DOCSLIB.ORG

Application to the Department of Environment on the Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Application to the Department of Environment on the Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT ON THE TASMANIAN GIANT CRAB FISHERY Against the Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries (2007) June 2019 DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES, PARKS, WATER AND ENVIRONMENT, TASMANIA 1. Background The purpose of this submission is to update the Department of Environment on the current status and management changes in the Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery to enable its reassessment against the Guidelines for Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries. The Tasmanian Giant Crab fishery was initially assessed by the then Environment Australia against the guidelines for the ecological sustainable management of fisheries in 2003 and the fishery was declared an approved Wildlife Trade Operation (WTO), under Part 13A of the EPBC Act. This declaration would allow the export of product from the fishery under permits for the next three years. The Fishery has since been re-assessed against the guidelines by the Department of Water and Environment in 2006, 2009 and 2014, where the fishery was given an exemption for export approval for a further five years. The current approval expires in July 2019. This report should be read in conjunction with: Previous assessments of the Giant Crab fishery under part 13A of the EPBC Act which can be found at http://www.environment.gov.au/marine/fisheries/tas/giant-crab The current Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery Management plan (Fisheries (Giant Crab) Rules 2013) which can be found at http://www.thelaw.tas.gov.au/tocview/index.w3p;cond=ALL;doc_id=%2B2%2B2013%2BAT%40EN %2B20140522150000;histon=;prompt=;rec=;term=Giant%20Crab%20Rules%202013 Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery 2. Fishery Overview The table below is a summary overview of the Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery: Publicly available information relevant to Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995 the fishery Fisheries Giant Crab Rules 2013 (Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery Management Plan) Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) giant crab assessment and research reports Application to the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts for the re-assessment of the Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery 2014 (2014 Submission) Application to the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts for the re-assessment of the Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery 2009 (2009 Submission) Department of the Environment and Heritage, Assessment of the Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery 2006 (2006 Assessment) Assessing the Ecological Sustainability of the Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery (2006 Submission) Department of the Environment and Heritage, Assessment of the, Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery 2003 (2003 Assessment) Area Figure 1: Map of the TGCF (Source, IMAS) The area of the fishery includes waters surrounding the state of Tasmania generally south of 39º12′ and out to the outer edge of the Australian Exclusive Economic Zone. The vast majority of the TCGF is in Commonwealth waters; however the entire fishery is managed by Prepared by Wild Fisheries Management Branch, DPIPWE, MAY 2019 Page 3 Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery Tasmania under an Offshore Constitutional Settlement (OCS) between the Australian Government and the Government of Tasmania. Fishery status The 2019 Status of Australian Fish Stocks Report reported the Tasmanian part of the giant crab fishery as depleted. Where the report states: This level of egg production is considered to be inadequate relative to benchmarks in most crustacean fisheries [Fogarty and Gendron 2004]. Since the 2013–14 assessment the model has not been updated due to a lack of data, and analyses have focused instead on CPUE trends. CPUE has decreased almost continually since the inception of the Tasmanian fishery. Due to its slow growth and longevity, Giant Crab is particularly susceptible to becoming recruitment overfished. The above evidence indicates that the stock is likely to be depleted. In an effort to increase biomass and reverse declining CPUE trends the total allowable catch for the fishery has been reduced since the last assessment from 38.3t to 20.7 t, a TAC reduction of 46%. Target Species Giant Crab (Pseudocarcinus gigas) Byproduct Species As of the 1 June 2007, giant crab byproduct has been reported in the Giant Crab Catch Record Book. This procedure has made for effective recording of byproduct as now fishers only have to fill in a single log book for their giant crab fishing operations. An audit of Giant Crab Catch returns for the 2016/17 season and 2018/19 season for fishers who caught more than one tonne indicated that no byproduct had been retained. Gear Giant crab from the TGCF are harvested using a heavy steel trap (modified rock lobster pot) usually set in strings of 10-20. There are limits on the number; dimensions and structure of giant crab traps that can be deployed form each licensed vessel. Each trap must have one or two escape gaps of defined minimum dimensions. Season The quota year commences on 1 March and concludes on the last day of February the following year. Fishing for male giant crabs is permitted year round. A spawning closure for females applies between 1 June and 14 November inclusive. Highest catches occur in the months of summer and autumn. Prepared by Wild Fisheries Management Branch, DPIPWE, MAY 2019 Page 4 Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery Commercial harvest Below is the harvest of giant crab since the 2014 assessment Quota year Total catch (tonnes) % of TAC (March – Feb) 2014/15 TAC 38.3t 23.14 60.4 2015/16 TAC 38.3t 20.5 53.5 2016/17 TAC 38.3t 29.6 77.4 2017/18 TAC 20.7t 16.5 80.4 2018/19 TAC 20.7t 19.8 96.3 Since the 2014 assessment there has been a steady rise in the giant crab beach price, which has seen the beach price generally maintained at greater than $90/kg often peaking at greater than $100/kg. This has resulted in a greater proportion of the TAC being taken in recent years along with the reduced TAC, as the remaining participants in the fishery look to maximise their catch by seeking out all available quota. A higher quota lease price (as a result of the higher beach price) is making it attractive for quota owners to lease out or sell giant crab quota. Value of commercial harvest For 2018/19 $1.89 million Take by other sectors Due to the nature of the TGCF, operating in deep water off the continental shelf (120 – 250 metres), Indigenous and recreational fishing catch are negligible. Recreational fishers are permitted to a possession limit of one giant crab. The Tasmanian Rock Lobster Fishery has historically taken giant crab where bycatch limits have been in place, no more than 10 giant crab could be taken on a fishing trip or no more than 50kg in a season by a rock lobster fisher. The provisions for the take of giant crab as bycatch in the rock lobster fishery have been suspended for three years commencing in the 2018/19 season. Take of giant crab has also been reported by the Commonwealth South East Trawl Fishery (SETF). The available data suggests that the crab catch landed by the SE Trawl Fishery is low. Commercial licences issued A total of 78 licences are currently issued in the TGCF and some fishers may hold more than one giant crab licence. The TGCF is linked to the Tasmanian Rock Lobster Fishery through the requirement to hold a rock lobster licence as well as a giant crab licence to target giant crab. Prepared by Wild Fisheries Management Branch, DPIPWE, MAY 2019 Page 5 Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery 42 giant crab licence are listed with a vessel. 18 vessels reported a catch of giant crab during the 2018/19 season of which six recorded catch of greater than 1t and three took greater than 50% of the landed catch for the 2018/19 season. Management arrangements The TGCF is managed under the Tasmanian Fisheries (Giant Crab) Rules 2013, which obtains its authority from the Tasmanian Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995. Input Controls: Limited entry Limited trap numbers Seasonal spawning closure Output Controls: Quota management including individual transferable quotas (ITQs) for giant crab. Annually set TAC Minimum size limits Catch limits for recreational fishers. Prohibition on the take of egg-bearing female Export As best can be determined, no giant crab from the TGCF has been exported during the period of the 2014 assessment due to quota reductions resulting in reduced supply (in Tasmania and other jurisdictions) and the crackdown on Chinese Government extravagance under President Xi Jinping. Bycatch Low – bycatch in the TGCF is considered negligible and assessed as low risk to other species due to the small amount of trapping effort. The majority of bycatch consists of species that can be returned to the sea unharmed, with the most abundant species being Hermit Crab (Trizopagarus strigimanus), and Draughtboard Shark (Cephaloscyllium laticeps). Interaction with Protected Species In the 2003 Assessment, the then Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH) noted that the TGCF had no interactions with protected species. Since this time, reporting procedures have shifted slightly and now the TGCF records all protected species interactions directly in the giant crab logbook. No protected species interactions were reported by fishers targeting giant crab in 2016/17, 2017/18 and 2018/19 which is expected given that the fishery operates in deep water away from coastal areas. Prepared by Wild Fisheries Management Branch, DPIPWE, MAY 2019 Page 6 Tasmanian Giant Crab Fishery Under sections 199, 214, 232 and 256 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), persons who interact with a protected species must report that interaction within seven days of the incident occurring to DEWHA. Ecosystem Impacts The TGCF is based mainly on habitat found along the edge of the continental shelf; on bryzoan turf growing on sand and mud sediments.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES and RESPONSIBLE AQUACULTURE: a Guide for USAID Staff and Partners
    SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES AND RESPONSIBLE AQUACULTURE: A Guide for USAID Staff and Partners June 2013 ABOUT THIS GUIDE GOAL This guide provides basic information on how to design programs to reform capture fisheries (also referred to as “wild” fisheries) and aquaculture sectors to ensure sound and effective development, environmental sustainability, economic profitability, and social responsibility. To achieve these objectives, this document focuses on ways to reduce the threats to biodiversity and ecosystem productivity through improved governance and more integrated planning and management practices. In the face of food insecurity, global climate change, and increasing population pressures, it is imperative that development programs help to maintain ecosystem resilience and the multiple goods and services that ecosystems provide. Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem functions are central to maintaining ecosystem integrity, health, and productivity. The intent of the guide is not to suggest that fisheries and aquaculture are interchangeable: these sectors are unique although linked. The world cannot afford to neglect global fisheries and expect aquaculture to fill that void. Global food security will not be achievable without reversing the decline of fisheries, restoring fisheries productivity, and moving towards more environmentally friendly and responsible aquaculture. There is a need for reform in both fisheries and aquaculture to reduce their environmental and social impacts. USAID’s experience has shown that well-designed programs can reform capture fisheries management, reducing threats to biodiversity while leading to increased productivity, incomes, and livelihoods. Agency programs have focused on an ecosystem-based approach to management in conjunction with improved governance, secure tenure and access to resources, and the application of modern management practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Interaction Between Giant Crab Trap and Benthic Trawl Fisheries
    Assessment of interaction between giant crab trap and benthic trawl fisheries Rafael León, Caleb Gardner, Klaas Hartmann October 2017 This report was produced by the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) using data provided by the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and the Environment (DPIPWE) and the Australian Fisheries Management Authority. The authors do not warrant that the information in this document is free from errors or omissions. The authors do not accept any form of liability, be it contractual, tortious, or otherwise, for the contents of this document or for any consequences arising from its use or any reliance placed upon it. The information, opinions and advice contained in this document may not relate, or be relevant, to a reader’s particular circumstance. Opinions expressed by the authors are the individual opinions expressed by those persons and are not necessarily those of the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) or the University of Tasmania (UTas). IMAS Fisheries and Aquaculture Private Bag 49 Hobart TAS 7001 Australia Email: [email protected] Ph: 0409 427 366 Fax: 03 6227 8035 © Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania 2017 Copyright protects this publication. Except for purposes permitted by the Copyright Act, reproduction by whatever means is prohibited without the prior written permission of the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies. Contents Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries Series Part II: Commercial Policy & Management for Commercial Fishing
    SAILFISHVERSION 14 TEENS TAKE ON BILLFISH CONSERVATION FISHERIES SERIES Part II: Commercial POLICY & MANAGEMENT for Commercial Fishing All About AQUACULTURE RECAPTURE MAPS Jr. Angler Profile SALES DE LA BARRE Cutler Bay Academy Welcomes The Billfish Foundation & Carey Chen CONTENTS Inside this issue of Sailfish FFEATURESEATURES 3 Fisheries Series Part II: Commercial Fishing 5 Aquaculture 7 Policy & Management of Commercial Fisheries 8 Commercial Fishing Review Questions 9 Cutler Bay Academy Students Enjoy Visit from TBF & Carey Chen 10 Billfish Advocacy at South Broward High ALSO INSIDE Get Involved: Track your school’s climate impact Recapture Maps Jr Angler Profile – Sales de La Barre We would like to extend our gratitude to the Fleming Family Foundation and the William H. and Mattie Wattis Harris Foundation for their belief in education as an important conservation tool. The Billfish Founation, educators, students, parents, the ocean and the fish are grateful for our sponsors generous donation that made this issue of Sailfish possible. Copyright 2014 • The Billfish Foundation • Editor: Peter Chaibongsai • Associate Editor: Elizabeth Black • Graphic Designer: Jackie Marsolais Sister Publications: Billfish and Spearfish magazines • Published by The Billfish Foundation • For subscription information contact: [email protected] by Jorie Heilman COMMERCIAL FISHING by Jorie Heilman What provides nutrition to 3 billion people gear advanced, humans could pursue food Top left: Aquacage snapper farm. Top right: Korean fishing boat. Below top to bottom: worldwide and is relied upon by 500 sources that were farther off the coast. Fishing boat in India. Commercial longline boat. Fishermen in the Seychelles. Commercial million people for their livelihoods? The Fish traps and nets were among the fishermen on a dock fixing a net.
    [Show full text]
  • Part I. an Annotated Checklist of Extant Brachyuran Crabs of the World
    THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2008 17: 1–286 Date of Publication: 31 Jan.2008 © National University of Singapore SYSTEMA BRACHYURORUM: PART I. AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF EXTANT BRACHYURAN CRABS OF THE WORLD Peter K. L. Ng Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Kent Ridge, Singapore 119260, Republic of Singapore Email: [email protected] Danièle Guinot Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Département Milieux et peuplements aquatiques, 61 rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France Email: [email protected] Peter J. F. Davie Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT. – An annotated checklist of the extant brachyuran crabs of the world is presented for the first time. Over 10,500 names are treated including 6,793 valid species and subspecies (with 1,907 primary synonyms), 1,271 genera and subgenera (with 393 primary synonyms), 93 families and 38 superfamilies. Nomenclatural and taxonomic problems are reviewed in detail, and many resolved. Detailed notes and references are provided where necessary. The constitution of a large number of families and superfamilies is discussed in detail, with the positions of some taxa rearranged in an attempt to form a stable base for future taxonomic studies. This is the first time the nomenclature of any large group of decapod crustaceans has been examined in such detail. KEY WORDS. – Annotated checklist, crabs of the world, Brachyura, systematics, nomenclature. CONTENTS Preamble .................................................................................. 3 Family Cymonomidae .......................................... 32 Caveats and acknowledgements ............................................... 5 Family Phyllotymolinidae .................................... 32 Introduction .............................................................................. 6 Superfamily DROMIOIDEA ..................................... 33 The higher classification of the Brachyura ........................
    [Show full text]
  • The Esd Assessment Manual for Wild Capture Fisheries
    THE ESD ASSESSMENT MANUAL FOR WILD CAPTURE FISHERIES Version 1 October 2003 FRDC Project 2002/086 This ‘ESD Assessment Manual’ is part of an on-going process to develop a framework for the reporting and assessment of ESD for fisheries within Australia. This edition is the first version, changes are expected to be made at regular intervals when further information indicates that significant improvements can be made. The material may be copied for use in completing assessments and reports as long as appropriate acknowledgement of the source is given. Whilst this project was originally conducted under the auspices of the SCFA, and is now a project endorsed by the Marine and Coastal Committee of the Natural Resources Management Committee (NRMC), it should not be taken as being the policy of any individual fisheries management agency. © FRDC 2002/086 Project Team Version 1 October 2003 ISBN: 1 877098 37 X Project Team Rick Fletcher (Principal Investigator) Department of Fisheries, WA Jean Chesson Bureau of Rural Science Melanie Fisher Bureau of Rural Science Keith Sainsbury CSIRO Tor Hundloe University of Queensland Correct Citation Fletcher, W.J., Chesson, J., Sainsbury, K.J., Hundloe, T., Fisher M., (2003) National ESD Reporting Framework for Australian Fisheries: The ESD Assessment Manual for Wild Capture Fisheries. FRDC Project 2002/086, Canberra, Australia. This report forms Publication No. 4 of the FRDC - ESD Reporting and Assessment Subprogram. The latest version of this report and other material related to the ESD Subprogram may be
    [Show full text]
  • Wholesale Market Profiles for Alaska Groundfish and Crab Fisheries
    JANUARY 2020 Wholesale Market Profiles for Alaska Groundfish and FisheriesCrab Wholesale Market Profiles for Alaska Groundfish and Crab Fisheries JANUARY 2020 JANUARY Prepared by: McDowell Group Authors and Contributions: From NOAA-NMFS’ Alaska Fisheries Science Center: Ben Fissel (PI, project oversight, project design, and editor), Brian Garber-Yonts (editor). From McDowell Group, Inc.: Jim Calvin (project oversight and editor), Dan Lesh (lead author/ analyst), Garrett Evridge (author/analyst) , Joe Jacobson (author/analyst), Paul Strickler (author/analyst). From Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission: Bob Ryznar (project oversight and sub-contractor management), Jean Lee (data compilation and analysis) This report was produced and funded by the NOAA-NMFS’ Alaska Fisheries Science Center. Funding was awarded through a competitive contract to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission and McDowell Group, Inc. The analysis was conducted during the winter of 2018 and spring of 2019, based primarily on 2017 harvest and market data. A final review by staff from NOAA-NMFS’ Alaska Fisheries Science Center was completed in June 2019 and the document was finalized in March 2016. Data throughout the report was compiled in November 2018. Revisions to source data after this time may not be reflect in this report. Typically, revisions to economic fisheries data are not substantial and data presented here accurately reflects the trends in the analyzed markets. For data sourced from NMFS and AKFIN the reader should refer to the Economic Status Report of the Groundfish Fisheries Off Alaska, 2017 (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/data/2017-economic-status-groundfish-fisheries-alaska) and Economic Status Report of the BSAI King and Tanner Crab Fisheries Off Alaska, 2018 (https://www.fisheries.noaa.
    [Show full text]
  • Seafood Watch® Standard for Fisheries
    1 Seafood Watch® Standard for Fisheries Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Seafood Watch Guiding Principles ...................................................................................................... 3 Seafood Watch Criteria and Scoring Methodology for Fisheries ........................................................... 5 Criterion 1 – Impacts on the Species Under Assessment ...................................................................... 8 Factor 1.1 Abundance .................................................................................................................... 9 Factor 1.2 Fishing Mortality ......................................................................................................... 19 Criterion 2 – Impacts on Other Capture Species ................................................................................ 22 Factor 2.1 Abundance .................................................................................................................. 26 Factor 2.2 Fishing Mortality ......................................................................................................... 27 Factor 2.3 Modifying Factor: Discards and Bait Use .................................................................... 29 Criterion
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of International Fisheries Management Regimes
    Cefas contract report C7372 A review of international fisheries management regimes Authors: Stuart A. Reeves, James B. Bell, Giulia Cambiè, Sarah L. Davie, Paul Dolder, Kieran Hyder, Hugo Pontalier, Zachary Radford & Duncan Vaughan Issue date: 02/08/2018 Cefas Document Control Title: A Review of International Fisheries Management Submitted to: Georgina Karlsson/Charlotte Wicker Date submitted: 02/08/18 Project Manager: Stuart A. Reeves Report compiled by: SAR Quality control by: Defra various & Kieran Hyder Approved by & Kieran Hyder, 8/1/2018 date: Version: 3.5a Version Control History Author Date Comment Version SAR et al. 20/06/17 Compiled from individual 2 chapters SAR et al. 19/07/17 Working version for comment 2.1 SAR et al. 1/09/17 Complete draft for comment 2.2 SAR et al. 21/11/17 Revised to take account of 3.1 comments SAR et al. 12/12/2017 Further revisions in response to 3.2 comments SAR et al. 12/12/2017 Revised structure inc. MRF 3.3 chapter SAR et al. 24/1/2018 Further corrections & enhanced 3.4 exec summary. SAR et al. 26/2/2018 Minor corrections 3.4a SAR et al. 27/7/18 Pre-publication corrections & 3.5 formatting SAR et al. 02/08/18 Fixing minor typos & formatting 3.5a A review of international fisheries management regimes Page i A review of international fisheries management regimes Page ii An international review of fisheries management regimes Authors: Stuart A. Reeves, James B. Bell, Giulia Cambiè, Sarah L. Davie, Paul Dolder, Kieran Hyder, Hugo Pontalier, Zachary Radford and Duncan Vaughan1 Issue date: 02/08/2018 Head office Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HT, UK Tel +44 (0) 1502 56 2244 Fax +44 (0) 1502 51 3865 www.cefas.defra.gov.uk Cefas is an executive agency of Defra 1 Contact Address: c/o Natural England, Suite D, Unex House, Bourges Boulevard, Peterborough, PE1 1NG.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishing for Food Security the Importance of Wild Fisheries for Food Security and Nutrition APRIL 2016
    Fishing for Food Security The Importance of Wild Fisheries for Food Security and Nutrition APRIL 2016 This publication was produced for review by theUSAID United – FISHING States FOR Agency FOOD for International0 Development. It was preparedSECURITY by Measuring Impact. Table of Contents I. PREFACE 03 II. OVERVIEW 04 III. FISHERIES AND GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT 07 IV. KEY OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACTION 24 V. CASE STUDIES 28 VI.THE IMPORTANCE OF FISHERIES IN NINE FEED THE FUTURE PRIORITY COUNTRIES 32 VII.SOURCES 52 Figures 1. Global Fishing in 2010 06 2. Fish contributions to animal protein supply 09 3. Voluntary submissions of marine fisheries catch data by FAO member countries and estimations including all fisheries known to exist 10 4. Reconstructed global catch by fisheries sectors 11 5. Evidence base, poverty reduction benefits, and importance to biodiversity for specific conservation mechanisms 18 6. The biological effects of fully protected, no-take marine reserves 21 7. Summary of potential biomass and financial gains that can be produced through sustainable fisheries management 22 8. Rebuilding of Kenyan small-scale fisheries through gear restrictions and closed area management 23 9. Nutrition and food security statistics for Bangladesh 33 10. Nutrition and food security statistics for Cambodia 35 11. Nutrition and food security statistics for Ghana 37 12. Nutrition and food security statistics for Kenya 39 13. Nutrition and food security statistics for Liberia 41 14. Nutrition and food security statistics for Malawi 43 15. Nutrition and food security statistics for Mozambique 45 16. Nutrition and food security statistics for Senegal 47 17. Nutrition and food security statistics for Tanzania 49 18.
    [Show full text]
  • A Framework for Assessment of Harvested Fish Resources In
    Resource Assessment Framework 45 5 DATA FOR RESOURCE ASSESSMENT 5.1 Continuous or Project-Based Data There are two general methods in which data are collected for resource assessment: continuous or project-based. Continuous data are repeatedly collected from a source or sources. The expression “monitoring” is frequently used to describe this type of activity. In contrast, project-based data are obtained for a particular research project and collected to test particular scientific hypotheses. Within resource assessment, continuous data collection methods (for catch, effort, ages and lengths) are frequently used because continuous data contain information about the dynamics18 of a fish population. Dynamic relationships are the basis of assessment models that are required to make quantitative forecasts of managerial decisions. Performance reporting commitments within the FMS are annual. Although there is no stated obligation that the data that are used to compile the reports would be updated every year, there would need to be some system in place that collected up-to-date information for the reports of managerial performance. The continuous data collection programs currently underway (relevant to resource assessment) in the NSW Department of Primary Industries are: the catch-effort reporting system; fishery-independent surveys for abalone; an observer and recruitment index project for rock lobster; the gamefish tournament monitoring program; and, some monitoring of the age and length structure of commercial landings. Project-based data have been collected for particular projects. Once that project is finished and written up, no more data are collected, though the methods are well documented enabling replication of that sampling design. Individual projects can yield information very valuable to resource assessment, particularly biological information such as growth, maturity and vulnerability.
    [Show full text]
  • Targeted Review of Biological and Ecological Information from Fisheries Research in the South East Marine Region
    TARGETED REVIEW OF BIOLOGICAL AND ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION FROM FISHERIES RESEARCH IN THE SOUTH EAST MARINE REGION FINAL REPORT B. D. Bruce, R. Bradford, R. Daley, M. Green and K. Phillips December 2002 Client: National Oceans Office Targeted review of biological and ecological information from fisheries research in the South East Marine Region Final Report B. D. Bruce, R. Bradford, R. Daley M. Green and K. Phillips* CSIRO Marine Research, Hobart * National Oceans Office December 2002 2 Table of Contents: Table of Contents:...................................................................................................................................3 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................5 Objective of review.............................................................................................................................5 Structure of review..............................................................................................................................5 Format.................................................................................................................................................6 General ecological/biological issues and uncertainties for the South East Marine Region ....................9 Specific fishery and key species accounts ............................................................................................10 South East Fishery (SEF) including the South East Trawl
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article a Review of the Impacts of Fisheries on Open-Ocean
    ICES Journal of Marine Science (2017), doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsx084 Review Article A review of the impacts of fisheries on open-ocean ecosystems Guillermo Ortuno~ Crespo* and Daniel C. Dunn Marine Geospatial Ecology Lab, Nicholas School of the Environment, Box 90328, Duke University, Levine Science Research Center, Durham, NC 27708, USA *Corresponding author: tel: þ1 (919) 638 4783; fax: þ1 252 504 7648; e-mail: [email protected]. Ortuno~ Crespo, G. and Dunn, D. C. A review of the impacts of fisheries on open-ocean ecosystems. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsx084. Received 30 August 2016; revised 14 April 2017; accepted 1 May 2017. Open-ocean fisheries expanded rapidly from the 1960s through the 1980s, when global fish catches peaked, plateaued and possibly began to decline. While catches remain at best stagnant, fishing effort globally continues to increase (Anticamara, J. A., Watson, R., Gelchu, A., and Pauly, D. 2011. Fisheries Research, 107: 131–136; Merrie, A., Dunn, D. C., Metian, M., Boustany, A. M., Takei, Y., Elferink, A. O., Ota, Y., et al. 2014. Global Environmental Change 27: 19–31). The likelihood of ecosystem impacts occurring due to fishing is related to fishing effort and is thus also expected to be increasing. Despite this rapid growth, ecological research into the impacts of fisheries on open-ocean environments has lagged behind coastal and deep-sea environments. This review addresses this knowledge gap by considering the roles fisheries play in con- trolling the open-ocean at three ecological scales: (i) species (population or stock); (ii) biological community; and (iii) ecosystem.
    [Show full text]