117. Western Australia Department of Fisheries. Sumner, N. R., Williamson, P. C., Blight, S. J. & Gaughan, D. J. (2008). A 12-month survey of recreational boat-based fishing between Augusta and Kalbarri on the West Coast of Western Australia during 2005-06. Fisheries Research Report No. 177. Department of Fisheries. Western Australia. Sumpton, W. & Jackson, S. (2005). The effects of incidental trawl capture of juvenile snapper (Pagrus auratus) on yield of a sub-tropical line fishery in Australia: an assessment examining habitat preference and early life history characteristics. Fisheries Research 71, 335-347. Svane, I. & Cheshire, A. (2005). Fisheries biology and spatial modeling of the blue swimmer crab (Portunus pelagicus). Fisheries Research and Development Corporation Report, Project No. 98/116. Thrush, S. F., Schultz, D., Hewitt, J. E. & Talley, D. (2002). Habitat structure in soft-sediment environments and abundance of juvenile snapper Pagrus auratus. Marine Ecology Progress Series 245, 273-280. Vanderklift, M. A. & Jacoby, C. A. (2003). Patterns in fish assemblages 25 years after major seagrass loss. Marine Ecology Progress Series 247, 225-235. Wakefield, C. B. (2006). Latitudinal and temporal comparisons of the reproductive biology and growth of snapper, Pagrus auratus (Sparidae), in Western Australia. [PhD Thesis]. Centre for Fish and Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Western Australia. Wakefield, C. B., Moran, M. J., Tapp, N. E. & Jackson, G. (2007). Catchability and selectivity of juvenile snapper (Pagrus auratus, Sparidae) and western butterfish (Pentapodis vitta, Nemipteridae) from prawn trawling in a large marine embayment in Western Australia. Fisheries Research 85, 37-48. Walker, D. I., Hillman, K. A., Kendrick, G. A. & Lavery, P. (2001). Ecological significance of seagrass: Assessment for management of environmental impact in Western Australia. Ecological Engineering 16, 323-330. Warwick, R. M. & Clarke, K. R. (1994). Relearning the ABC: taxonomic changes and abundance/ biomass relationships in disturbed benthic communities. Marine Biology 118, 739-744. Warwick, R. M. & Clarke, K. R. (1995). New ‘biodiversity’ measures reveal a decrease in taxonomic distinctness with increasing stress. Marine Ecology Progress Series 129, 301-305.

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 79 Warwick, R. M. & Clarke, K. R. (1998). Taxonomic distinctness and environmental assessment. Journal of Applied Ecology 35, 532-543. Wells, F. & Bryce, C. (1985). Seashells of Western Australia. Western Australian Museum. Perth, Australia. Wells, F. & Bryce, C. (1993). Sea slugs and their relatives of Western Australia. Western Australian Museum. Perth, Australia. Wells, F. E. (1977). Type specimens in the Department of Molluscs, Western Australian Museum. Records of the Western Australian Museum 6, 33-61. Wells, F. E. (1978). A Quantatative Examination of the Benthic Molluscs of Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. Western Australian Museum. Perth, Western Australia. Wells, F. E. & Threlfall, T. J. (1980). A survey of the softbottom molluscs of Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. The Veliger 23, 131-140. Williams, M. J. (1982). Natural food and feeding in the commercial sand crab Portunus pelagicus Linnaeus, 1766 (Crustacea: Decapoda: Portunidae) in Moreton Bay, Queensland. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 59, 165-176. Wilson, B., Wilson, C. & Baker, P. (1994). Australian marine shells. Part 2. Odyssey Publishing. Kallaroo, Western Australia. Wilson, B. R., Kendrick, G. W. & Brearley, A. (1978). The benthic fauna of Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. Part I: Prosobranch Gastropod and Bivalve Molluscs. Western Australian Museum. Perth, Western Australia. Wise, B. S., St John, J. & Lenanton, R. C. J. (2007). Spatial scales of exploitation among populations of demersal scalefish: implications for management. Part 1: Stock status of the key indicator species for the demersal scalefish fishery in the West Coast Bioregion. Final report to Fisheries Research and Development Corporation on Project No. 2003/052. Fisheries Research Report No. 163. Department of Fisheries. Western Australia.

80 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 9.0 Appendices

9.1 Appendix 1 List of invertebrate taxa retained in the WA Museum collections as voucher specimens for this project. Note, ‘cf.’ denotes specimens that had some variation in characters from published species descriptions and therefore may not belong to that species, and ‘?’ denotes species with some uncertainty in the validity of the identification, mostly due to insufficient knowledge of the taxa.

PhlyaTaxa Date ShotNo Site WAM# Porifera Acanthodendrilla? sp. C1 29-Oct-074 JPTWAM Z49570 Callyspongia sp. C1 12-Dec-07 5CSN WAM Z49537 Callyspongia sp. MF3 29-Oct-071aMGB WAM Z49571 Ciocalypta sp.C1 30-Oct-0712GIN WAM Z49510 13-Feb-0817GIN WAM Z49508 Coelosphaera sp. C1 2-May-07 2JPT WAM Z49535 Echinodictyum clathrioides 12-Dec-07 1JVB WAM Z49529 Echinodictyum mesentarium 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM Z49511 2-May-07 2JPT WAM Z49496 Haliclona (Reniera) sp.C1 30-Oct-078 GISWAM Z49518 Haliclona (Haliclona)sp. C2 30-Oct-078 GISWAM Z49524 Haliclona (Reniera) sp.C3 30-Oct-078 GISWAM Z49530 13-Feb-0816GIN WAM Z49503 Holopsamma sp. C1 2-May-078 GINWAM Z49501 & 49514 12-Dec-07 6CSN WAM Z49516 12-Dec-07 2JVB WAM Z49527 12-Feb-08 5JPT WAM Z49534 Igernella sp.C1 12-Dec-07 1JVB WAM Z49517 13-Feb-0816GIN WAM Z49558 Ircinia sp.J1 2-May-07 1JPT WAM Z49506 13-Feb-0816GIN WAM Z49509 Leucosolenida sp. C1 30-Oct-0712GIN WAM Z49502 Leucosolenida sp. C2 30-Oct-0710GIN WAM Z49532 Mycale sp.C1 29-Oct-074 JPTWAM Z49495 Mycale sp.C2 12-Feb-08 5JPT WAM Z49498 Phorbas sp MF3 2-May-07 8GIN WAM Z49505 Phorbas sp MF4 2-May-07 1JPT WAM Z49521 Phorbas sp.C1 2-May-07 2JPT WAM Z49536 12-Feb-08 6JPT WAM Z49497 Phorbas sp.C2 12-Dec-07 2JVB WAM Z49513 13-Feb-0816GIN WAM Z49512 Sarcotragus sp. C1 12-Dec-07 3JVB WAM Z49540 Sarcotragus sp. C2 12-Dec-07 2JVB WAM Z49507 Semitaspongia sp. C1 12-Dec-07 3JVB WAM Z49538 Spheciospongia cf.papillosa 13-Feb-0817GIN WAM Z49525 Suberites sp.C1 13-Feb-0816GIN WAM Z49519 Tedania sp.C1 12-Dec-07 1JVB WAM Z49500 Tethya cf. ingalli 29-Oct-071bMGB WAM Z49522 13-Dec-0710OWA WAM Z49523 12-Feb-08 8JVB WAM Z49533 Tethya cf.robusta 30-Oct-0710GIN WAM Z49526 12-Dec-07 2JVB WAM Z49515 Te thya sp. C1 12-Dec-07 6CSN WAM Z49520 13-Dec-0711OWA WAM Z49504 Xestospongia sp.C1 12-Dec-07 2JVB WAM Z49528 Cnidaria Sarcoptilus spp. 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM Z49568

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 81 Appendix 1. continued

PhlyaTaxa Date ShotNo Site WAM# Crustacea Actumnus setifer 12-Dec-073 JVBWAM C39989 Alpheus cf. rapax 12-Dec-073 JVBWAM C40000 Alpheus digitalis 12-Dec-075 CSNWAM C39999 13-Feb-08 15 GISWAM C40010 Alpheus pacificus 13-Dec-0710OWA WAM C40003 Balanus trigonus 29-Oct-071bMGB WAM C39985 29-Oct-074 JPTWAM C39984 Belosquilla laevis 3-Apr-071MGBWAM C39974 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM C40005 cf. Leptomithrax sternocostulatus 13-Feb-0817GIN WAM C39995 Diogenes serenei? 12-Dec-073 JVBWAM C39997 Diogenes sp. 12-Dec-072 JVBWAM C40009 Dumea latipes 13-Feb-08 14 GISWAM C39992 Ebalia intermedia 13-Dec-0710OWA WAM C40001 Ephippias endeavouri 12-Dec-074 CSNWAM C40002 Fultodromia nodipes 2-May-072 JPTWAM C39963 & WAM C39971 2-May-07 3JPT WAM C39977 2-May-078 GINWAM C39979 29-Oct-074 JPTWAM C39964 30-Oct-0710GIN WAM C39991 12-Feb-08 5JPT WAM C40016 13-Feb-08 21 OWAWAM C39996 Galathea subsquamata? 2-May-07 2JPT WAM C39968 Heteropilumnus sp. 12-Dec-072 JVBWAM C40007 Hyastenus sebae 29-Oct-074 JPTWAM C39980 30-Oct-0712GIN WAM C39967 Metapenaeopsis fusca 3-Apr-071MGBWAM C39982 12-Dec-072 JVBWAM C39998 Naxia aurita 13-Feb-08 19 OWAWAM C40008 Nectocarcinus integrifrons 13-Feb-0817GIN WAM C39993 Pilumnus fissifrons 2-May-079 GINWAM C39970 30-Oct-078 GISWAM C39972 30-Oct-079 GISWAM C39986 30-Oct-0712GIN WAM C39965 12-Dec-071 JVBWAM C39994 Pilumnus spp. 12-Dec-073 JVBWAM C39962 Pisidia dispar 13-Dec-0710OWA WAM C39973 Portunus rugosus 3-Apr-071MGBWAM C39983 / WAM C40015 3-Apr-073MGBWAM C39976 3-Apr-074GIS WAM C40014 3-Apr-075GIS WAM C40006 2-May-07 1JPT WAM C39978 Rochinia cf. fultoni 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM C39987 Thalamita sima 2-May-07 1JPT WAM C39966

82 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 1. continued

Phlya Taxa Date ShotNo Site WAM# Echinodermata Anthenea australiae 29-Oct-075 JPTWAM Z49547 13-Feb-0817GIN WAM Z49592 Archaster angulatus 2-May-07 12 OWAWAM Z49591 Astropecten preissi 3-Apr-07 1MGB WAM Z49586 3-Apr-07 4GIS WAM Z49564 2-May-07 2JPT WAM Z49567 Cercodema anceps 3-Apr-07 4GIS WAM Z49543 Cladolabes schmeltzii 13-Dec-0710OWA WAM Z49542 13-Dec-0711OWA WAM Z49541 Colochirus quadrangularis 3-Apr-07 4GIS WAM Z49559 Comanthus parvicirrus 2-May-07 9GIN WAM Z49552 Comanthus wahlbergi 12-Feb-08 5JPT WAM Z49561 Comatula purpurea 3-Apr-07 3MGB WAM Z49583 2-May-07 1JPT WAM Z49554 2-May-07 9GIN WAM Z49555 30-Oct-0711GIN WAM Z49560 30-Oct-0712GIN WAM Z49560 Coscinasterias muricata 2-May-07 3JPT WAM Z49584 Dorometra nana 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM Z49577 Dorometra parvicirra 2-May-07 4JVB WAM Z49550 Echinocardium cordatum 2-May-07 2JPT WAM Z49566 29-Oct-074 JPTWAM Z49590 29-Oct-075 JPTWAM Z49581 Luidia australiae 2-May-07 11 OWAWAM Z49594 13-Dec-0711OWA WAM Z49588 Macrophiothrix spongicola 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM Z49582 2-May-072 JPTWAM Z49580 & 49587 2-May-07 4JVB WAM Z49546 Nepanthia crassa 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM Z49557 Nudechinus scotiopremnus 13-Feb-08 21 OWAWAM Z49549 Ophiopsammus assimilis 12-Dec-07 6CSN WAM Z49544 13-Dec-0710OWA WAM Z49556 Ophiothrix caespitosa 3-Apr-074GIS WAM Z49563 Ophiothrix ciliaris 30-Oct-0711 GIN WAM Z49589 Ophiura kinbergi 2-May-07 5JVB WAM Z49569 Peronella lesueuri 2-May-07 4JVB WAM Z49585 Stellaster inspinosus 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM Z49545 Stichopus mollis 3-Apr-074GIS WAM Z49562 29-Oct-076 JPTWAM Z49553 Temnopleurus michaelseni 2-May-07 4JVB WAM Z49575 2-May-07 5JVB WAM Z49565 29-Oct-074 JPTWAM Z49551

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 83 Appendix 1. continued

PhlyaTaxa Date ShotNo Site WAM# Mollusca ?Electroma georgiana 30-Oct-0711GIN WAM S49967 ?Grimpella sp. 2-May-072JPTWAM S34812 Amusium balloti 3-Apr-07 4GIS WAM S34953 12-Feb-08 8JVB WAM S34965 Aplysia dactylomela 2-May-0711OWA WAM S34920 30-Oct-0710GIN WAM S34923 Bedeva paivae 3-Apr-071MGBWAM S34940 12-Dec-072 JVBWAM S34919 13-Dec-0710OWA WAM S34950 13-Dec-0711OWA WAM S34925 Berthella stellata 30-Oct-078 GISWAM S34948 Chiton sp. 30-Oct-0710GIN WAM S34961 Crenatula viridis? 2-May-077 GINWAM S34926 2-May-078 GINWAM S34943 29-Oct-075 JPTWAM S34918 13-Feb-0817GIN WAM S34968 Cryptochiton sp. 2-May-075JVBWAM S34960 Cymatium (Monoplex) cf.exaratum 30-Oct-0710GIN WAM S34955 Cymatium (Monoplex) labiosum 13-Feb-0817GIN WAM S34966 Ensiculus cultellus 30-Oct-0710GIN WAM S34933 Euprymna tasmanica 3-Apr-073MGBWAM S34932 2-May-074JVBWAM S34938 Hapalochlaena sp. 2-May-0712OWA WAM S34811 13-Feb-08 21 OWAWAM S34962 Mimachlamys asperrima 13-Feb-08 14 GISWAM S34951 13-Feb-08 19 OWAWAM S34954 13-Feb-08 21 OWAWAM S34947 Octopus sp. 12-Feb-08 5JPT WAM S34964 13-Feb-08 20 OWAWAM S34963 Pecten fumatus 30-Oct-0711GIN WAM S34941 Phasianella australis 13-Dec-0710OWA WAM S34949 Philine spp. 3-Apr-07 11 CSNWAM S34956 Philinopsis troubridgensis 2-May-075JVBWAM S34921 Pleurobranchus peroni 29-Oct-077 GISWAM S34917 Pyrene bidentata 29-Oct-072MGBWAM S34944 Scaeochlamys lividus 3-Apr-07 9CSN WAM S34957 2-May-078 GINWAM S34924 2-May-079 GINWAM S34922 Scutus antipodes 2-May-073JPTWAM S34942 Sepia braggi 3-Apr-071MGBWAM S34931 3-Apr-07 7CSN WAM S34936 Sepia novaehollandiae 2-May-07 7GIN WAM S34935 & 34929 30-Oct-0711GIN WAM S34928 Sepiadarium austrinum 2-May-071JPTWAM S34937 2-May-077 GINWAM S34958 30-Oct-079 GISWAM S34946 30-Oct-0712GIN WAM S34945 Sepioloidea lineolata 2-May-077 GINWAM S34934 Stylocheilus striatus 30-Oct-0710GIN WAM S34952

84 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 9.2 Appendix 2 The total count (Table 1) and weight (Table 2) of each taxa collected during the study from each site and survey are presented. Sites and surveys are abbreviated as follows: Owen Anchorage OWA; Research Area RSA; Garden Island North GIN; Garden Island South GIS; Jervois Bay JVB; James Point JPT; Mangles Bay MGB, April/May1; October/December2; February 3. The streaked goby Acentrogobius pflaumii was the only introduced species to be collected during the study (introduced speciesI). Two species captured during the study were considered to be tropical species outside their expected geographic range; further taxonomic investigation would be required to confirm identifications of these species. Alpheus rapax1 is a tropical species only known from NE Australia and Gulf of Carpentaria, Upeneus asymmetricus 2 is a tropical species with an Indo-Australian distribution, in Western Australia it is known from Shark Bay north. A number of taxa could not be identified to species either due to a lack of available expertise, e.g. ascidians and sea pens, the need for microscopic examination of diagnostic features coupled with insufficient retention of voucher specimens to confirm identification, e.g. Metapenaeopsis spp. and Upeneus spp., or because the specimens were too damaged to allow confirmation of identifications, e.g. Arnoglossus spp. None of these taxa groupsT were analysed in the community analysis conducted in Chapter 3 of this report

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 85 Appendix 2. continued 96

2008.

B G 1 3 M 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 J PT to February 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 B 1 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 J V 1 ber 2007 and 3 IS 1 1 G 1 2 3 1 1 r/Decem 1 e 3 9 2 38 100 N I 1 1 5 2 6 1 1 G 1 4 1 , 2 to Octob A 1 1 S R 1 2 3 1 2 1 ay 2007 A 1 1 1 OW 1 2 3 1 e m a s e N n o ong m sp m o C h ere, 1 refers to April/M ey. W 1 886) , y y t d , 1858) , 1858) i , 19 11 n k k l e o r e k , 1814 ) c h h r er , 188 5 t D c a s u rt er ban er ban a & m n t A y a C e ite and surv and ite ow ow H (L id le ( B ( B (R a a vos m a os f u i ll nae io id es i nta r e hr . papi a s C1 C2 am l x at e . C1 1 cf ta . C1 . a li 4 3 sp. sp. f 1 m cl C 2 1 a T F F sp . sp c 2 1 m m C e e a . C C ae C1 da da o bus u u r a . . M M . sp e C C d y y C1 . . da d Counts of all taxa for each site Where, and 1 survey. refers April/May to 2007, 2 to October/December 2007 and 3 to February 2008. sp t t . a . r . in gal sp sp sp sp a ii c c da eni eni p ongi sp sp sp s i e id ae d a cf cf sp da s s s s aer i i m n ol ol dr ii phae ae e o s d yp ta te ae ae ri er id i i i da i le le a a a io psamma psamma d en os os ph os al nodi nodi id g on

y y y d a . Counts of all taxa for each s each for taxa all of Counts . a a ili er des n o iti o i a l l ol niid r el e oc hi hi os y dan ia o uc uc th th th oc n ch oscl m r a e p a i o e e e calidae h h m o li pon os il d t b Myc T Myc Ph orb a Ph orb a Ph orb a L L Sp hec Su ber Te Ec Ec Te Ho Te C Ho C Ph orb a s a c c o el e lic o e u ar ea T My Clio Su Te Ras H Mic C Hy a e o m lc f era L Hadr H P e a ri C D o P

Table 1 Table 1. Table

86 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

B G 1 M 1 97 2 3 1 2 3 1 PT J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 JVB 2 IS 1 1 G 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 3 1 1 1 1 N I 1 1 G 1 SA R 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 OWA 1 1 e m a N n o m m o C y i t r o h t u A C2 3 1 . p T . C . C p p ) s . . C1 3 1 a ) s ) s 1 spp. 1 sp a a a MF x l on C ge C . . . er er a C1 C2 n i i sp. C i c . . p illa l T n n sp sp s sp sp dr . . C1 1 a a a spo Re Ha Re ae i gia ( ( en J ( continued. sp a gi gi . us us a iid ng on ied a g sp p ae on on e na na na ag ag tid d ndrillidae ae s t i d n tif r r p p thod t t ra a a n o tinued s s t i d ra

p iid n an t ospo ode s s . Continued. l y l y i ni s ce ide ernella c a a e o Co roce n Ac r alinida orec lly tro C C X Haliclo Haliclo I Sarco Haliclo Sarco Semit d ? u Ig a h h a e n r C C P Irciniidae T Dicty i ct y e e Haploscleri D D rif Po

Table 1 Table 1. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 87 Appendix 2. continued

3 5 178 B 3 G 3 4 M 2 5 1 1 1 98 3 2 2 34 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 PT 3 J 3 4 7 5 3 90 2 JVB 6 8 3 4 IS 2 G 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 N I 1 G 1 1 1 1 231 1 5 SA 35 R 3 19 39 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 17 OWA 1 5 ish e f s n m e lly a es e one h ns n rals N i s m e r r J o f o n e sea p p o n c e a lly g a m e j se Rive anem soft m n o a oran tube C Sw 4 8 8 1 , y i t 848 r feld o 1 n , e h t u A Gray Lend n n Vo T p. p ral s t a T a T . . sp. x p dis T a cta . s t co p T spp an e s r thu sof

sp on i a n r e continued. e i a ied em l a a e r a a ae u tif eae ptilus ptilusg id n ea yce rn m d thi e i d t ul

a n ac . Continued. v a yllorhiza pun ch till to ied an ide a o tigiida t ulace s i a n o a r on tif nn Ca u Sarco Pa Sarco Ph z y ia e tiniaria hoz izo o riantharia nn r Vere P Ce Mas l c c e h p e a y i den A A C R P n h Ant Sc u Cnid

Table 1 Table 1. Table

88 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued 99

2 4 4 3 3 3 16 B G 1 3 50 45 180 M 1 169 7 3 3 1 2 2 19 218 1 1 1 1 5 PT 80 67 121 J 1 3 1 37 495 3 1 6 B 0 1 3 1 9 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 JV 31 270 1 2 13 16 158 S I 2 3 1 4 23 117 118 G 4 1 145 1 6 4 3 19 95 N I 1 1 1 1 2 2 55 G 301 6 3 1 1 14 2 3 75 72 A 1 8 2 1 S 49 10 156 R 5 1 1 2 3 1 1 457 1 4 3 1 55 4 2 1 1 1 24 OWA 1 1 2 3 167 n s e s p crabs s r b s m rs n m b e i a s Praw t r abs s g r aw h cra N n r n crabs n i s n obs acle spide e e c r crabs p g it cra o l g K n et de m at praw rm v l barn e pi ebbl m ern ppi pon tor & e qu t s h p orcelai o s a s v p n C s Wes ecora d 1851) , ) e, 1832) y l 56 86 989 l t rds i , 1896) i 1798 1988 1988 a 1918 , 1838 1880) , 1858 , 1858) , e r v , , , 1844 1854) , 1825) , , , 1 , s 18 l e y o g g , 19 , 1847 n , , 1905 l , 1852 n u t on t on on n u n n e h i i an e a i i t é t n o c i bu n n ps ers ps ps w n u res i h reille i n n M e Edw t Haan o m arw m m - A bri as a a h n i i i Dan at M Wh F l n s a t t t (Gra i Morg L R a De M M (D F S S ri (H ( (S é (Ki (Gu (H. M s u t a l u t os a? s T i noc a s at tu c i er s a 1 ndae pp. t us pe i u x s ? a s l f a i at e es x s s s s lton l i i i T lis quam a a i nei ed r fu apax tisulca b e ov dae . nodi i ificu r h . m e a ndeavour t r a a t c pes gonus ops ops ops . e ubs t i gita par a i i tacea sp s e cf i continued. a i t s l s nus r s s s ter cf i daps e m a u t dae as c tu om omi a r e o i ae ia s p s d e e nu ea s e r in dae s d a a l e a di i a pt h nus id o in t i d t ca e a ppi a aur ia eus eu eu i da da e . Continued. ei : C car d i odr

l n h i apenae apenae apenae di a i i a i c c anus t h h L t t t i lice i r xi as l os en ei e c a e a dae t ogenes ogenes s e e e e i . c c a a h a a cellan st j poda m di l a r om u n og p a Hal N Ro Ephi Hy Dum cf M M Eb M Bal Ful Di Alp Pi Alph Di M Alph Gal C r a y r a i l e o poda co o pe H M Pe L Balan D A G P D a l ro rri Dec Th i Ma C Arth Table 1

Table 1. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 89 Appendix 2. continued

7 3 33 3 2 72 1 2 B 5 2 G 99 2 79 18 M 100 73 48 41 4 1 7 8 2 6 4 1 7 1 PT 2 7 4 J 17 11 3 9 7 1 17 1 2 8 4 4 8 3 1 2 3 1 2 6 6 2 1 B 3 6 5 4 1 1 1 V 71 6 2 1 J 7 1 67 27 2 8 5 1 3 5 4 S 8 5 6 I 2 3 1 1 158 G 4 4 1 2 3 1 2 6 5 135 4 5 2 3 1 5 8 5 3 7 N I 1 3 1 1 89 34 G 0 0 9 1 1 1 5 1 9 7 6 1 1 6 3 2 1 A 05 21 8 1 S 14 1 1 R 1 7 8 1 2 3 1 2 1 4 9 3 6 5 4 14 A 5 7 5 2 1 2 OW 5 1 2 3 58 s e s s er b t p m s r a a ster s s oy l ells rim N n e l h r s n ng c ng r oy sh s i s o e g m n m tis chito m pea i mu n m e m i m w a o ls a w m a h s C f ) 4 1) 3 8 834 1 1 186 5) , , ) 58 58) s 19 s 35) d, y d r t 856) r rd i a 18 17 18 18 a a 865 , , r , , s o w w 1 im r,1 , u on an d d a e s e rck t h ille, 182 a k s E E a a ps e

u e G n r n e e m A n n e H at a in l & (H i L y (Du Stim (L (D (L o M u . . Mil H (Q (A ns o a r if m a ? i . r gr a r e ? x sp e t s s . a cus gian i T T su in sp dis i s ifrons o dae ma r i d u lag e g glab n i pp. laevi e e a n o s a continued. . u setifer d p ru a geor ci s iton lum s e sp. ni sp e ita s ra m tin us usfiss s a us a u uill o a o o n d n opilumnus q n oda och i h o m r idae ata s mnu ocar tr un o

idae t n t e . Continued. n c o ygd lleu u th it t op rtu c lidae alam enatula vi yptochit C op o t unid a m ill e e r r c h ti a lleidae a a gno it an u rt i a a y l er iidae N C Por Bel Ch M Po Act C Am T H Pteria sp. Ele Pilumn Pilumn iloida o c o t t v ce s oloric l pl sca erioida P Ch I Pi Squ A M P M a t y l v Ne P Stom My llu o Po Bi Crusta M Table 1

Table 1. Table

90 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

101 B G 1 M 1 2 3 1 PT J 1 2 1 2 1 4 JVB 1 1 1 1 1 1 IS 1 G 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 3 1 3 1 N I 5 2 1 2 1 1 1 G 1 2 1 2 1 1 A 1 1 1 R S 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 A 9 1 5 1 2 OW 1 2 3 1 2 3 3 p p p e m callo s s callo ls s callo pets ells g r ill ps S res N a

h a cer s d n u lim o oy r clam a ter b callo ve shel ve m s ea slu ercial S s h zo s iton iton s o s sea h s y ield a easant shells easant g r m m d r t o h h u s m p C o o Do allot' C B ) 32 ) ) ) 3) ) 18 1) , 3 19) 19) 8 58). 8 4 y 810 44) 861 52 2 09) t 8 864 179 i 1 8 ard

18 18 17 , r , , , 1 , 179 i, , s o , 19 rt, 1 , 182 lis e, 18 e, 18 h d, 1 o rd g s e, 1 lin t f a t arck arck e nke aeu Gaim n Sa n e n m m A u Ren a a Reev & in on (Woo (Verco (Reev (Cros (M y Mo (Gm (Ber (L (L (v o (L (Qu m u exaratum . is s cf labios ima peum a idgen s plex) plex) x ralis a t br mela s heno es T riatus t ono ono t d e r loti ltellu a ntata au . M M d e p s trou continued. . cu tipo i a a da s s sp lamys asperr e h sp e bid nella ae c e a e ellidae a a dae ntinue ia ochlamys livida n b us an idae ine d iid . Continued. s ellidae

e t e i id da cid siidae inidae siculu a il lysia dactylo j ida idae stropo i m o inidae ur a m usium bal n h h p Co a r alaspid ly o l pidea lum rb nelli eocon ar il po a eo u Stylocheilus s A Sca Pecten fumatus Monia Mimach E Scu P Cymatium ( Cymatium ( Cymatium p Pyr Philinop P A Bedeva paiva n p a o u h as rb ro s c Pectin Ph A T R Fiss C Ag M P A t n o u s l Ostr Vener S Vetig Ceph A l G a Mo Table 1

Table 1. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 91 Appendix 2. continued

3 5 13 B G 2 M 1 2 3 1 8 1 102 1 1 1 1 9 1 2 3 1 2 3 3 3 3 2 7 4 1 5 1 PT 1 J 0 1 5 1 3 3 1 6 0 1 2 5 1 1 2 1 4 7 3 1 1 5 JVB 5 3 9 37 1 7 1 6 40 2 IS 3 1 1 1 6 7 1 1 G 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 7 5 1 4 5 1 3 5 1 2 3 5 N I 2 1 3 2 G 4 5 6 1 1 1 2 2 2 7 1 1 3 1 1 5 1 1 SA 1 1 R 5 4 4 6 2 5 3 3 1 1 3 4 3 1 1 2 7 1 3 5 3 3 2 4 2 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 OWA 4 2 1 1 3 1 19 5 1 d i d i d ui u u q s h q e s h u s d i S p m s Squid r l S

i ds s a i ui a to a tail Sq tail e u ch l ug q c t a s s m q n N m ttlefis b i shes a a o n u l a ttle r j o pu o cuttlefis a i l s o y s C t o ' B gill i ng t B m C di b P

n n bt a n r u oc gg m ttletail s ttletail cuttlef r rn e ed n o o e side bo ra ue r l ue t h Gia b he C b t h B u trip u ut o S o S S So ) 2 32 3 8 18 )

1 , 4 4 76 7 9 1 6) d d, 8 0 y 0 r 2 8 8 i t 9 ar a 9 18 849 1 , r

1 190 1 , 1 , o , i m im , m r r , 1 h o, a a e l e t f so, 182 y Ga rry f u

is o e rah f A Gray & G & b Be H Verc &

Cuvie P (R ( y A o u Q (Quoy T tum p. a i p m d n s

u o iae ta c a inu . ica x ica p t ralis a v per llus s s ta s eola e lland T o u la ae l a br i m ena lin chu sp. i dae id m austr t e tinued a continued. tasman d h la n e ae a iu ied lla ama vaeho this h ri e e i a e co bran ar tif lla s iid h a do a a r loc o n didae c pussp. o a

branc a ae n imp da a i oteu i a ap i a bragg i a no t he i ad i oloid d od da . Continued. ide a po prymn ratosoma r ide ro p i d e i ol i d l eur u n u po Gr br op rom liginida p P Sep Be C Hap ? Octo u Sep Sep Sep E Sep Sep t h iida i olida h o l e e al tas di ro u L t P C Octo Sepiid S Sepia h u s p No N Octopo Sep Sep Te e Ga C Table 1

Table 1. Table

92 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

0 2 B 2 G 1 M 1 1 3 103 2 6 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 2 3 8 1 PT J 7 3 5 1 2 3 2 3 1 JVB 0 1 1 1 2 IS G 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 3 1 1 0 9 6 7 3 1 2 3 2 8 1 21 N I 3 1 2 G 4 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 5 4 5 1 7 SA R 0 2 2 8 4 4 1 6 1 15 1 6 8 1 1 15 1 1 1 0 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 3 3 6 1 2 2 4 10 2 3 OWA 1 1 4 1 10 e m a tars N rs tars n s e o t h m a sea e m f o C 3 43) 42 4 8 ) ) ) 0 1 ) ) ) 15 ) ) 2 l , 3 1 3 58 90 916 el, 18 el, 18 e 9 888 y 4 4 4 67 1 h

19 8 8 8 i t 1 1 , , c 17 847 840 18 , r , , s 1 s , o 1 1 b i n osch osch o r,1 r,1 r , , t er, ein r r r e h u y y l eu t r a l e lle lle T T T u rrill, 18 t l a ra ra e Clark n ü . r e derl d A a & i n ö (G (G V M r (Mü (Mü ( H L D ( Dö H.L ( (Carpen ller & l e ller & ü ü ü M M (M ta s i a u t us g r ra i c r e i a a r i i r e i x t us u i c ata lia icir a osus v sa a v nn hlb m eiss in T r r in t r a rpurea ana a gula p c str e terser s u e s pa u e agu t raliae e e s sw p p a n a p an continued. s a a a a u terias t r ten p i a cras ae u ae e s tr i d i d i d t hu a ea e ter a r ec er in t er r id e i as t n tula tula a n s i d ter t e as a a a ectinida i odisca i d op anth s s id

e st t er a i n r . Continued. s scina ma manth m m a m the s p donid a idia a ch r i a e tida tulida o e o o o o o h r u n te m teriida t e a a idiida trop ea c ipulatida N C M Dorometr C Dorome C C C L Astr An Gon Stella A s n s i dea u m lv xill roide o A As A Co L A Go Or Ar o a n te Forc C P Va s hinoder Cri A c E

Table 1 Table 1. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 93 Appendix 2. continued

3 B 104 G 4 M 1 2 1 5 1 1 3 6 5 1 PT 1 5 24 J 0 0 1 2 3 9 4 6 1 5 1 7 1 1 1 8 1 B 4 2 3 7 1 3 2 50 102 JV 2 1 2 14 24 4 3 1 165 S 8 4 I 2 3 1 2 2 4 4 1 2 G 1 1 1 2 5 1 37 3 1 3 3 3 6 3 24 N I 4 4 5 2 6 1 1 5 1 4 2 4 2 G 0 4 49 1 2 3 1 3 4 7 4 2 1 A 6 0 1 1 4 S 3 3 R 5 4 6 1 1 4 4 3 1 2 6 3 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 8 1 4 2 5 2 1 3 3 1 74 265 OWA 1 2 1 10 20 e m ers s a b N m star n cu o chins ttle i m ur r cu a m b e o s C ) ) ) 14) 46 67 1841 y , t 1912 s i , 19 , 1777 e r 1875) k , 18 1872 , , n r , n o t i a, 18 g el a n n e h i l k h l t en o a n t c w u n t C e ci d . l u os A u en L r en . L Se (H T ( (P al H (Döder (V s s i la r o eni nu a s l um l m i e a at i e s a r d tz a o h r p l s angu s x pongic ssimilis c d o o i p ri i i i a e pit r s e t u dr s g s i a x c T s s a e o m e l i hme i e l c s e a c e a i ae su u e s d a an s a ntinu a e qua r c c nber a da e a s dium c d ti continued. a i d o othr x x le u mol mmu i lid a a d us e a r i i t us i c tid y m d n t e s oi e r t i id i sa e m o i a ki lla r e a hr hr o a a eu a ab c phi o chid h t t pus r p ri e r t a h u i ir eu r d a er o i c a id a o o u o id i r a n od a e a d dea nocar h r

d i t d l i i e a o c ho . Continued. opl d dol d c m o h opodida ni o loc o ur i ste n de o d r e ro g n mnople a i i i o i r u opn ic e h rm e o l op u e n e r h h h o c id u x c ea v m ga ler no n C Mac C Ophi C Ophi i St Op Ophi P T N Echi e o h p t de hiuri ur t pidoch m hi ata i Cu o Op Sc S Op Op La T T Lo p s o e c h l hino Dend O A Cly E T Sp o c hin Op E H Ec Table 1

Table 1. Table

94 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 105 Appendix 2. continued

1 6 B G 2 2 1 3 3 3 2 3 1 M 2 8 2 1 1 3 6 2 1 1 5 7 2 3 1 3 PT J 3 0 0 5 3 6 3 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 1 1 3 1 7 JV B 2 19 3 3 4 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 S 6 I 3 1 1 2 2 3 1 G 1 1 4 3 1 1 5 8 21 6 6 8 3 3 1 3 5 1 2 3 4 5 N I 3 1 1 1 7 2 2 1 G 4 3 1 2 2 1 2 3 9 1 4 2 1 2 4 1 2 1 3 1 1 R SA 3 2 8 3 1 2 1 2 3 8 3 3 1 6 5 3 2 1 1 1 5 1 3 1 1 6 6 3 1 1 OWA 2 5 2 1 1 2 3 2 1 2 e e y a y k e gar h a y e e Ray s ar ov R ay i s a ree R r Stingar f h m ay ish o r g e g ch l ler er se g n l g in d in a tf s obbler t eln N a t g a Sardin d e t in A n n Sprat C S h C S ov E elno o S Fi e y an n v cidians i on s fi n potted Stin m l ar ackson S ped s e r Sh a as i ralian - m ack ooth m Blu h r n tu l y t her r st s l m t rt J m str u B e t riate A St u e o u E n n Sho o u C o S o s S A o C P S A S ster West e Spar W 1 4 40) 841 8 1 1 3) 8 18 y 8 , t 1791) 969 i 794) 790) 1885) 1 e s 1939 r , 1875) 1897) , 1842) g, g, , 1899 , , n 1 , 1 o , 179 , , e, s a y n, 1 h er n t e o lby l y a w a w ilby itley i tton cien ey & Henle, 1 & Henle, aack a c A u en Dix M hunber Og O g (Sh (Sh Wh ( (J ( M (Hu ller ller (H T ( ü ü V alen ( M M i n o lus a a n T a T y a jacks tus s a c iata t us x cos s litar lis r a atus a bus o a o i T cimaculatus f trali o r T t t r p r s es a mu a testacea sp. e ina evicaudata pau es h neopilchardus rm au e ma vincenti a e s aus continued. r ius s ida i o lineatus d us pter pter r t spp. - colonial spp. - s ps rm es es nt loides i is br is thetidis dontus e n n o tif t t idae es ae o nar a i da e o mania l aulis . Continued. i f na es d rm rm d a e m id r y a y a d

atel o dino o o d atidae m idoglanis macroceph ten g tychotr oloph e i a u r nna obatidae i f ea go ygono ygono ygono otosus r y lioba cidia cidia r i n l n n p r r r liobatidae o iif o in a e g obat r up P A C M Ur T Das T T Das Heter Her Spr E Sar A as as t h p i f yur u in a u e Ante Plotos My Uroloph Dasy Cl Heter P En R oph d l c es cidiac s Silurifor L Raj Heterodon P Rh Cl s A Pi Chor

Table 1 Table 1. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 95 Appendix 2. continued

5 8 2 1 3 4 9 1 1 2 5 B 3 106 G 1 1 1 4 7 9 34 4 M 1 2 1 1 1 7 5 60 19 8 0 2 1 1 6 1 4 6 1 4 1 2 1 7 9 PT 39 6 J 2 4 2 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 6 3 5 2 2 6 7 3 60 B 2 3 3 4 49 12 JV 3 4 2 3 1 9 91 1 1 2 1 2 72 17 4 2 S 5 4 I 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 9 1 1 G 1 2 1 8 4 58 3 0 3 2 6 7 2 3 43 3 45 217 N 6 2 I 1 0 2 2 1 9 4 6 1 1 3 G 19 14 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 19 2 22 238 1 7 3 1 7 2 1 2 2 12 237 A 2 9 4 1 2 1 4 1 5 S 3 22 2 R 4 3 1 1 5 8 1 19 160 9 2 1 1 7 3 1 2 2 4 3 1 3 2 2 3 1 2 6 3 2 1 1 1 10 OWA 2 1 2 7 1 2 7 1 6 1 1 8 5 ad e s r d h athe o rch a c e ad e h ad h h n e r e i e s a e Fl d e ad f i h ot r e h m ad h l d e i a rf P ardi e a h m at ard at a e r d h l l tte a ard P rn r at N rn F o e G l at u a Ve lvetfish

l rn n p die n e F lian S lian Hardy h il G s o

a n on t F F a ol i n t ern y Ve e y m ue S m t o p oot h der S p l g str s t s ed Gu m n d u m m ow et u ad Gu g pin i e e Gur e B o R o n e ll ou n S R i n Dee h C M o C t A t r Sl S ittl F s g e Ye L i L Com e h t B u W So ) ) 25) 25 ) 1843 , 2 l ) 18 3 18 ) ) ) 7 e 2 5 7 6 7) 8 5 3 8 1847 y eg 884 , 9 9 t l 1842 1 s i , , 1 ard, ard, 1758 h 1 1 e 1 1812 r , n , 1826 1829 1829 , c , , m s m , , , n o , 198 , 190 o y s i i y y n S n h a u a er er nau, i eu nger t i en o an ea i i l l i a rds s s u itle itle v v & z G G ci a cl e n eg h h u l u k es A ste h n i c i un en Pau & & c C C l W (R W i n ( ( (L Ma y L (T i al Ca K o oy (R m u u (V Q (Q em (T s i s r s i u t n s s s h i i ca c s n tu o i ns hte atus p ator n p ia e r c e i s onga a d o a ul andi l a g ic l c i i us e r m x s e s ilio a r b a a kumu n ca p n p ubel m s a a ltira v T s a s ys endr longi o s s ans s s h m e u chi t e p sc pand in i us us us e r a s poni a quee e es l o ta r r mu d e e da tes a m cht i a e s a t i sp a r s continued. es hut dae l hal m j hal hal mpu e a h is s vol o e e rm o d a p a ti a p p a life ia e p trig a e oni us o id s e hamphu if e e c no c rm us m e i f o a d i es ue r d mp g thid c koni c r c i llic ve tinid r i ebas o o a i rm te d d a nid o e f eph o c o n i o i . Continued. s in i r i o xi f

eba c ig na el p mna a n t rm s os f p ppo o aty her n aty ar aty i y a h n e ri a o t lo mi lifer os f ri tr n ng er her iglid p i Pl C Eey Le Gy Hy At Ma Pegas Meta N Hi Inegoci K On Pl Pl e e t p e r e o d Co l orpae h T Moridae T H A N Peg Ve Sy Pla A t c s e Ga Be A Gast Lam S c s Pi Table 1

Table 1. Table

96 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued 1 1 1 1 8 51 413 296 B 5 4 G 2 27 38 M 0 2 5 5 8 5 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 0 107 2 1 5 7 9 3 4 6 5 4 2 3 1 2 3 1 PT 2 2 21 J 3 1 2 1 2 08 2 8 6 2 1 5 5 8 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 3 1 6 3 JVB 3 5 4 1 2 1 2 2 1 8 7 4 3 9 5 7 8 3 1 8 38 8 IS 5 195 172 2 G 0 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 7 146 371 1 9 7 7 4 6 3 2 57 12 9 1 93 2 4 1 N 1 1 6 I 9 2 1 1 5 2 1 1 G 2 6 13 9 3 1 2 1 4 2 46 324 731 3 6 1 4 3 1 514 2 8 9 2 1 1 1 8 SA 8 8 1 R 1 5 1 14 72 60 33 6 6 8 6 8 3 4 2 2 4 9 74 3 1 54 2 0 9 3 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 5 1 3 29 4 OWA 5 9 8 7 1 23 2 1 1 8 2 52 71 8 2 3 20 h i s f h se d t s et h i s i sh i sh e t u f s e n l y as i s e e n o f ad i e atf al n m i sh atf o n c leg v a oby Wr sh h W ally o e b i lly e atf d f h Go p G e ago N

il Sc il ev Drag te Tr s

r n a

on Go t h e t t Sip o Sip s k T es Dr tric Go Gob

s tted i s i n fishes s e m a ' d aked t f p spotted e t ail e Cr m s llow a r m r n Silverb an Sam n e g a i pjac o o m inger espo S ood Str k estern y Y B G F C on s lu S row W i nkb W L B A P B uther So ) ) 6 7 0 6 3 3 3 ) ) 2) 5) ) ) ) 5 4 4 8 8 9 4 3) 6 9 3 8 8 8 5 4 31 1 1 8 y 2 3 876 954 8 9 1 1 1 8 8 8 , i t 187 , 187 1 1 19 185 r 1 , ,1 , , , o r, r, 1 r au y e e e h er,1 er,1 t b dson, l ey l ey n i i iennes, i ennes, t h rdson h u eker i l i t i t v v c c a ar ardson, n telnau, teln c g h h u u n n A s le h h a a as O B i c i c ich W L Gü Günth (C (C ( ( (W ( ale R R (C (C (R Vale V ( i lad e d s 2 o I u ? o n i dia a us ensis i us n g hti umii ing ic ysg a r r ter t es s s x ig tr m ii o r e a l ou ezelan alis ilu a b T pfla ctylop r T s vla s h va . a a pell u o gula o i ys e p p a austr d p spp th cep roseiga continued. usd ob i s e tr asymm la mel alliurichth h ida e a s s s ue a s brus ep e og m e i d e e a eic eu eu on ruep y i d tr l quu doc docaranx geo docaranx w n ae a amia amia tic n n n n e o

. Continued. to og r i d en ng is eu eu achurusn g orm r o r p a c a s s r llid biida o rreida llio r b i f Contin Seriola h Upe Upeneu A N T C Upe P Upe Siph A Siph Dactylop Pseu P P e linidae a s e Ap La C Mu G Go C Ca c Perc Pis Table 1 Table 1. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 97 Appendix 2. continued

0 4 2 1 3 08 5 8 1 1 B 2 7 8 G 1 2 2 1 M 108 0 1 1 6 5 31 2 9 5 123 4 1 2 1 2 2 4 2 7 4 PT J 2 3 1 1 4 3 2 1 4 19 1 1 8 1 2 3 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 14 12 B 7 2 3 9 V J 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 29 11 2 5 3 1 1 7 2 S I 3 5 4 1 2 G 0 7 5 4 4 2 9 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 9 2 5 9 3 5 8 4 1 2 4 5 2 9 1 3 1 1 1 277 294 N I 7 5 2 1 1 1 2 25 2 1 G 9 6 1 2 1 1 1 5 1 101 2 9 3 3 1 8 4 1 158 A 2 3 1 1 1 S 71 1 2 R 2 5 3 2 3 7 4 2 3 2 1 2 3 1 2 45 2 6 6 1 1 1 5 2 1 1 5 47 2 1 A 1 6 2 1 1 2 3 OW 4 4 2 8 1 6 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 2 3 4 2 1 50 2 g g g n e n ter itin r l g r n h e r h iti o iti e s u e e in d e i h r h e r d n it l y s W m r f i n u h o f a e h und se u o r t l b ter s l d G gue S gue t pete o l o e i ol Wh s e olW e u W l N n f u u r o F m p o Fl e F ed S n o

pp ilor h

h B ed B b o rip t she a a m T r u e c G t e te

o o h h n u y fi y T l T r n m n r S o

S Sch S v e t ga rrow a G t E ug l m a t a n rn T l s e o f her leW e a n o e ern ern t S H e W l t t Ro h C u t s itt s m L E W e e S L ster So e W W Sou W ) 4 2 801 4) 8 1 1 4 40) ) 1 16) 1 1

5 , 8 0) 66) 842 9 9 5 5 d 1 29 y 188 1 0 r 8 t 1 1 985 19 899) 8 s,18 r, , , i 9 a 17 e e , 1 eider, r h h, h, 1 1 1 18 184 , m s , , , n n , n c c c o r , , , 1 i r r y s u y h o o e e a e e a lo e t n en t h ch dson b c i i k l i l a y u e i v v u a G ci ar S n da e g u u A l Cull C Cull W in & in ch c C c C & McK (Jen (O y e ( B h (L M M o Ri c (Mc u o (St (Valen Q (Bl i i t i s i s ns r ur e u x s t a s ny g u ei x T e u n r t adh i a s alis j e z ck i o nga r la T s pp. a o us s eatus s u s un el a b br t l e ens us lt e hem c s el e s a t s r e m s saltatris a k e u r tolineatus a r s u a e s o ttata s is is h a idae c s i a d orm dus vitta h d r y i orm tidae can continued. d r rc au c h d axb los tia hume ssid so n nic tidae e los tif t o r i e he e idae inued mi tidae e o n p us d e ctif ias go bu go ba go vi t n p n ae o ar i nt e t h u . Continued. pter idae a a a s a gl idae d ra idae gr ood nog i m br odo e nog don lich r o n p i e y

e s a ag e a o o th m no ma rapo m r r Co a eu nguip Ammotretis Z D Sill Sill P Sill Pomatomu N Pa P C Pentapo Pel Pel Ar P o e l o i a r t eu P Solei Diodon P Sill Pe Odac P P Cy Ne T B Spar idae e l T P Pisces Table 1

Table 1. Table

98 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

1 1 9 B G 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 M 1 1 109 1 9 2 3 1 2 3 1 3 3 PT J 6 1 5 1 1 4 3 2 JVB 4 1 2 2 1 4 1 1 3 IS 6 3 G 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 7 7 2 3 1 2 3 3 2 3 6 4 N I 2 1 1 5 4 G 1 2 2 4 2 1 2 1 1 6 1 3 1 1 3 6 1 2 SA R 7 0 4 1 2 1 6 1 5 2 5 6 1 3 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 OWA 2 4 3 5 5 2 1 1 1 7 4 2 3 ket c et t a t ish e j et e k k k xf ack ket c e h c h o a rj s a t her ac j m ac i e j j fis r a j f r a e d e e a h th B th ath L t N

o t h o e a n y a ather o Cow e T o e e L s ' h L L L fishes gm m Leather

s w Sm y m a l y n ru ed nged r o e h i b ugh ugh n P n b S C i dl R r osaic osaic o n r e oth a este R M B o F th W u T o S ) ) ) ) 6 15 4 8 1 24 2 8 4 8 , 19 9 ) 3) 1 18 1 ) ) , h 1 5 , ,

y 0 , 6 d d y r b 9 98 7 i t ar a 7 lloc il , 187 r 1 u g , 1 17 o i m im , , au k unner h a c r t w e a u & O & Ga b

teln haw -B s A & & G & S

as er & McC ( (Sh O

s say y y ( a o (C u uo am Fr aite Q Q R ( ( ( (W s u r T i des s nus inant elanu r i s nia s m dalo o o ulatu icus a en term il a x e s p a milla s vittige r T s jacks amyg gran chin a es e mo s s e es e - ind - a y a r ys t er t er d pros t hu t er th ied hth aurita ho e h continued. ue c ntida i tif c nthid can o n li loca thalu thalu a in gop iida b na c . Continued. ba op an an achalu ide acana o

c r n r nac n tra traod o Contin A Ome Ac B u Eu A M Sco A e s e M T Os c Pis Table 1

Table 1. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 99 Appendix 2. continued

3 B G 2 10 230 M 1 110 5 5 00 7 3 2 1 17 uary r 20 PT J 0 0 0 0 60 50 60 20 46 135 110 6 3 1 2 1 0 0 5 50 2 70 30 24 1 3 15 1 2 JVB 1 3 8 b er 2007 and 3 to Feb S I 20 30 G 5 1 6 0 3 1 2 52 750 111 210 0 0 N 5 I 1 2 1 15 20 2 165 G 108 200 0 5 1 50 71 3 2007, 2 to October/Decem

0 2 2 SA 5 3 R ay 0 5 1 A 0 0 3 15 5 OW 5 1 2 3 1 1 e, 1 refers to April/M to refers 1 e, r e m h e a s e g n N o pon m s m o C and survey. W survey. and 6) ) ) 4) 188 , 5 y y t d ,1858 ,1858 i r n k k , 181 l,1911 e n n k e , 188 c h h o r er D ba ba c a r r s u t rt t e e a & m n A y a C e e l H (L d i (Bow (Bow R ( sa ) of all taxa for each site a vo s m s o fa u l i l ide ae ar io in r nt 1 a m e papi h x t s C2 C1 a C1 a e a . C cf. i l . . l p T sta sp. sp. f C1 ll p Weights Weights (g) of all taxa for each site Where, and 1 survey. refers April/May to 2007, 2 to October/December 2007 and 3 to February 2008. m c ights (g a F 4 F 3 s . s c a a bu m m C1 p e e a C1 gi . ae

r ae . . C2 . . C1 M M nga . e s id id C1 C2 i ro yu yu C1 . . da id sp . a id . . sp sp sp sp a ii ct ct da en en a ta pon d sp mma mma sp sp i s ri hae i ae e s a cf sp cf d

e s s s s aer id r m a e a n di di ae ol ol i a p a e o d yp t ae a s s s ae . W h id n i i i i a d le le io r ba ba p ba ba p i p os os os al no no id ya ya tid ya d id i ili e de s ec er o o i ndr i a scle h h h l l ole n el r e oc or or or or o hi hi y dani uc uc o oc n chond yca ong yca r a e o i lo cal h m om c el os spa d t b ea io y ch T e Ec M Ph M Ph C Ho Ph Ec L e Ph L e Sph Sub Ho Tet Tet C Tet sp y c o dr o eci u Te Ra M H C Cl Te Mi Su Hali a e o car era m l f H P L Hali i e a r D C o P Table 2

2008. Table 2. Table

100 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

3 B G 2 8 M 5 8 1 1 111 3 T 10 P J 5 0 357 140 0 3 1 2 5 3 B 0 2 800 50 314 23 20 JV 1 1 1 22 3 S 5 I 5 70 050 3 G 0 0 3 1 2 32 139 110 N I 2 5 40 G 1 3 0 2 SA 25 R A 700 OW 1 2 3 1 10 e m a n N o m m o C y t i r h o u t A 2 . C 1 p C1 C3 T . . p. ) s . C p a ) sp ) ) sp ) a n s x C1 o . MF3 a l a C1 ge ge sp C1 . l . . c C1 C2 n T sp p il niera niera sp sp ae continued. s sp. sp. dr C1 e ia . 1 a spo Hali Re Re lid ia ia ( ( l en J da ( d i sp a . us us ed r a e ii ong ngi i e a d id f g e a sp p ag ag id d l n hod n ti

r r l ae po da e at pong pong ona ona ona . Continued. t t at da l l l a n s s d ti i tas eri de o o i c c c e y y os po ntinu ii i ne l da i ant i i n t c c o cer s s r d l l l c ll ll i ec c s in cer i m y y o a a a c a a o Co r A al os ll inii or tro y C H C H H Sar Xe Ir Sar Se ? Ige un d c h h pl r Ca C Pe I T Dict a era f H Dict Den i r o P

Table 2 Table 2. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 101 Appendix 2. continued

3 300 100 455 B G 0 2 9 660 M 0 5 1 50 45 30 112 50 3 35 10 4 8 PT 4900 J 5 69 00 3 1 2 98 2 550 JVB 4 1 1900 3 37 S 70 I 3 G 0 3 50 3 1 2 N I 2 2 G .5 00 1 2 156 2 8 3 5 7 0 5 2 SA 4 R 5 5 5 7 6 22 825 1 A 270 OW .5 1 2 3 1 152 ish e f n y es m l s l a l pe e es on h a a ns s n r J i e e o f o n N em s y o n m l e l e g a m je sea sea p e River an soft c soft m an b o u an an t or C Sw 4 8 18 , 8 y t i eld r f 184 n , h o y a u t nde r e A G L n Vo T . p p s l a a . a r t x T s T . sp a ta p T c T ndi pp. s n p. s a e continued. hus n a soft co soft sp o pu nt gr s m e ed ia ari us u i iza e a e l r ae f a il i n ae e ul d t ti i eae rh ia da

. Continued. l pt p a id n yc rn ii m u a o ace d ar e cea e llo l a co c ill e d ri a ig at y t ch to i u r th i o anthid t f n s n e h a s n z i oa at r ri o n S P Sar Cav Pa un e ia nt ho tinia oz ria nn cy r e Ma Pe V Ce l c e p e d th y Rhizo P C A A d a n Sc A uni Cni Table 2

Table 2. Table

102 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

.5 3 4 2 32 1 1900 B 0 G 2 1 40 149 180 M 445 0 1 3 345 113 50 3 50 9 9 10 25 1 1 0 0 6 1 10 2 50 PT 180 265 1400 J 0 2 3 1 65 1 990 5 3 1 2 1 3 7 5 0 2 2 5 1 1 5 4 5 15 2 0. JVB 1 580 800 0 8 3 2 15 31 1 355 2 S 5 I 500 33 71 2 3 G 550 12 4 0 1 3 1 2 6 1 15 43 225 50 N 5 I 2 5 5 1 20 2 155 G 100 0 5 1 2 10. 390 00 6 3 2 18 1 1 16 3 89 7 5 2 8 1 4 1 SA 7 3 1 R 46 3 190 5 2 13 6 4 450 14 10 1 A 0 1 2 2 10 20 100 OW 0 1 2 3 1 0.5 490 s n ab s w e s p cr s s s b s s m s n m er a b i a s b Pra r ter ab r w ab a a e s id s g l a r c n p r n b cr i cr sh c n N in ac s t e r p i o aw t ge ge cr e la K ng t t lo rn e i m n d m a pr r & i bbl p ce o lv u ba o p m ern p t e t s her pe or o s ap sq v s p ra C sn o c We de ) 32) 6) ) 1851

18 4 8 , , 4 6 6 80) e 89 2 838 858 858) y 988 988 8 ll 5 189 t 854) rds i , i 847 905) 1 1798 1 1 1 a 191 , , 1 , 1 , e r v , , , 1 ,1825 , , 18 , 19 , s 1 188 n y e w 18 g g n , 195 e , n , , 1 ll n u t l o on on u n t a n d n e h o i i an e s i i s t é il o n i bu n n w ers ps ps p ic E w n u t rg re h r r re i ra n n s M e t Ha a m - A b h a n a i im im Dana, at Mi Wh F o l a t (G i is Mo R L De Ma Ma (D F S t S rin (H ( (S t K é ( u . M H (G ( s tu a l u t os ? e s T i ta noc a r a s a c s u i er x s atu 1 nda pp. t m o n pe a c s a a l v s s o i? fu li i atu T s di u e u x a us e i lt us d l s is is is pax e q c a a i ne e i s continued. s r a fu ti d r e bae ov f d . tal ps ps ps i cea i r h m . e n a r t a no t gon pe r e aps ta i i la gi p i ta sp e s e cf eo eo eo ti s s nus r s s s sub a te cf. ri m d i e e ma s s u t u di pac as c tu o om a na na na e o la ae s s s ia e ea e n e r r r in da s . Continued. ne ne

a au a d a di e a e pt a nus i Cr o in t da ii e th ca e a eu nus eu eu ia ppi i d a da c : d c lanid od s i i n i ape di ape ape i i ii a l t i t t L e la l ic ra en lc e as a ei al la lt hi ch da theid n oge oge oda ph s ph ph i i . d c a i i y a a h a b o cel a st j p me d la a l r om uco n og p o Me G Al Pi Al Ba Me C Al D Fu E D Me Me cf Dum Ep H H R Nax a e i a y e o po c Al D Ba P Pe Dr L G Ma H ip e hor lac r T D Cir Ma Arthro Table 2

Table 2. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 103 Appendix 2. continued

0 3 10 540 889 1650 1 B 0 G 2 773 520 295 256 M 2 0 8 50 7 5 1 3 2 114 147 3 3 25 4 1 3 8 55 4 1 8 T 76 25 P 695 399 2850 J 0 5 00 0 1 5 50 2 1 105 116 50 5 3 1 2 30 83 6 4 2 328 B 0 0 0 1 1 7 2 5 950 2 4 2 3 4 3 JV 11 2 1 2700 1450 1 0 0 7 4 3 11 21 3 680 0 S 80 5 250 2 22 I 1 2 1 G 30 80 648 5 4150 1 0 5 3 3 1 2 4 4 11 7 509 100 850 50 N 0 I 2 3 2 1 10 190 G 246 0 0 1 5 15 55 0.5 52 790 0 8 03 1 900 0 3 1 2 1 10 0 7 8 5 6 650 1 2 SA 4 6 1 R 20 250 1 750 44 1 13 9 7 73 43 0350 1 A 0 5 26 40 800 OW 0 0 1 2 3 1 28 135 r s e s s e r t p m e s ab s t l a m s l l i s cr e y r oy e l h s h r o on n N ng s t r s a s i o i u s g i m n m t m ch pe n m e m i mme wi s o l ma a ha sw C f 1) 34) 834 ) 1 186 8) 5) 9 18 , , , 858 y t 856) rds rds i ard 175 181 a a 865) , 1 r , , 183 , ,1825 s w w n k e 1 im r, 1 , l u on a d d h o a e s e rc il a k s a a G ps E u t e

n re n e e E H m u A n n e im at a in l & l (H i i L y L L (D S t ( (D ( o M u . . M A H (Q ( ns o a r f i m a i r x na ? gr s s r a a ? u sp. e te n i is s c T b r g e us i i s v T a in a sp. continued. e s or ife a p. m rid d lag e gla i i ssifro a nu . mnu ugos on sp a a l v . onid ue set u fi it r pe a ge ci . a s um s a ll n s s a r e i sp p e u it e hit u u s s sp ch pil a ul ui e da a

onid a e a n c s . Continued. om nt n n ae c e dal nus a nus o a d r o ida hor to a at eu m at a sq m am i o u t d u on i m m l id t n a t i t c o d n yg c l r da it opo r r c lid i lo tu e d Co op ll e e onid u a i m l i h e e ilu ilu c oi ti l r at it anth ori u l u ia ac a y C Am Cryp B Po El P T hal P A Heter N M Pt Po Cren i ioi ogn c l h t c cea ol s lv p y er C A S q M Pte om Port Pil I Ma a e a y u s l l N M Pt S t l o Biv P Mo Crust

Table 2 Table 2. Table

104 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued 3 B G 2 0.5 M 1 1 115 3 PT J 5 5 2 4 5 3 1 2 1 2 4 2 JVB 1 2 10 200 2 3 2 2 S 2 I G 40 7 5 3 1 2 6 N 0 I 1 1 2 5 2 2 1 220 G 1 5 30 11 5 3 0 1 00 2 SA 1 1 R 3 4 3 7 5 2 7 1 1 200 A 0 2 2 5 22 115 OW 0 1 2 3 1 7 p o l p e lop o al l s ls t a m s s all l e ls c el a l s s l S c lls m p r e e e ps Sc e l S sh

h m o t c a dri n N s cla r u o oy r n e all a a slug rci t b san ldli o m s e t h S a sc e ove sh ove se sea sea har i azo s g ea m m d r tri oy h t' u h o s o p l C om l Do a C B 32) ) ). 9) 9 ) 18 , 3) 93) 10 1 61) 2 4) 9 y 8 28) 0 758 t 791) 864) i ard 17 1 18 1 , r , 18 , 181 , , 1 , 184 185 , 19 s , , 1 s k , , 184 , rt im ,1828 n e e li c ck u e e h o d, 18 a i o rdi g s r k l e f v co a t n a ar G e n a u t ev e

S a e n e er n e e ros m m A o R n ern a am V R & i on M (Woo ( (R (C ( L y M (G (B ( (L (v o (L u (Q um at r um a x os i e s . b i a a m cf ns l ) ) eu x x ge a is a rrim a x id e d us s al a ple ple nop el i p r v t br at T a s i m i i llu t he es continued. t s r o l at o ono ono t e l ou r s s a s lte r ll y tu a a y s nt M M e u t v d a pod aaus ct i s p ( ( my a l us de ti i m a ba l pp. da am a a ue s c s il ae s l u e h n sp. m pa e um um um e hl bi lli

de e i h lu f ae c an id ae ae a da pod . Continued. e a he e ti ti c ti ane iu i da ae n a a ll nt pi i nops d da oc id ne b s s da a a a a id a ae cu en id us i i ro ii s eva i i oc e lin t u ni ida d ll co ci de s i in il m m si ly as m jid m n d r i id s ae ut in i o yl e oda y y y a h e m n ect Co ri a ala r ly l pi om lum rb n ili eo ar ct a g C C P B Py Ph A M e Ap Mo St E P Sc Sc Ph s C h g p n a u i h h b c a t p treo rop Mu Co P A Pe A P A Fissure T R t e n e u s s l C Os A Ven V Sor a l G Mo Table 2 Table 2. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 105 Appendix 2. continued

8 3 17 3 117 308 B G 2 7 10 M 0 4 0 1 1 5 40 20 3 6 3 116 6 0 8 6 3 1 8 40 53 2 1 20 6 0 8 T 1 1 16 7 24 P 181 J 5 0 7 2 20 65 45 18 5 0 0 1 3 1 2 50 5 0 1 50 8 1 6 B 5 0 2 9 1 5 00 1 200 50 8 2 2 JV 3 0 3 1 29 9 375 130 147 4 4 3 47 27 50 109 0 S 0 1 5 I 1 30 10 4 G 5 80 70 1 1 2 0 9 3 1 2 6 28 89 5 759 180 N 0 0 I 1 2 15 6 60 15 4 450 450 G 0 1 0 3 1 7 5 7 6 140 0 0 0 0 4 7 1 5 3 9 1 2 5 2 3 1 25 1 6 0 4 2 93 2 4 3 SA 2 5 1 1 R 2 0 0 0 3 15 4 2 2 175 2 1 1 0 6 0 5 2 180 1 3 563 1 1 A 0 2 50 2 148 OW 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 4 4 2 1 28 5 190 d d i i d i d u u i u u h s e s S q s q S q i S q s d l f m s i i ds ri l S e i s opu a u a a l a t t e u ch ai t q lefish t s slug m q n m le

s u bt a l a l oc n N s tt l efish j l g o a C ai bra opu t n s ai t Bo gil ' m e C di Bo e l g ri cuttl t rn u d Py oc m g t e rn obt rn e n iant Cutt iant a o o u e sid e b h r pe t b G h h C bl t t ri B u t u u S S o S o S o 32) 32 6 18 18 , , 4) 4 9 9 y 0 26) t 4 8 i 907 ard ard 921 187 8 , r 188 1 190 1 , im im , , 18 m r , , 1 h o e, a o, 1 a a o er, e l f s h ay y G G rry f rc u t

is e o e ra uvi f A Gr Be b H V & & C P (R ( y A o oy u u Q (Q m T u . t p a e d s a a oni a ia c c sp num li r au x d i s . ic at a a r n ic u p r t t ol v pe a a T an ll d s t s o e . a s a m ne oll l ue ae s aus l hu au bre continued. da n m li en a e i s . eh a t a i e ta a a sp di p la ggi ed e nt h ium anc i chid ll am va t ri ae a s e d o f da r a s na n ia i ch e u Continued. o a c som b ti ii ll a id pe m d d r lo o n e ch i y to ea pus o ar

da r b e adar olo a a ap a ote a br ida a no he a n im a d t u da o d d i r m to pr r i pi ad pi r d i pi pi pi ol pi a id e gin c p i opod poda G d opo bra t ro li hi pi pi i ol eu Se Se Be Pl Se Cera Se Eu Hap Se ? Se O un c i h opo l al di ro t ut pi S e P C Lo Sep S e O u c e st ph Notas N Sep T O S e a e G C

Table 2. Table 2. Table

106 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

3 1290 B G 2 750 M 0 0 1 1 0 3 124 117 0 0 0 1 3 5 0 2 4 30 1 PT 150 250 400 J 0 5 1 1 0 1 1 1 43 1 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 5 2 1 JVB 1 5 180 1200 0 0 2 3 5 50 60 2 0 S 50 0 I 5 3 G 80 2 480 5 0 0 5 3 1 2 1 750 100 100 195 195 0 N 4 I 2 1 1 500 900 G 193 0 0 0 1 5 1 5 0.5 0.5 1 135 0 5 0 7 75 3 7 2 2 3 1 1 0 6 5 7 00 0 3 2 2 5 2 SA 1 4 1 2 7 R 0 5 . 2 550 26 490 30 0 4 1 1 7 500 21 21 300 935 1 3 A 0 0 10 30 10 20 900 215 370 OW 0 0 0 5 4 1 2 3 1 2 7 45 e m s a s tar r s a r n N e o h t m seast m fea o C 3 2 3) 6 8) , 184 , 184 , 184 88) l l l 7 90) 915 e e e 920 0) 7) y 6 h h t h 191 1 843) 843) 841) 8 i 1 , , c c c 175 , , 18 r , k n r 1 n s i r b, 18 184 184 i os os os e r, 1 r, 1 r, 1 , , u t a r r r e ll, h o u l y y l e i n a le le le rle r a l l l l T T T u t rr t ra ra e C n pe . r de d A r a & & & ö L in ö a (G (G Ve r r r . (Mü (Mü (Mü e e L e D (H l l l D H ( (C l l l ü Mü M Mü ( ta s us i u g ca a r s at s r e r x rra a a ri i u i a e ci u be at lia a e osu T lat a vi s vic nni a n m eissi in n r i pur s r ahl tra as r a a s e r spi ect continued. ngu ster seri ster a par w u ral ria e n n p e a gu e s c s d p pu a a a p a n e r st a e i a e a ca t r r te a a u a da n d e a s t d a la l hu hu c i i i i i er in er t t hia a e d te e t ast a d as r u e r a i a d . Continued. i t t tu n n ae d n a c st e r t metr nt ae nid i o ter in t as di a e e a a a a d ia e a a a

i op s o s n id i ste l l h a p i r r l ni rom r m m m m a t pa do a id iid a id ch t r ri u e o e o o tulid os o o o h o e n s r d e t d te m at a t i t te east c ip i ll de S Ar A Do G D A C C C C Me Lu N Cosc n s i v c derm o m x r Gonia Or A As Ar Co As Lu A e t inoi Co Val Pa For r C As Echino

Table 2 Table 2. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 107 Appendix 2. continued 3 B G 0 2 1 M 1 118 0 0 5 7 1 3 1 7 65 1 0 3 T 0 1 32 9 77 P 1 J 0 0 5 00 5 51 16 49 4 9 0 0 5 3 1 2 1 0 25 8 B 0 0 2 0 55 5 0 6 2 0 750 2 1 1 1 1 JV 8 5 0 . 5 1 5 32 1 1200 6 3 8 9 62 5 S 0 4 5 I 90 13 51 8 G 0 99 5 3 9 915 0.5 1 3 1 4 8 3 3 1 2 7 1 149 155 5 0 N 3 0 I 1 2 5 3 12 2 3 100 G 236 116 0 0 1 2.5 300 157 00 00 5 3 5 3 6 0 0 0 5 5 8 2 7 5 0 SA 0 0 1 R 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 5 1 1 4 11 1 2 3 5 4 5 250 14 11 1 135 150 3 0 A 0 0 7 2 1 12 21 275 270 175 OW 1010 0 5 0 1 2 3 1 5 50 17 e s r m e s a r b s n m i n N u esta h c o c ttl i m ur acu m br e o s C 1) ) 12 2) 46 75) 914) 184 y , 777 867 t 19 s i , , 1 e 1 r 18 k , 18 187 , 1 , , r , n t in a g el a n n i h o l k h le en a o n t c w n u t t C er e ci d . l n u n A u e L e öd . H l S e P ( Tros (L ( a H (D (V s a i i l n o s m e nus ar i l ls i m ul i gic a i atu e a m s ae z r d i t x o r s l s ang s a pon ch d e o p ri i iop pit T s e u as dr s gi c ue i ari x ot m hm i es n continued. m ll er c us s i ae c e ili ae u sue o b u ae hr s i a m anc s nt a qua id ca n s ae s d id d a i id ae da o d ot x ur le m m i l a ae da r d e at r i ix c ix t us c i a y a m d r ti b id s le oi u e l t i id inu us s ir a k l r e a ca a i hr h ae a a c rm ch t le

r . Continued. ro e t a u iroti i d a i ophi ch a id a ot o op ur id i a ch ola a r ode a d de no ero neu d i i i nop i h t le e a t o hop c op d d ch cr o h hi h h opod n lo ode de p s ni oi d r ron hi n m ad r i i r ic h p p p p a l o e u o e ro e h o ide cum u ve ea m doc g n ang d C C ic St C O Ma O O O P T e N Ec p u t o e oxop p derm th ur pi n y Scl S t C Ophio O Ophiur T La T Lo s o l l hi A Den Ophiuri C Tem Echinoi Spa o H Op Echi Echino Table 2 Table 2. Table

108 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

0 3 450 179 4850 2 B 0 5 0 0 G 2 14 20 285 M 327 340 120 4 0 1 81 75 119 5 0 2 3 50 0 13 360 700 4 8 3 4 6 0 PT 190 645 2050 1000 J 1 0 0 0 0 50 0 9 36 11 120 990 645 465 266 00 0 3 1 2 1 121 0 0 1 3 50 2 5 300 150 1 2 9 JVB 2 5 1 400 2650 3050 4650 1 1 0 0 0 3 32 24 20 320 120 400 0 S 02 5 200 150 I 900 43 550 23 1 3 3 5 G 25 19 30 50 400 970 84 1 610 9 550 1250 5 1 1 9 0 0 7 0 - 3 1 2 2 36 1 247 750 250 110 175 335 0 00 0 0 N 7 1 I 2 1 1 760 900 400 G 234 500 122 515 1 0 0 2 0 4 6 6 1 5 0 0 2 8 7 1 4 200 0 0 4 2 00 5 6 3 5 3 2 1 6 14 7 0 0 0 5 00 5 00 2 5 5 SA 4 3 6 3 6 R 11 0 0 6 6 5 350 20 600 4 3 6 3 16 0 5 14 14 650 550 479 550 315 450 4 2 5 A 0 45 27 100 469 350 160 OW 7 0 0 0 50 0 1 2 3 1 10 9 389 240 179 e e re y a re a y a y y e a k e g R a h r e r y e n e s r a ov h y e a in i s a R s r R r f m a h t i o r r e g rdi e e Sting c g a f s l a le n e S h t s g bbl n n n r l l g i d i d S t a s n o n o e g an a i S a d e e o n C A t n N C S p n S t n

s h S t t

di n ov E F i o a s i S t n e

o y h a i h n A c r ck ed i l fi o u n p r m l l a r a p ck s e te S a as i r - m e oot m a r B Ja t h n r tu la y t t t Shovel r s o s th

s u e B S t u el om t n E u C S m S tri A Por rs C S o A a S ou ter s Wes e S p W 1 1 4 0) ) 8 ) ) 9 ) 1 184 5) 9 7) 3) 9 81 , 85) 184 y e , t l s i 1791 790 794 n , 193 e r , 18 187 189 189 , 1842 179 e , 18 196 g , , , n 1 1 , , y y r , , e s y n y a h o n e e k H er, n en w b l w o e o b l t c t lb l y y a a u t i i t i & & Henle, & x ci a n c e

i g u g a n r r u a A e D e M O H (S h (S h l l Wh ( (Jen ( M (O l (H a (Th ü (V Mülle M s ni s u l so s a k T atu u h c ana T a d p t s a y al ti ul a i r e ea a u a s i t ata a c x en ac t o usj c is s har us o i ac a c lon l t c li rt nc al im u s at bus T o cr i il a aud r T is s co us t o . r a c p

continued. v t i m te po r o id s at - - a v s es auc a a sp nafas . . e m s e i e s u et s s s stri e p p m t p aus ne e er er h a n da au rm e d ae p p i n r e iu is ae ae s r e br th o li ti s r a s s ani f rm s li Continued. s e es e opt opt or hus loi iid i a is is id id do e ae

ops l da o t u e a s n an an i bat a hot e f e n m at at ar at at man hid au na d ogl e id don ro op t i c n a o r d ti os y y n di di d i i a e e a d rm gon gon gon d orm i i l s at m id gr ty t aul ol e ob n ro i op f go y y y ot o r c c osi r a r i r n n e odon f li o i te o t inob eifo oba r ol u r ace up y f ot En as D as Het Her Das T r T r C Ap U T r Pl A My Spr Sar ri e n h e n p i l u t i j u ph di u es e Eng Dasy H Py l P Ur R A M Cl e h l o data l c ci r s Ra H P S i R L C s Pi A Cho Table 2.

Table 2. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 109 Appendix 2. continued

5 8 2 3 2 87 3 3 318 553 B G 7 1 4 2 6 1 31 2 271 162 238 M 0 5 4 1 0 4 57 9 2 21 40 2 120 8 2 38 4 5 3 2 6 7 33 12 3 1 2. 5 T 3 5 49 1 P 156 164 126 J 0 3 8 3 6 1 3 4 7 20 5 4 1 28 1 1 4 7 4 3 1 2 26 0 2 1 1 3 1 B 9 1 7 09 2 32 3 2 3 JV 2 1 1 3 1 4 3 3 2 154 601 1 7 5 9 3 4 9 4 18 33 13 102 S 5 3 21 4 I 98 64 10 14 4 3 G 98 33 19 10 2 254 0 9 3 1 2 4 37 38 358 236 685 367 105 162 5 N 7 2 2 I 2 2 30 1 40 7 1 275 771 239 G 221 6 2 4 1 2 9 1 1 4 1 2 13 11 19 18 88 120 102 0 9 2 1 13 4 27 5 8 3 4 0 5 1 5 3 1 8 2 .23 3 9 8 0 3 71 17 3 2 SA 0 8 9 3 2 1 1 1 R 125 4 2 8 0 0 5 4 1 26 0 7 62 1 7 1 5 1 1 5 3 5 850 24 4 8 203 199 347 786 161 1 A 0 1 18 46 87 3 114 125 OW 3 9 8 5 0 1 4 8 1 7 2 8 5 1 2 3 1 8 3 1 2 3 1 33 22 4 d a e se h h t r h d a o a e ad ad h h n rc e d e i e e ah d Perc sh di a f h is ot d i h h m ad l d F l e t t y f r i d ar e ar rf a Se h m r a a a e d te a h r d Pe et r a a t rn r at e v F l F l a rn ot G a i an an u a V l

rn n N u l p d e e n li H h h Be i n S e l F l u s F l o

rn t G a r t r

o a e in r u t o e y e e y t m u G t m S o p on d G o h n g d p p V s s s t i d e G m n d u m ow m u g a u i e ee e Bl R o l o ll e n o S p t R m A e D t h M C o C S l rn S o i Finet st g e L Y L C e h t Bi u W S o ) 1843 25 25) 7) , l 3 8 42) e 72 18 18 2 5 , , 7 6 84 5 12) 184 26) y eg 8 , 9 l t 18 829) 829) s 907) , i , 18 18 ard ard h 175 , 1 193 e 18 r , n , 18 18 , , , 19 u er s , , 1 n , 1 o , , 1 y s im im y r a r g u n s S c a n h o a a e e e n e n iu en o ley l d e an i i i t l r a s G G u t i it v & v

z uli ci s c a es n eg h u u k a n n e a A stel h n c i e u P & & a l l Wh W (R ic n (C (C M (L y L i (Til a C K oy o (R m u u (V m Q (Q e (T sis ir tus s s a s r i is en ch u o ic n s t t i ht ns p atu nga u p ia e r la a s i ano ac o m s and lo o l x g ice r l i ad i i e r a l m s r d ecu a a i b a ku n T t ns ongi ube m s l e v continued. ns s andu ys l u s nic hi s s en s u s s sp s h mar e us ta sca p t ino tc u h u s e s a ae s li l lu l e a h p que e e u p e lapapi or d pus e a t apo s a m c i a e te er m er s a e m d h lid j ha h ha ig s e h a is d s ost a e es d d i a r nia a a p a s s vo i am a lif e d i

m t a i e e orm us i ic n h ep ifor h e ep nom d r . Continued. b e h i ap i o d i es u asti doni mp g e t ko c rm if su t ve r e i rm te r ill da a ni n a yc y yc ri ep fo o c o n a goc o da s i t t r o x r goc ta i eb e c na el a ne por e rm os r g y f pid ppoc o li f a at he a ni a s a e i y n i a h o a e rif l o r e l i i rid r l mi f r n t ng gasi he p ig i aty C P M L e K H N Ine O Pl At M Ee H P P Gymn e t r o l e ste Conti l m orp he T Neo Ap P H A Vel Mo S y P Te a t a es S c Be Gad A G L c s Pi

Table 2 Table 2. Table

110 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

8 8 1 5 1 5 3 2 77. 33.5 06.8 0. 287. 4 8 1 1 1 B 6 G 1 2 46 2 922 M 195 6 2 0 3 9 1 9 6 2 11 4 131 121 4 4 5 4 4 3 3 0 3 7 38 2 1 1 3 1 2 95 PT 141 1062 J 0 5 6 7 3 0 2 5 2 7 4 1 31 20 1 8 2 7 5 3 1 5 7 1 3 1 2 0 97 6 1 6 6 1 4 4 0 2 2 9 2 2 1 JVB 0 9 7 5 1 7 49 4 58 5 4 4 319 2 9 0 3 3 64 39 49 543 403 5 S 2 94 I 681 7 5 5 G 379 806 68 349 4 1 4 8 3 1 2 56 194 167 143 407 307 825 1137 3 2 N I 2 4 8 13 118 279 836 G 322 327 9 1 6 1 8 2 8 8 1 24 35 2 3 75 57 428 134 6 4 81 93 3 6 3 1 1 50 49 5 19 7 6 56 . 2 42 SA 3 1 6 3 R 44 37 6 287 6 1 27 768 171 2 1 1 11 2 7 634 711 436 993 101 311 937 1 A 4 5 3.1 262 404 432 114 OW 5 9 1 2 9 4 6 2 3 0 1 2 3 1 8 8 58 9 902 176 690 326 251 h s i f e h t h s s s d t s e h i y i u s f s e l f as h d i et l t e g n on s f a i a atfish n m ly i a e o g h l c f y o a o oby t s l a h Wee a on e i l r g a S c p d v G p G s l d Wr a

o e i nf e ph r obbl t s c c Go D d n N d a te Trev i rbe o S i h s G t e h e D t r o s s e e te

s l S i G Tre s k w r ck i v s fi et n a m m pot d f l a a er ai o t pin s e j l n d' C m pot g s l er a r rt m S i n S a t s tre n e g ip o o m s i rn e S a oo S n kb e Y Ba u G F C ow o n l S k sy h r W i t L We B A P B u S o ) 7 ) ) 3 ) 46 43 50) 8 6 4 9 1) 4) 6) 1836 7 5 5 875 872

1 y , 8 9 8 t 18 829) 833) s s, , , 18 , 18 i , 1 , 1 1 1 1 193 e 194 e r n 188 , , , , ,1853 , n , 1 , 1 n r r, r o on on r y y r au au r y s n n e e h o e e e e e e d ds ds he he i i k ln ln i i tl lb tl r u t i e i i v e e v c c a ar ar t t e h g h u u n A l h h h ünt ünt achn en as as c c le B W W i ic i G L G (C (C (O ( ( ( a al R R (C (C (R V V ( di la s s 2 i I iae ? s i i i i s s n anu i good g e u r s a s and n gi p e in l icu y x r t s ght o r e aum i h a i i l u or m l t i ote r y as l o lus T ez h t a l i ral l al b c pf met r ig e l i T continued. u va e xw st xge a p e m us s g ph u ur p ys ys vla e dac p o pp. an an e s bi li no a d ppos s th r ce s u a m s s a us d e e ar ar al i h u e r s s tra s s asy s u ia ia hi r a s e opu ogo n r m n

. Continued. a ida e e r cep a eu eu eu eic l y id t ae lab doc yl quul doc doc ae hu a d t ae o n e n nti i d on i c en en en en i to r ogo id e ng eu eu eu r ac i io lid pham pham orm r a l rre ll ra b if inid u Co Up Ps Se Cristi Up T r Up Si Up No D Pa Si Ac Ap Ps Ps pog s rc Cl M La Ca Ge A Gob Ca sce Pe Pi Table 2

Table 2. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 111 Appendix 2. continued

9 4 3 9 38.2 873 066. 2950 4 1 B 0 0 G 1 7 6 4 2 3 11 3 4 1 124 M 430 140 0 4 5 0 5 1 3 8 2 4 52 112 122 1 00 2 8 2 3 270 6 6 1 1 1 0 5 9 T 8 1 85 26 2 33 4 P 190 1500 J 0 9 4 9 4 2 3 0 4 2 1 22 8 2 13 760 101 0 6 5 3 1 2 2 0 4 0 33 5 6 1 3 B 0 8 7 2 7 5 34 759 2 3 JV 3 4 1 2 16 57 22 25 50 3350 421 1112 1 9 2 5 9 5 6 3 5 1 6 27 8 17 14 127 0 S 0 1 0 4 18 I 16 66 30 2 24 4 4 7 G 35 528 26 250 11 55 9 512 145 1 2 7 2 6 3 1 2 80 1 12 324 353 114 558 369 0 N 4 I 2 13 1 25 47 532 143 824 380 G 110 6 3 7 8 2 1 9 5 82 14 1 53 2 171 101 2 6 80 9 5 3 7 5 3 9 0 9 1 5 6 4 5 12 1 3 8 5 7 8 22 94 85 2 SA 6 1 2 2 8 7 1 2 R 6 1 1 8 7 9 22 14 6 1 2 9 8 3 009 18 150 62 1 4 21 658 562 365 300 144 2 2 1 A 0 5 3 2 9 2 9 8 303 150 511 210 OW 9 4 6 9 0 3 4 3 5 5 9 1 2 3 1 1 4 1 7 2 5 90 128 248 316 g n r g g i t n e n te i i r i g t t r n r h i n i e s u e i e de e i r h t e r d d n i f l y s e Wh m r i n t n u e h r f a Wh e ue ue Sol h e s Wh e o r l t l b t s d G S o t p ou r ll ou i s o o W u l f o e r F l o m pe o l pe n N ed ong F l ppe h i h h u h Bu o ri Bu s e a a m r e F G eed T t n obe h n y fi ow y T l T r m a n S c oot g S t S c S e t g rr a G W E t m n t a n rn Tru ll s rn r ou o f her e a o n e e t S e tle H e Wav l t r t R h t C u t s i e L E We t e u S m L So W Wes S o Wes 1) ) 24 0 1 4 6) 4 180 ) ) , 6) 42 18 8 884) r , 9) 5 1 e

y 0 d t 191 191 985 191 818 829 s, , 18 i r, 1 i , , , 9 ard 176 1840 e e e r , h h h 1 189

,1855 , 1 s , , 1 , 1 n , n n c on r im r r y s u y n h h oc oc o e e, h o a e e a l e t n e c ds i i k ll l ll i i lb a G y a u t K e i v v a u u u

c ar S c n d e g u u A l h C C n W in en & i c c cC c C C & Mc B i (Jen (O e L ( h al ( M M oy R (M V u (S t ( loc Q (B i i t i s ns ri a us s hur s ix x i s ny ge u is u r s e a T t t n r tu i al je e T tu a z p. ck oad is r ngat s t ea la lta r n m t e o continued. u s s ea sp us ns l s u a b b t l e e lin m u t e lt e he cel vi e s e e s a r s a haa o u a s s sa m n a s e u t a t u ct e ae d d e i s k s u t s is a d ae i c e s t d a ba e a i orm ho c d ri a e id orm a a h m d ae u ni s r id os aur bur vi odus bas r e os if cti hy d s s ca if ti s

t s o s n t . Continued. rid to e h ed r mi e er gl dax o ae o us n ht dor e ae ct ia te a ap n ae p a o onti c ape r ip nti e h t pt ago m ago ago gl o id i d onti m r gr id no oo i m la lsa nt p id u odon eu nogl l r p ll ll ll i d y e e o e e a aginid a g odo ac th m l r ma lei ar r m ron Co a eu n Am Si C P Ps Pa Zeb D P N Pa Si Pe P P Si Ar d e o e l a i o r s P Cyno P eu Pe So O P Dio N Sp T P Sil B sce Tet Pl Pi

Table 2 Table 2. Table

112 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 Appendix 2. continued

3 4 14 2650 B G 2 2 9 24 3 24 975 150 114 M 5 1 4 83 123 3 1 650 2 2 4 1 3 PT 750 J 0 570 50 7 3 1 2 2 46 2 6.3 250 55 3 JVB 6 1 6 6 46 3400 1 0 9 3 40 11 130 S 6 I 250 4 43 2 G 1 350 33 19 2 7 4 3 1 2 1 12 87 98 15 327 108 176 0 N 5 I 2 70 9 14 156 G 195 0 0 0 6 1 5 5 34 27 50 3 375 0 5 8 3 3 3 2 4 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 1 5 2 SA 1 5 2 5 R 470 2 8 8 14 . 8 71 8 6250 450 3 1 A 0 6 .34 5 9.27 5 144 545 2 1 OW 1 90 0 1 1 7 0 7 1 2 3 1 5 6 7 7 1 28 329 120 t e k t h c e t s t a t k i t e e e f e rj k k k x e k e h c h c o h s rjac a a t i m is e j f rjac a f B rj r a h rjac e d e e h e w e h s at L h h h o

t t e e at n N y a a oot h at e C Toa o e e L s e m s d ' h L fi g m L s e L y w S m d L l u g h m ic a l n n g r a le Py e o i br s e b S h h t C R id rn o t ou n s r e o a R M h B o F t We u T S o 86) 915) 24) 24) 41 ) 1 , 18 18 ) ) , 18 h , , c , 19 65) 873 y r o by t l e i ard ard 798 790 l il , 1 r n 17 u g , 1 1 n im im , , au k C h o a a O ru w w ln ec G G a a u t e B

b & t - Mc s A r y & & as e a (S h (S h & s s y y (O e a o o (C t i u u am F r (Q (Q (R (Wa s u T s s nur de la oi anu inant s tus e i s er us m la rm a dal a oni n o l ic ig s x l e l te i i k yg a tt n e sa anu p c i m T r a h s s j a am g c t ind ar s e i s e r s s mo e continued. e - a ys os a eres vi eres y a t er d th d h d ed thu u ute i i e l apr t f ut hi ht u ch phor a al ae an ti n . Continued. oc nt h ni n lic t th a anaaur hal go

iid e a n c nti e nac odon d b opl a a an ac ac i obi ac a m c u n r tr t Co o A Ac Ar O Mo Sc un Br E An s e s M T O sce Pi

Table 2 Table 2. Table

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 181, 2008 113