Report of the Expert Panel on a Declared Commercial Fishing Activity

5 Direct impacts on EPBC Act protected species 49 5.1 Introduction 5 DIRECT There are 241 species (see Appendix 3) protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cwlth) (EPBC Act) that occur in the area of the Small Pelagic Fishery (SPF). These are comprised of: impacts • 10 pinniped species • 44 cetacean species • Dugong Dugong dugon ON EPBC A • 89 species of seabirds • six marine turtle species CT • nine seasnake species PROTECTE • 13 shark and ray species • 69 teleost species, of which 66 are syngnathids and three are other teleost fish. The data compiled by Tuck et al. (2013) have been used as the primary source to inform the panel’s understanding of the D nature and extent of the direct interactions of mid-water trawling in the SPF with protected species to date. Tuck et al. SPECIES (2013) report on ‘interactions’ with protected species but do not define ‘interaction’. Since the data were compiled from Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) logbooks and observer records the panel has assumed that the interactions data reported in Tuck et al. (2013) reflect the definition in the memorandum of understanding (MoU) between AFMA and the Department of the Environment. As noted in Section 2.2.3, this definition excludes acoustic disturbance and behavioural changes brought about by habituation to fishing operations, which the panel includes in its definition of ‘direct interactions’ applied to the assessment of the Declared Commercial Fishing Activity (DCFA). As a result Tuck et al. (2013) understate the level of ‘direct interactions’. However, in the absence of any more comprehensive assessment of historical interactions data, the panel has used the information collated by Tuck et al. (2013) as an indicator of the nature and extent of direct interactions with protected species by previous mid-water trawl activity in the SPF. The panel’s Terms of Reference specified the need to assess the likely nature and extent of direct interactions of the DCFA with seals and dolphins. The panel formed the view that pinnipeds and cetacean species generally warranted detailed consideration. Within each of those groups the panel identified species of particular interest (Sections 5.2 and 5.3). The panel noted that the Department of the Environment did not ascribe a high level of uncertainty to the impacts of the DCFA on seabirds (Box 1.1). This appears to have been based largely on the fact that there would be no discharge of biological material by the DCFA, the net would remain submerged during the pumping operation and bird mitigation measures were relatively well developed and tested. The panel generally concurs with this assessment. As a result, its assessment of the impact of any direct interactions with seabirds (Section 5.4) is less extensive and less species-specific than that for pinnipeds and cetaceans. However, the panel formed the view that the potential for ecosystem effects, of any potential localised depletion arising from the DCFA, on seabirds, particularly on central place foragers (CPF), required more detailed assessment (Chapter 6). The panel considered the need to assess direct interactions between the DCFA and protected species of dugong, turtles, seasnakes, sharks and teleosts and formed the view that this was not necessary. The rationale for this decision is provided in Appendix 3. 50 5.2 Pinnipeds 5.2.1 Pinniped species assessed There are three resident pinniped species that breed in coastal areas and islands off southern Australia. These are the Australian sea lion Neophoca cinerea, the New Zealand fur seal Arctocephalus forsteri, and the Australian fur seal A. pusillus doriferus. All species are native to Australia, occur within the SPF and occur in sympatry (overlap in ranges) over SPECIES parts of their range (Kirkwood and Goldsworthy 2013) (Figure 5.1). D In addition to these resident species, a number of vagrant species visit southern Australia irregularly (Figure 5.2). The most common is the subantarctic fur seal A. tropicalis. Its nearest breeding colonies are located at subantarctic Macquarie Island (Southern Ocean/South Pacific Ocean) and Amsterdam/St Paul Islands (Southern Ocean/Southern PROTECTE Indian Ocean). Southern elephant seals Mirounga leonina are also regularly sighted in southern Australia, most commonly between September and March with animals coming ashore to moult. There are a number of breeding records in southern CT Australia, most notably in Tasmania. Prior to European arrival in Australia this species used to breed on King Island, Bass Strait, but was eliminated by sealers by the early 1800s. The nearest breeding sites are now at subantarctic Macquarie and Heard Islands. Another regular visitor to southern Australia is the leopard seal Hydrurga leptonyx. Although there EPBC A are records of sightings of crabeater seal Lobodon carcinophagus, Weddell seal Leptonychotes weddelli, Ross seal ON Ommatophoca rossii and Antarctic fur seal A. gazella in southern Australia, they are uncommon relative to the other vagrant species (Kirkwood and Goldsworthy 2013). The panel recognises that interactions between these vagrant pinniped species and SPF fishing vessels is possible but unlikely because of their irregular occurrence. Therefore, this report impacts focuses largely on the three key resident species. The panel recognises that potential impacts from the DCFA could apply to the other seven pinniped species as well. A summary of distribution and abundance throughout the SPF, status and trends, conservation status and foraging ecology of these key species is provided below. DIRECT 5 Australian sea lion Neophoca cinerea (Level 2 Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) Residual Risk – Medium) Distribution and range The Australian sea lion (ASL) is endemic to Australia, and restricted to South Australia (SA) and Western Australia (WA). Its extant breeding range extends from The Pages Islands (just east of Kangaroo Island) in SA to Houtman Abrolhos on the west coast of WA (Shaughnessy et al. 2011). Pupping has been recorded at 81 sites (islands and at several mainland sites); 47 in SA and 34 in WA (Shaughnessy et al. 2011, Goldsworthy et al. 2013b, Goldsworthy unpublished data) (Figure 5.3). Despite the large number of breeding sites, only seven sites produce more than 100 pups per breeding season, all of which are in SA. The average pup production per breeding site is just 40, with most sites (70 per cent), producing fewer than 30 pups per breeding season (Goldsworthy et al. 2009a, Goldsworthy unpublished data). The population can be broadly separated into three main metapopulations, one in SA accounting for approximately 84 per cent of pup production; one on the south coast of WA accounting for approximately 10 per cent of pup production; and one on the west coast of WA accounting for approximately 6 per cent of pup production (Goldsworthy et al. 2009a, Goldsworthy unpublished data). All west coast WA colonies fall north of the SPF boundary (31°S) (although the southernmost colony at Buller Island is only 38 kilometres (km) to the north). Therefore, about 94 per cent of the species population occurs adjacent to the SPF area. Another 151 locations have been identified as haul-out sites (90 in SA and 61 in WA), but because records of haul-out sites are based on opportunistic observations, the actual number is likely to be higher than this (Goldsworthy et al. 2009a). 51 5 DIRECT impacts ON EPBC A CT PROTECTE D SPECIES Figure 5.1 Distribution of the three resident pinnipeds in relation to the total area of waters fished in the SPF using mid-water trawl during 2000–2013. Source: Map produced by the Environmental Resources Information Network (ERIN), Department of the Environment using unpublished AFMA data. Population size and trends Total pup production is estimated to be 2691 in SA and 335 off the south coast of WA, and 182 off the west coast of WA (3208 in total) (Goldsworthy et al. 2009a, Shaughnessy et al. 2011, Goldsworthy et al. 2013b, Goldsworthy unpublished data, Goldsworthy in review). Pup production to total population multipliers developed for the species range from 3.83 to 4.08 (Goldsworthy and Page 2007, Goldsworthy et al. 2010) giving a total population estimate of approximately 12,690 (with a range of about 12,290–13,090), or approximately 12,000 (with a range of 11,590–12,350) adjacent to the SPF area. ASL were subject to unregulated sealing in the late 18th and early 19th century (Ling 1999), resulting in a reduction in population size of unknown extent and extirpation of populations in Bass Strait and from many locations within their current range (Shaughnessy et al. 2011). The species has not recovered since harvesting ceased, unlike the two fur seal species in southern Australia that have undergone rapid recovery in recent years (Kirkwood et al. 2010, Shaughnessy et al. 2014). The analysis of population trends requires consistent estimates or indices of pup production over a number of breeding seasons, and the non-annual and asynchronous breeding habits of the species have made collecting reliable time-series of pup abundance/production challenging (Goldsworthy et al. 2009a). Therefore, time series data from which trends in abundance can be estimated are limited (Goldsworthy et al. 2009a). The longest time-series data come from the three largest breeding colonies in SA, Seal Bay (Kangaroo Island), The Pages Islands (Backstairs Passage) and Dangerous Reef (Spencer Gulf). More recent time series have come from SA colonies along the Bunda Cliffs in the Great Australian Bight (GAB), at Olive Island (off Streaky Bay), Lilliput and Blefuscu Islands (Nuyts Archipelago) and two small colonies at Jones 52 SPECIES D PROTECTE CT EPBC A ON impacts DIRECT 5 Figure 5.2 Pinniped species richness (resident and vagrant species) in relation to the total area of waters fished in the SPF using mid-water trawl during 2000–2013.

Load more