�� _Austral__i_an_Govern __m_e_n_t _____ � AustralianFisheries Management Authority
REF: DOC18/46947 5 October 2018
Mr Nathan Sibley Director Wildlife TradeAssessments Departmentof the Environment and Energy GPO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT 2601
email: [email protected]
RE: Application for export approval as a Wildlife Trade Operation for the Southern and Eastern Scalefishand Shark Fishery
Dear Mr Sibley
I am writing in regard to the current Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery (SESSF) Wildlife Trade Operation (WTO) export approval under Part13A of the EPBC Act 1999, set to expire 21 February2019.
In March 2018, AFMA submittedthe Southern and Eastern Scalefishand Shark Fishery Wildlife Trade Operation Annual Report2018 (Attachment A) that reported on the 2017 calendar year. The reassessment for WTO re-approval requires an additional reassessment report be produced. There have been few changes to the management arrangements described in the 2018 WTO Annual Report and any data provided at present would be incomplete for2018. Accordingly, we have provideda progress reporton the recommendations and conditions from the WTO accreditation of the SESSF in Attachment B. Additional updates on management arrangements that have changed in 2018 as follows:
Elactronlc logbooks - From 1 July 2018, all operators in the SESSF who fish more than 50 days in a season were required to use electronic logbooks (e-logs). E-logs promote more accurateand timely data.
Electronic monitoring - Electronic monitoring is being trialled on board three trawl vessels-two otter board trawland one Danish seine. Data is being collected to assess the capability of electronic monitoring systems in supporting the verification of fishery dependent catch and effort information.The outcomes of the trial will be considered,
Canberra Darwin ThursdayIsland POBox7051 POBox 131 POBox376 Canberra BusinessCentre ACT 2610 Darwin 0801NT ThursdayIsland OLD 4875 P 026225 5555 F 02 6225 5500 P 08 89430333 F 08 8942 2897 P 07 4069 1990 F 07 4069 1W
AFMA Direct 1300 723121 I Efficient& sustainablemanagement ofCommonwealth fish 111&0Urces afma.gov.au 1 of10 amongst a range of other fishery dependant and independent monitoring approaches, to support stock assessments and management decisions.
Cross jurisdictional management arrangements
New South Wales - The Commonwealth and NSW are negotiating an Offshore Constitutional Settlement (OCS) arrangement to transition the NSWSouthern Fish Trawl Fishery (SFTF) into Commonwealth jurisdiction. If the arrangement proceeds a new sector will be created in the SESSF. It is intended that operators will be fishing in the new sector on 1 May 2019 at the beginning of the SESSF season. If the transition proceeds:
. one jurisdiction will manage the finfish stocks south of Barrenjoey Head . more stringent rules of the Commonwealth will apply, including VMS and Seabird management plans . quota will be introduced for the fishery with the removal of wasteful trip limits leading to less discarding.
We will inform you as soon as possible if the transition proceeds.
Please note that the SFTF is part of the NSW Ocean Trawl Fishery and has been assessed previously under the EPBCAct: www. environment. aov. au/marine/fisheries/nsw/ocean-trawl
South Australia - AFMA and the Department of Primary Industries and Regions South Australia have been discussing potential improvements to cross-jurisdictional fisheries management. The most pertinent of these regards the shared management of snapper. AFMA is consulting with the Commonwealth industry on implementing an annual prohibition of possessing, landing and acts preparatory to taking snapper (ie targeting) during 1 November to 15 December each year; this would be consistent with the South Australian state-wide seasonal snapper closure.
Subject to the implementation of these complementary Commonwealth arrangements, SA has indicated that it will support:
. an annual snapper bycatch allocation for the Commonwealth based on historical total annual bycatch levels . the revision of the bycatch trip limit.
The size of the allocation and revised trip limit will also require consultation with both State and Commonwealth fishing industries.
Western Australia - WA now has sole jurisdiction of the formerly joint-managed Southern Demersal Gillnet and Demersal Longline Fishery. This was undertaken via OCS arrangements (C2018G00617 / C2018G00618) to streamline management arrangements.
AFMA and the WA Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development are developing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that will guide the development of complementary harvest strategies and catch sharing arrangements for important shared Canberra Darwin Thursday Island PO Box 7051 POBox 131 PO Box376 Canberra Business Centre ACT 261 0 Darwin NT 0801 Thursday Island OLD 4875 P 02 6225 5555 F 02 6225 5500 P 08 8943 0333 F 08 8942 2897 P 07 4069 1990F 07 4069 1277
AFMA Direct 1300 723 621 | Efficient & sustainable management of Commonwealth Fish resources 2 of 10 stocks. These will help to ensure that AFMA can manage these stocks sustainably in the Great Australian Eighttrawl and Gillnet Hook and Trap (GHAT) sectors of the SESSF.
GHAT data collection -A co-management agreement regarding data collection services in the gillnet, shark longline and scalefish longline sectors of the SESSFwas agreed between the Southern Shark Industry Alliance (SSIA) and AFMA in September 2018. As such, rather than the AFMA observer program, the SSIA will coordinate an industry led biological sampling program using a combination of crew and land based port samplers. The program will fulfil the data collection requirements of the SESSFdata plan for gummy shark, school shark, pink ling, blue eye trevalla and ribaldo and will supplement the data collected through the AFMA electronic monitoring program.
Stock assessments
The stock assessmentfor the southern and eastern scalefish and shark fishery 2016 and 2017 report is in the process of being published to the AFMA website. Part 1 (2016)has been uploaded at www.afma.aov.au/fisheries/southem-eastem-scalefish-shark-fisherv under 'fishery publications' Part 2 will be uploaded to the same page as soon as possible.
For the schedule of future stock assessments (2018 to 2023) please see Attachment C.
Upper slope dogflsh -As advised on 9 September 2017 the review of the Upper Slope Dogflsh Management Strategy was postponed pending the results of the research project entitled 'Research to support the upper slope dogfish management strategy: options for the monitoring the recovery of Southern Dogfish and Harrisson's Dogfish'. We are expecting the final report later this year.
If you have any queries please contact me: aeorae. dav@aftna. aov. au / (02) 6225 5331.
Yours sincerely
George Day Senior Manager Demersal and Midwaterfisheries
Canberra Darwin ThursdayIsland PO Box 7051 PO Box 131 PO Box 376 Canberra Business Centre ACT 2610 Darwin NT 0601 Thursday Island QLD 4875 P 02 6225 5555 F 02 6225 5500 P 08 8943 0333 F 06 8942 2897 P07 4069 1990 F07 40691277
AFMA Direct 1300 723 621 ) Efficient &sustalnable management of Commonwealth fish rosourees 3 of 10
Operation Fishery Wildlife Trade Shark and Scalefish Annual Report 201 Report Annual Southe rn and Eastern
8 Attachment A
Box 7051, Canberra Business Centre, ACT 2610 / Ph (02) 6225 5555 / Fax (02) 6225 5500 / AFMA Direct 1300 723 621 afma.gov.au Contents
Contents ...... 2
Tables ...... 3
1 Introduction ...... 5
2 Description of the fishery ...... 5
3 Changes to management arrangements ...... 5
3.1 TAC settings for quota species 2016-17 and 2017-18 seasons ...... 5
3.2 Australian Sea Lion (ASL) Management Strategy ...... 7
3.3 Discard reporting ...... 7
3.4 Harvest Strategy Framework and Harvest Strategy Policy ...... 8
3.5 Upper Slope Dogfish Management Strategy ...... 8
3.6 School Shark Rebuilding Strategy ...... 8
3.7 Blue Warehou Rebuilding Strategy ...... 8
3.8 Eastern Gemfish Rebuilding Strategy ...... 9
3.9 Orange Roughy Rebuilding Strategy ...... 9
3.10 Redfish Rebuilding Strategy ...... 10
3.11 Bycatch and Discard Workplans ...... 10
3.12 Seabird mitigation ...... 11
3.13 Dolphin interactions and mitigation measures ...... 11
3.14 Pink ling management ...... 11
3.15 Performance of the fishery against objectives, performance indicators and performance measures ...... 12
3.15.1 Compliance risks present and actions taken to reduce these risks ...... 12
3.15.2 Description of cross jurisdictional management arrangements ...... 13
3.15.3 Compliance with Threat Abatement Plans, recovery plans, etc...... 13
4 Research and monitoring ...... 14
4.1 Research projects ...... 14
4.2 Electronic monitoring ...... 16
5 Catch data ...... 16
5.1 Catch of target and by-product species ...... 16
5.2 Catch by sector ...... 17 5.3 Fishing effort by sector ...... 17
6 Status of target stocks ...... 18
6.1 ABARES Fishery Status Reports ...... 18
7 Interactions with protected species ...... 18
7.1 Frequency and nature of interactions ...... 18
7.2 Management actions to reduce interactions with TEP species ...... 20
8 Impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem in which it operates ...... 21
8.1 Environmental risk ...... 21
9 Progress against the recommendations and conditions from the WTO accreditation of the SESSF22
Appendix 1: Summary of progress against rebuilding strategies ...... 29
Tables
Table 1: Global TAC levels for SESSF quota species from 2016-17 to 2017-18...... 5 Table 2: East Coast Deepwater Trawl Sector (ECD) non-quota species TAC. The TACs for these species act as a trigger which, if reached, would close the sector...... 7
Table 3: Key research projects in the SESSF...... 14 Table 4: Catch (tonnes) for target species in the SESSF in calendar years 2016-2017. Catch data includes research catch. Source: AFMA CDR landings...... 16 Table 5: Catch (tonnes) for major non-quota (by-product) species in the SESSF. Source: AFMA CDR landings...... 17
Table 6: Catch (tonnes) by each sector, 2016-2017. Source: AFMA CDR landings...... 17 Table 7: Trawl fishing effort (trawl and Danish seine) by calendar year in the SESSF for 2016–2017. Source: AFMA logbook records...... 17 Table 8: Gillnet and hook fishing effort by calendar year in the SESSF 2016–2017. Source: AFMA logbook records...... 18 Table 9: Number of reported interactions with TEP species in the CTS by calendar year for 2016 and 2017. Source: AFMA logbook data...... 19 Table 10: Number of reported interactions with TEP species in the GHAT (gillnet & hook) by calendar year for 2016 and 2017. Source: AFMA logbook data...... 19 Table 11: Number of reported interactions with TEP species in the GAB by calendar year for 2016- 2017. Source: AFMA logbook data...... 20 Table 12: Reports on AFMA’s progress meeting the conditions of the WTO declaration for the SESSF from 22 February 2016 until 21 February 2019...... 22
Table 13: Recommendations to AFMA on the ecologically sustainable management of the SESSF...... 25
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 3 of 46 Table 14: Conditions on the Part 13 accreditation for the SESSF...... 26
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 4 of 46 1 Introduction This report describes the operation of the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery (SESSF), which is managed under the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery Management Plan 2003 (the Plan) and governed by the Fisheries Management Act 1991 (the Act).
The report details changes that have occurred in the SESSF during the 2017 calendar year for the purposes of meeting a condition of the Wildlife Trade Operation (WTO) declaration.
WTO accreditation recognises that a fishery is being managed in an ecologically sustainable manner, and allows the export of product derived from the fishery. On 22 February 2016 the SESSF attained WTO accreditation until 21 February 2019. Conditions and recommendations that relate to the accreditation can be found at www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/commonwealth/scale-fish/index.html.
2 Description of the fishery As per 2017 report.
3 Changes to management arrangements 3.1 TAC settings for quota species 2016-17 and 2017-18 seasons Total Allowable Catches (TACs) are set by the AFMA Commission under the Harvest Strategy Framework (HSF) after considering advice from Resource Assessment Groups (RAGs), Management Advisory Committees (MACs) and AFMA Management.
Changes to the TACs since the last WTO assessment in 2017 are listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Global TAC levels for SESSF quota species from 2016-17 to 2017-18.
Change 2016-17 2017-18 Quota species since TAC (t) TAC (t) 2016-17 (t)
Alfonsino* 1017 1017 0 Bight redfish* 800 800 0 Blue-eye trevalla 410 458 48 Blue grenadier* 8810 8765 -45 118 Blue warehou (incidental) 118 0 Deepwater flathead* 1150 1128 -22 Deepwater shark basket – east* 47 46 -1
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 5 of 46 Change 2016-17 2017-18 Quota species since TAC (t) TAC (t) 2016-17 (t)
Deepwater shark basket – west* 215 215 0 Elephant fish* 92 114 22 Flathead* 2882 2712 -170 100 Gemfish – east (incidental) 100 0 Gemfish – west* 247 199 -48 Gummy shark* 1836 1774 -62 Jackass morwong* 474 513 39 John dory* 167 175 8 Mirror dory 325 235 -90 Ocean perch* 190 190 0 50 Orange roughy- Albany & Esperance (incidental) 50 0 35 (Pedra 35 (Pedra Branca) 31 Branca) 31 Orange roughy – southern* (incidental) (incidental) 0 Orange roughy – eastern* 465 465 0 60 Orange roughy – western* (incidental) 60 0 Orange roughy – Cascade* 500 500 0 Oreo, smooth – Cascade 150 150 0 Oreo, smooth – other* 90 90 0 Oreo, basket* 128 128 0 Pink ling* 1144 1154 10 100 Redfish (incidental) 100 0 Ribaldo* 355 355 0 Royal red prawn* 387 384 -3 Saw shark* 433 442 9 215 School shark (incidental) 215 0
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 6 of 46 Change 2016-17 2017-18 Quota species since TAC (t) TAC (t) 2016-17 (t)
School whiting 868 986 118 Silver trevally* 588 613 25 Silver warehou* 1209 605 -604 *Subject to Multi Year TAC.
Table 2: East Coast Deepwater Trawl Sector (ECD) non-quota species TAC. The TACs for these species act as a trigger which, if reached, would close the sector. Non-quota species TAC
Boarfish 200 tonnes whole weight, trigger limit. No change.
Orange roughy – incidental catch 50 tonnes, whole weight, trigger limit. No change.
3.2 Australian Sea Lion (ASL) Management Strategy On 12 September 2017, under the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery (Closures) Direction No. 1 2017, Australian Sea Lion Management Zone D was closed to gillnet fishing for 18 months. Zone D is located in waters off South Australia, extending from east of Elliston to Sleaford Bay, south west of Port Lincoln.
The closure was implemented under AFMA’s Australian Sea Lion Management Strategy because the trigger limit for mortalities of Australian sea lions (ASLs) for that zone had been reached. The closure will remain in force in this zone until midnight 9 March 2019, 18 months from the date of the last Australian sea lion mortality in the zone.
The ASL Management Strategy is published on the AFMA website at www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Australian-Sea-Lion-Management- Strategy-2015-v2.0-FINAL.pdf.
Details of the closure direction which includes spatial closures around all known ASL breeding colonies can be found at www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2016L00549.
3.3 Discard reporting AFMA provided discard reports to all trawl operators in the SESSF. The report compared reported discard rates to observed discards through the Independent Scientific Monitoring Program (ISMP) for each vessel’s top ten landed quota species. The ISMP is considered to be the best estimate of fleet wide discard rates. Given the different fishing practices across the fleet, the expectation is not that individual discard rates match the ISMP discard rates. However, the reports highlight significant discrepancies and failures to report.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 7 of 46 Gillnet and hook operators who have an e-monitoring system installed on their vessel receive a report comparing logbook reported catch to observed catch via email or post following the return of each hard drive. These reports are designed to make operators aware of their reporting performance. Reports are regularly followed up with a phone call from AFMA staff where any issues such as the non-reporting of discards are raised with the operator. ABARES is currently preparing a report which will examine whether or not the introduction of e-monitoring has changed the reporting behaviour of fishers over time.
3.4 Harvest Strategy Framework and Harvest Strategy Policy As per 2017 report.
The SESSF HSF will be reviewed following finalisation of the new Commonwealth Fisheries Harvest Strategy Policy and Guidelines.
The HSF is available at www.afma.gov.au/sustainability-environment/harvest-strategies/.
3.5 Upper Slope Dogfish Management Strategy Appendix 1, Table 1 provides a summary of progress against the Upper Slope Dogfish Management Strategy.
AFMA, in consultation with SESSFRAG, has developed a new monitoring and assessment workplan to assess the effectiveness of the Upper Slope Dogfish Management Strategy 2012 in rebuilding stocks of Harrisson’s and southern dogfish. The 2017-18 workplan provides a framework for progressing the above research project and can be found at www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Upper-Slope-Dogfish-Research-and- Monitoring-Workplan-2017-18.pdf.
The Upper Slope Dogfish Management Strategy can be found at www.afma.gov.au/wp- content/uploads/2012/12/Upper-slope-Dogfish-Management-Strategy-14December-2012- FINAL.pdf.
3.6 School Shark Rebuilding Strategy Appendix 1, Table 2 provides a summary of progress against the School Shark Stock Rebuilding Strategy.
A copy of the 2015 stock rebuilding strategy can be found at www.afma.gov.au/wp- content/uploads/2014/12/School-Shark-Rebuilding-Strategy.pdf.
3.7 Blue Warehou Rebuilding Strategy Blue warehou is classified as ‘uncertain’ if overfishing is occurring’ and ‘overfished’ in the ABARES Fishery Status Reports 2017. Blue warehou was listed as a ‘conservation dependent’ species under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) in February 2015.
Under the Commonwealth Fisheries Harvest Strategy Policy 2007 (HSP), blue warehou was placed under a stock rebuilding strategy in 2008, which was subsequently revised in 2014. A copy of the rebuilding strategy, including objectives and management arrangements, can be found at www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Blue- Warehou-Rebuilding-Strategy-2014.pdf.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 8 of 46 In 2016 South East Resource Assessment Group (SERAG) recommended that estimates of recreational catch and catch data for the Tasmanian amateur grab-all mesh net fishery be included in the 2017 Blue Warehou Rebuilding Strategy Report. Tasmanian fisheries have advised a survey is currently underway, the results of which can be considered for the next rebuild report.
In November 2017, SERAG considered the annual review of the rebuilding strategy, the detail of which can be found at Appendix 1, Table 3. Only 16 tonnes of the 118 tonne incidental TAC was landed in 2016-17. While landed catch remains low, there is no evidence that the stock has rebuilt to above the limit reference point.
Blue warehou will be considered as part of the non-recovering stocks project, expected to commence in 2018. 3.8 Eastern Gemfish Rebuilding Strategy Eastern gemfish is classified as ‘overfished’ and ‘uncertain if overfishing is occurring’ in the ABARES Fishery Status Report 2017. Eastern gemfish is listed as a ‘conservation dependent’ species under the EPBC Act and was placed under a stock rebuilding strategy in 2008. The Strategy was reviewed in 2014. A copy of the 2015 Strategy, including objectives and management arrangements, can be found at www.afma.gov.au/wp- content/uploads/2014/12/SESSF-Eastern-Gemfish-Rebuilding-Strategy-20152.pdf.
Only 30 tonnes of the 100 tonne incidental catch allowance was landed in 2016-17. The non-targeted spawning standardised catch per unit effort (CPUE) has continued to decrease, however the CPUE is considered a bycatch index only, and is unlikely to be representative of the stock. SERAG noted at November 2016 meeting that variable oceanographic conditions off the east coast of Australia may have contributed to ongoing failure to recover and it appears that rebuilding is being constrained by poor recruitment. In November 2017, SERAG again considered the review of the rebuilding strategy (see Appendix 1, Table 4) including maps of eastern gemfish catch over time, and noted there has been little change in fishing practices in the last 12 months, and commercial catch of eastern gemfish is unlikely to be impacting rebuilding.
Eastern gemfish will be considered as part of the non-recovering stocks project, expected to commence in 2018. 3.9 Orange Roughy Rebuilding Strategy Orange roughy (excluding the Cascade Plateau and eastern zone) is classified as ‘overfished’ and ‘not subject to overfishing’ in the ABARES Fishery Status Report 2017. Orange roughy is listed as a ‘conservation dependent’ species under the EPBC Act and was placed under a conservation program in 2006. In 2015 orange roughy was placed under a stock rebuilding strategy. A copy of the Strategy including the objectives and management arrangements can be found at www.afma.gov.au/wp- content/uploads/2014/12/SESSF-Orange-roughy-rebuilding-strategy-2015-FINAL.pdf.
SERAG considered an updated eastern orange roughy stock assessment in 2017 which showed the stock had rebuilt to an estimated biomass of 34 per cent of unfished biomass. Final TAC advice is currently being considered by the South East Management Advisory
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 9 of 46 Committee (SEMAC). A key concern for fishing for orange roughy is the potential for large amounts of fish to be taken in a trawl shot. AFMA will continue management arrangements to ensure all fishing activity on spawning aggregations is observed and recorded, that no- one can begin fishing on aggregations unless they hold substantial amounts of quota and that all mortality is readily accounted for.
Given the observed recovery of the eastern zone stock, SERAG has noted it is not unreasonable to think that similar rebuilding may have occurred in the southern and western zones. SERAG is currently providing advice on a staged approach to updating the Tier 1 assessment for western roughy, with a view to establish whether rebuilding has occurred. SERAG noted that, while catches have been very low since the rebuilding strategy was introduced, standardised CPUE has been increasing since 1997, however is highly uncertain.
3.10 Redfish Rebuilding Strategy Redfish was assessed in 2014 to have an estimated biomass at 11 per cent of unfished stock biomass and was subsequently placed under a rebuilding strategy. A copy of the strategy, including objectives and management arrangements can be found at www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Redfish-rebuilding-strategy-2016.pdf.
In addition to the rebuilding strategy review (Appendix 1, Table 6) SERAG considered an updated stock assessment in 2017 which estimated the biomass at 8 per cent of unfished stock biomass. SERAG noted that the recruitment pulse predicted by the 2014 assessment had eventuated but not to the degree expected and that catches and catch rates in 2016 were the lowest recorded. The RAG noted that climate factors may be influencing recruitment and recovery and further work was required to better understand and respond to these impacts.
An incidental catch TAC of 100 tonnes was set for the 2018-19 fishing seasons and this species will be considered as part of the non-recovering stock project in 2018. The RAG noted that the impact of the incidental catch TAC would be small, because the main driver for rebuilding is recruitment.
3.11 Bycatch and Discard Workplans Bycatch and discard workplans are reviewed and updated every two years and provided to the Department of the Environment and Energy. Reviews against the actions for each bycatch and discard workplan are completed at 6, 12 and 18 month intervals. Since the last WTO report, the terms of the Commonwealth Trawl Sector (CTS), Great Australian Bight Trawl Sector (GAB) and the Gillnet Hook and Trap Sector (GHAT) workplans have ended.
The SESSF will be updating the ecological risk assessments (ERAs) for each sector at the end of the 2017-18 fishing season. The results of these assessments will be considered, and actions to address these risks will be included in the SESSF Fisheries Management Strategy, to be developed in 2018. Until these ERAs have been finalised, the actions from 2014-16 workplans have been rolled over, a number of new actions have been adopted to account for new projects. The updated workplans, including the reviews of the 2014-16
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 10 of 46 workplans can be found at www.afma.gov.au/sustainability-environment/bycatch- discarding/bycatch-discard-workplans/.
3.12 Seabird mitigation From 1 May 2017 all SET and GAB trawl operators have needed an approved seabird management plan that defines one of the three approved seabird mitigation devices: bird bafflers; sprayers; or pinkies with specified offal retention procedures.
AFMA is currently reviewing and updating seabird management plans for all active autolongline vessels operating in the GHAT. The seabird management plans were developed in 2014 and operators are required to carry a signed copy of their individual boat seabird management plan on the vessel at all times
3.13 Dolphin interactions and mitigation measures On 10 May 2017, AFMA implemented the Gillnet Dolphin Mitigation Strategy which extended the individual responsibility approach for dolphin interactions across the whole gillnet sector to create incentives for fishers to innovate and adopt best practice to avoid interactions.
The Gillnet Dolphin Mitigation Strategy implements a management response for every dolphin interaction. For any subsequent interactions, a series of escalating management responses are applied to individual fishers culminating in closures for fishers who are unable to minimise their interactions. The Gillnet Dolphin Mitigation Strategy is available at: www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Gillnet-Dolphin-Mitigation-Strategy- FINAL.pdf.
3.14 Pink ling management Pink ling is managed under a single TAC, however, it is assessed as two separate stocks either side of longitude 147° East.
An updated stock assessment was accepted by SlopeRAG in November 2015 which indicated the status of the eastern stock was at 30 per cent of unfished biomass, while the western stock was at 48 per cent of unfished biomass.
The 2017 ABARES Fishery Status Report lists pink ling as ‘not overfished’ and ‘overfishing is not occurring’, and states that although the eastern stock is above the limit reference point, the stock needs further rebuilding towards the target.
AFMA set a combined east and west TAC of 1154 tonnes for 2017-18, with alternative controls to restrict catches in the east to below 404 tonnes to allow the eastern stock to rebuild to target levels.
Until the 2016-17 season, AFMA applied:
• a daily catch limit, or alternatively where operators opted-in, a commitment to restrict eastern catches to 25 per cent of their total pink ling quota holdings; and • area closures.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 11 of 46 Since the start of the 2016-17 fishing season, the catch of eastern ling has been managed in one of three ways to ensure the eastern nominal TAC is not exceeded:
a) Commitment vessels: through SETFIA, trawl boat operators voluntarily committed to individual limits that would cap their combined eastern pink ling catches for the fishing season. SETFIA oversaw the running of the commitment scheme. b) Ratio vessels: a number of trawl and auto longline vessel operators ‘opt-in’ to an arrangement whereby they commit to catching no more than 25 per cent of their total pink ling quota holdings in the east. c) Small catchers: vessels catching less than one tonne per fishing season operate under the usual quota management arrangements.
Pink ling catches in the east have been restricted to below the eastern pink ling catch limit. Removal of the daily catch limit provides operators with the flexibility to manage their catches within the fishing season. This is beneficial to the sustainability of the stock and industry’s economic efficiency. Industry reports that the scheme has positively engaged industry and encouraged greater stewardship of the resource.
An updated pink ling stock assessment is scheduled for 2018. AFMA is currently investigating the splitting of pink ling statutory fishing rights into east and west as an alternate management arrangement to limit fishing effort to sustainable levels. This is expected to be implemented by 1 May 2020.
3.15 Performance of the fishery against objectives, performance indicators and performance measures The performance of the SESSF against the objectives, performance indicators and performance measures contained in the Plan and the Act can be found within the AFMA annual report. The latest report can be found at www.afma.gov.au/about-us/afma-annual- reports.
3.15.1 Compliance risks present and actions taken to reduce these risks In order to achieve the objectives of the AFMA National Compliance Operations and Enforcement Policy AFMA continued undertaking a risk based compliance and enforcement program in 2016-17. In late 2011 the Operational Management Committee (OMC) recommended that the risk assessment process should be conducted on a biennial basis. The risk assessment process for 2017-18 resulted in the priority (endemic) risks identified below.
• quota evasion • failure to report interaction/retention of protected or prohibited species • bycatch mishandling.
In order to ensure the general deterrence/presence role is maintained, the 2017-18 program consists of a series of inspections and patrols designed to target identified high risk ports, boats and fish receivers.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 12 of 46 A copy of the Domestic Compliance and Enforcement Program 2017-18 and the Domestic Compliance and Enforcement Policy can be found at www.afma.gov.au/monitoring- enforcement/combating-illegal-fishing-2/.
3.15.2 Description of cross jurisdictional management arrangements The Offshore Constitutional Settlement (OCS) arrangements relevant to the SESSF exist between the Commonwealth, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia.
Recent developments include the following.
• Continued work to transition operators in the NSW Southern Fish Trawl Fishery (SFTF) to the Commonwealth East Trawl Sector of the SESSF. The two fisheries share many fish stocks. Once completed, former SFTF endorsement holders will operate under Commonwealth legislation and have access rights in the form of quota SFRs and either vessel SFRs or fishing permits. AFMA anticipates the new arrangement will be implemented on 1 May 2019. To ensure that industry views are taken into account, the Southern Fish Trawl Transition Working Group, an industry advisory body, has been established. Further stakeholder consultation will occur in 2018. • South Australia have implemented reduced bycatch trip limits for state fishers for gummy shark and school shark. • AFMA and South Australia are working towards a single fishing concession for operators in the SESSF accessing waters relevant to South Australia. • AFMA and South Australia have agreed the Commonwealth is responsible for managing bight redfish outside three nautical miles.
Discussions between AFMA and the States to further develop complementary management arrangements are ongoing.
3.15.3 Compliance with Threat Abatement Plans, recovery plans, etc. The longline sector of the GHAT is managed in accordance with the 2014 Threat Abatement Plan (TAP) for the incidental catch (or bycatch) of seabirds during oceanic longline fishing operations.
During the summer 2016-17 seabird TAP season the auto-longline sector finished with a rate of approximately 0.0158 seabirds per 1000 hooks set. This included observed interactions with six white chinned petrels, 33 shearwaters (eight flesh footed shearwaters), two shy albatross and one black browed albatross from 2,655,800 observed hooks. Total electronic monitoring coverage for the summer season exceeded the TAP requirement of 10 per cent total hooks set.
In the demersal longline sector there was one albatross interaction during the summer 2016-17 seabird TAP season from 328,370 observed hooks. This was a rate of approximately 0.003 seabirds per 1000 hooks set.
Neither hook sectors, demersal nor auto-longline exceeded the winter 2017 TAP.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 13 of 46
AFMA investigated the cause of the interactions and met with the operators that interacted with birds to discuss seabird mitigation measures. AFMA is currently reviewing the autolongline vessels seabird mitigation plans to strengthen arrangements. This includes improving the specifications for tori lines and brickle curtains to ensure they are in line with best practice mitigation.
4 Research and monitoring
4.1 Research projects Fisheries research is undertaken to support the achievement of management objectives. A Strategic Research Plan for 2016-20 has been developed for the SESSF (excluding GAB) which is consistent with AFMA’s framework for cost-effective research. This plan provides a basis for industry, managers, scientists and other interested parties to work together to address management and research issues facing the fishery.
Further details may be obtained from www.afma.gov.au/research/prioritisation-process.
A list of research projects relevant to the SESSF supported by AFMA is given in Table 3 below.
Table 3: Key research projects in the SESSF.
Research project Status Principal Investigator(s) Stock assessment for the SESSF 2014 Completed June Geoff Tuck, CSIRO (RR2013/0010) 2015 Targeting and CPUE definition in the Completed June Mark Bravington, CSIRO SESSF trawl fishery through auxiliary data 2015 (FRDC Project No. 2008/002) Continuation of the SESSF Fishery Completed July Simon Boag, SETFIA Independent Surveys (RR2014/0816) 2015 Fishery independent survey of shelf Completed Ian Knuckey, Fishwell resources in the Great Australian Bight September 2015 Consulting Trawl Fishery:2015 (R2014/0809) Blue-eye trevalla catch per unit effort Completed Malcolm Haddon, CSIRO standardisation November 2015 (RR2015/0820) Development of a Gulper Shark Exclusion Completed Matt Koopman, Fishwell Device in the Royal Red Prawn fishery January 2016 Consulting Options for Tier 5 approaches in the SESSF Completed Neil Klaer, CSIRO and identification of when data support for March 2016 harvest strategies are inappropriate (FRDC 2013/202) Stock assessment for the SESSF 2015 Completed June Geoff Tuck, CSIRO (RR2014/0818) 2016 Implications of current spatial management Completed June Roland Pitcher, CSIRO measures on AFMA ERAs for habitats. 2016 (FRDC 2014/204)
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 14 of 46
Research project Status Principal Investigator(s) An evaluation of Ichthyoplankton long-term Completed JA Smith, IM Suthers, A Lara- monitoring at IMOS National Reference December 2016 Lopez, AJ Richardson, KM Stations (RR2015/0819) Swadling, T Ward, P Van Ruth, JD Everett Developing improved methods for stock Completed Alan Williams, CSIRO assessment in spatially complex fisheries January 2017 using Blue–Eye Trevalla as a case study (FRDC 2013/015) Operationalising the risk cost catch trade-off Completed Cathy Dichmont, CSIRO (FRDC 2012/201) March 2017 Provision of fish ageing and length Completed June Kyne Krusic Golub, Fish frequency services for the SESSF 2014- 2017 Ageing Services 2017 (RR2014/0817) Continuation of the SESS Fishery Completed June SETFIA Independent Survey 2016 (RR2016/0802) 2017 Eastern Zone Orange Roughy Spawning Completed June SETFIA Biomass Survey 2016 (RR2016/0813) 2017 SESSF Monitoring and Assessment – Completed Nick Rayns, AFMA Strategic Review (FRDC 2014/203) December 2017 ISMP Data services 2017 (170815) Completed Robin Thomson, CSIRO January 2018 Various Stock assessments for the SESSF Active Geoff Tuck, CSIRO 2016-2020 (RR2015/0817) Completion date: May 2018 Research to underpin better understanding Active Andrew Moore, ABARES and management of western gemfish stocks in the Great Australian Bight (FRDC 2013/014) Estimating the abundance of school shark Active Robin Thomson, CSIRO in Australia using close kin genetic methods (FRDC 2014/024) Research to support the Upper Slope Active Dr Alan Williams, CSIRO Dogfish Management Strategy Completion (RR2016/0807) date: June 2018 Stock assessment for SESSF 2016-18 Active Geoff Tuck, CSIRO (150817) SESS FIS 2018 (170801) Active SETFIA Provision of fish ageing and length Active Kyne Krusic Golub, Fish frequency services for the SESSF (170802) Ageing Services GAB FIS 2018 (170807) Active Ian Knuckey, Fishwell Consulting Analysis of electronic monitoring (170803) Active Ian Knuckey, Fishwell Consulting ISMP Data services 2018 (180801) Active Robin Thomson, CSIRO Understanding factors influencing Active Fishwell Consulting undercaught TACs, declining catch rates Completion and failure to recover for many quota date: July 2018 species in the SESSF (FRDC project 2016/146)
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 15 of 46 Research project Status Principal Investigator(s) Decadal scale projection of changes in Active Beth Fulton, CSIRO Australian fisheries stocks under climate change (FRDC project 2016-139) Adaptation of Commonwealth fisheries Active Nick Rayns, AFMA management to climate change (FRDC project 2016-059) 4.2 Electronic monitoring As per 2017 report.
5 Catch data
5.1 Catch of target and by-product species Catches for the years 2016-2017 for target and by-product species in the SESSF are shown in tables 4 and 5 respectively.
Table 4: Catch (tonnes) for target species in the SESSF in calendar years 2016-2017. Catch data includes research catch. Source: AFMA CDR landings. Species 2016 2017 Alfonsino 6.2 9.7 Bight Redfish 201.2 330.3 Blue Grenadier* 1,314.5 1713.6 Blue Warehou 10.1 30.0 Blue-eye Trevalla 324.7 410.2 Deepwater Flathead 687.2 750.0 Deepwater sharks+ 100.1 104.5 Eastern School Whiting 706.9 767.3 Elephantfish 56.8 50.6 Tiger Flathead 3,010.4 2462.2 Western Gemfish# 75.3 100.4 Eastern Gemfish 22.7 35.1 Gummy Shark 1,745.9 1723.2 Jackass Morwong 192.9 238.0 John Dory 82.4 85.9 Mirror Dory 272.2 248.4 Orange Roughy** 431.8 405.5 Oreos 106.0 82.5 Pink Ling 863.1 1054.0 Redfish 42.5 26.0 Reef Ocean Perch 163.6 188.2 Ribaldo 83.3 95.4 Royal Red Prawn 168.8 171.1 Sawsharks 190.1 203.7 School Shark 157.8 259.8 Silver Trevally 58.3 51.6
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 16 of 46 Silver Warehou 302.7 352.0 Smooth Oreo 31.8 69.8 + Catches of eastern and western deepwater shark basket are included in this total. # Western gemfish catches include GAB catches caught under a trigger limit. ** Includes catches across all zones combined.
Table 5: Catch (tonnes) for major non-quota (by-product) species in the SESSF. Source: AFMA CDR landings. Species 2016 2017 Broadnose Shark 42.3 50.6 Cuttlefish (mixed) 55.0 43.5 Frostfish 243.3 302.9 Gould’s Squid 542.8 611.7 King Dory 120.8 124.6 Latchet 147.6 232.8 Leatherjackets 54.3 35.73 Ocean Jacket 245.8 445.4 Red Gurnard 154.9 189.4 Stargazers 128.1 149.7
5.2 Catch by sector The total catch per fishery sector in the SESSF is shown in Table 6. Catches in the CTS have shown gradual increases over the period. Catches in the GHAT have increased from 2013-14 likely due to dolphin closures re-opening in gillnet fishing grounds, and have remained steady since 2014.
Table 6: Catch (tonnes) by each sector, 2016-2017. Source: AFMA CDR landings. Year CTS GAB GHAT Total 2016 10,233.9 1,626.2 2,717.7 14,577.8 2017 10,546.0 1,827.0 2,903.4 15,276.4 5.3 Fishing effort by sector The trawl fishing effort (trawl hours) by calendar year for the different sectors in the SESSF is shown in Table 7. Fishing effort across all sectors has been relatively consistent across years.
Table 7: Trawl fishing effort (trawl and Danish seine) by calendar year in the SESSF for 2016–2017. Source: AFMA logbook records. Sector Year Number of shots Trawl hours CTS and ECD 2016 24,019 54,378 2017 23,435 54,994 GAB 2016 2,905 13,609 2017 3,181 14,428
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 17 of 46 Effort levels in the GHAT fishery are detailed in Table 8.
Table 8: Gillnet and hook fishing effort by calendar year in the SESSF 2016–2017. Source: AFMA logbook records.
Method Year Number Shots Number Hooks Length Gillnet (m) Gillnet 2016 6,812 30,703,220 Gillnet 2017 7,619 34,748,295 Hook 2016 9,468 3,856,660 Hook 2017 11,507 5,223,008
6 Status of target stocks
6.1 ABARES Fishery Status Reports In the 2017 Fishery Status Report, no solely Commonwealth managed stocks were classified as subject to overfishing.
Seven stocks were classified as ‘overfished’ in the 2017 fishery status report, however all are subject to stock rebuilding strategies. They are blue warehou, eastern gemfish, orange roughy (southern and western zone), gulper sharks, redfish and school shark. AFMA continues to work with stakeholders to control the level of fishing mortality for these stocks to facilitate rebuilding. See section 3 above and Appendix 1 for more information on the progress of these rebuilding strategies.
A copy of the ABARES Fishery Status Reports can be found at www.agriculture.gov.au/ABARES/Pages/publications/default.aspx.
7 Interactions with protected species
7.1 Frequency and nature of interactions The numbers of interactions with threatened, endangered or protected (TEP) species which have been reported in SESSF logbooks during the period 2016-2017 are provided in Tables 9 to 11. These data are presented by species, fishery and year.
AFMA and the South East Trawl Fishing Industry Association (SETFIA) carried out a project to provide a formal learning pathway for fishers to become better educated regarding interactions with TEP species. A total of 101 operators and crew completed the online learning module Act to Prevent Interaction with Protected Species and 116 operators and crew completed the online learning module Understanding Commonwealth Marine Reserves. The project has now concluded. Those who completed the course obtained a TAFE accredited course that contributes to a nationally accredited Certificate III in Fishing Operations. Operators and crew are subsequently better informed of mitigation techniques and their reporting responsibilities.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 18 of 46 Table 9: Number of reported interactions with TEP species in the CTS by calendar year for 2016 and 2017. Source: AFMA logbook data. 2016 2017 Species Alive Dead Injured Alive Dead Injured Albatrosses 22 8 0 3 18 1 Antarctic fur seal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Australian fur seal 10 68 0 27 97 0 Dolphins 0 1 0 0 8 0 Basking shark 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grey Nurse Shark 0 0 0 1 0 0 New Zealand fur seal 1 0 0 1 0 0 Seals (unidentified species) 3 16 0 10 6 0 Shortfin mako+ 0 1 0 0 0 0 White shark 1 0 0 0 0 0 Petrels, prions & shearwaters 1 0 0 0 0 0 Total 38 94 0 42 129 1 + Listed as Migratory species under Part 13 of the EPBC Act on 29 January 2010.
Table 10: Number of reported interactions with TEP species in the GHAT (gillnet & hook) by calendar year for 2016 and 2017. Source: AFMA logbook data. Species 2016 2017 Alive Dead Unkn. Alive Dead Injured Unkn. Albatrosses 5 2 0 4 3 1 0 Australian fur seal 0 10 0 1 6 0 0 Australian gannet 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Australian sea lions 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 Birds (unidentified) 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 Cormorants 0 11 0 0 17 0 0 Dolphins 2 34 2 2 64 1 Green Turtle 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Grey nurse shark 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Killer whale 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Little penguin 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 Longfin mako 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 New Zealand fur seal 0 6 0 1 0 0 0 Pacific gull 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Petrels, prions & 8 100 0 11 36 0 0 shearwaters Porbeagle+ 0 11 6 0 1 0 3 Seals (unidentified species) 3 17 0 1 28 0 0 Shortfin mako+ 3 89 9 2 71 0 27 Terns 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 White shark 9 1 1 14 3 1 0 Total 39 292 18 41 233 3 35 + Listed as Migratory species under Part 13 of the EPBC Act on 29 January 2010.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 19 of 46 * EM implemented from August 2015.
Table 11: Number of reported interactions with TEP species in the GAB by calendar year for 2016-2017. Source: AFMA logbook data. Species 2016 2017 Alive Dead Alive Dead Albatrosses 0 1 0 0 New Zealand fur seal 0 0 0 0 Petrels, prions & shearwaters 0 0 0 0 Seahorses & pipefishes 0 1 0 0 Total 0 2 0 0
7.2 Management actions to reduce interactions with TEP species AFMA is continually reviewing management arrangements in the SESSF to further reduce interactions with TEP species. The SESSF Ecological Risk Management Strategy (ERM) has been developed to support the objectives of the Commonwealth Policy on Fisheries Bycatch 2000. The ERM Strategy outlines the management arrangements and strategies for addressing bycatch and TEP issues in the SESSF, including:
• bycatch and discard workplans; • species-specific management strategies; • industry co-management arrangements; • restrictions of effort and catch; • observer and monitoring arrangements; and • reporting requirements for certain species.
A number of closures have periodically been implemented under species-specific management strategies, including:
• Australian sea lion closures; • upper slope dogfish closures; • dolphin closures; • deepwater (700m) closure which was put in place to provide protection for orange roughy and also offers some protection to gulper shark and other deepwater species; and • waters deeper than 183m closed to gillnet fishing to protect gulper sharks. Waters shallower than 183m closed to automatic longlining to protect school shark. For more information on management arrangements to minimise TEP interactions, and bycatch more generally, see AFMAs Ecological Risk Management webpage at www.afma.gov.au/sustainability-environment/ecological-risk-management-strategies/.
Information is also available in the SESSF Management Arrangements Booklet at www.afma.gov.au/fisheries-services/fisheries-management-plans/.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 20 of 46 Under a revised framework, fishery management strategies will be developed to incorporate all management arrangements in place for a given fishery. This will include revised bycatch and discard workplans and strategies to address the impact of fishing on high risk and protected species.
On 11 May 2017, AFMA implemented the revised Gillnet Dolphin Mitigation Strategy which extended and the individual responsibility approach for dolphin interactions across the whole gillnet sector to create incentives for fishers to innovate and adopt best practice to avoid interactions. The Gillnet Dolphin Mitigation Strategy 2017 is available at: www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Gillnet-Dolphin-Mitigation-Strategy- FINAL.pdf.
8 Impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem in which it operates
8.1 Environmental risk AFMA finalised the updated ERA for all SESSF species in late 2014. This resulted in a list of high risk species which will be addressed in the ERM Strategy. The ERM Strategy was published in 2015 and describes management arrangements and strategies aimed at mitigating the risk to species identified through the ERA.
AFMA finalised a review of the ERA/ERM framework in 2017. In addition to updated methodology for the assessments, ERM Strategies have been replaced by Fisheries Management Strategies which address much broader issues related to the Commonwealth Fisheries Harvest Strategy Policy and Guidelines, the Commonwealth Policy on Fisheries Bycatch, EPBC Act assessment and reporting obligations as well as better focusing management and research strategies for each fishery.
Updated ERAs are currently underway for all major sectors in the SESSF, and are expected to be completed in 2018. The SESSF Fisheries Management Strategy will be drafted throughout 2018 considering the outcomes of these assessments as well as broader components of the fishery to ensure it is being managed in a sustainable manner.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 21 of 46 9 Progress against the recommendations and conditions from the WTO accreditation of the SESSF
Table 12: Reports on AFMA’s progress meeting the conditions of the WTO declaration for the SESSF from 22 February 2016 until 21 February 2019. Condition Level of Achievement Status
Condition 1.
Operation of the fishery will be carried Fulfillment of this condition is carried out and Ongoing. out in accordance with the management reported against in the AFMA annual report. The arrangements in force under the latest report can be found at Fisheries Management Act 1991. www.afma.gov.au/about/corporate-publications/.
Condition 2.
AFMA to inform the Department of the AFMA has reported changes to the SESSF As required. Environment and Energy of any management arrangements carried out in intended material changes to the SESSF accordance with the WTO conditions. management arrangements that may affect the assessment against which See section 3 – changes to management Environment Protection and Biodiversity arrangements. Conservation Act 1999 decisions are made. Condition 3.
AFMA to produce and present reports to AFMA continues to manage the SESSF and Annually – this report Department of the Environment and respond to any issues that impact on bycatch Energy annually, as per Appendix B of and discarding with the fishery. This report is the the Guidelines for the Ecologically annual report required under Condition 3, and Sustainable Management of Fisheries – includes progress reports against the SESSF 2nd Edition. bycatch and discarding workplans (see section 4.10).
Condition 4.
AFMA to:
a) ensure that management a) and b) reports on the implementation and Annually. measures are in place to meet progress of existing rebuilding strategies are the objectives of the rebuilding included in sections 3.5 – 3.10 and Appendix 1 strategies and management of this report. strategies for species listed as conservation dependent under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, and
b) continue to evaluate and report to the Department on the effectiveness of rebuilding strategies for conservation dependent listed species.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 23 of 46
Condition 5.
AFMA to:
a) continue regular review of a) The Ecological Risk Assessment Ongoing. ecological risk assessments in methodology was recently reviewed to the SESSF, ensuring that the include new assessment techniques. The cumulative impact of all SESSF is scheduled to have its ERA Commonwealth commercial updated towards the end of the 2017-18 fisheries in the area is taken into fishing season. Using the Sustainability account, and Assessment for Fishing Effects (SAFE),
cumulative impact has been assessed within the SESSF (across sectors) but has not been assessed across fisheries. b) implement management actions b) The SESSF Ecological Risk Management Ongoing. to address and mitigate risks and Strategy details the management
impacts for species that are arrangements put in place to address and identified as high risk. mitigate the risk to species assessed as high risk under the ERA. Under a revised framework, Fishery Management Strategies will be developed to incorporate all management arrangements in place for a given fishery. This will include revised bycatch and discard workplans and strategies to address the impact of fishing on high risk and Protected species.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 24 of 46
Table 13: Recommendations to AFMA on the ecologically sustainable management of the SESSF. Recommendation Level of Achievement Status
AFMA to determine the extent of the AFMA developed bycatch and discarding Ongoing. impact of fishing on non target shark workplans for the 2014-16 fishing seasons. The species, including seeking to identify the reviews of these workplans are available at species impacted, and develop www.afma.gov.au/sustainability- management actions to mitigate the environment/bycatch-discarding/bycatch-discard- impact for non target shark species that workplans/. Several projects (described as action are identified as high risk through the items) are designed to determine the impact of Ecological Risk Assessment process. fishing on non-target species, and to mitigate further bycatch. The SESSF ERA is to be updated during 2018.
AFMA to consult with the Department in In 2016, in consultation with the Department of Complete the development and finalisation of the Agriculture and Water Resources, AFMA eastern redfish rebuilding strategy. published the Redfish Rebuilding Strategy which is aimed at maintaining the overall low fishing mortality of redfish while continuing to monitor and assess the stock status.
AFMA to consider further promotion of While AFMA does not have a direct role in Complete. best practice management of unwanted managing unwanted fishing gear such as marine fishing gear within the Commonwealth debris, it does enforce gear restrictions and Trawl Sector works with industry to ensure best practice gear use.
The Global Ghost Gear Initiative was discussed at the South East Management Advisory Committee meeting 6-8 February 2018. Trawl industry members were supportive of the
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 25 of 46
initiative and have committed to pursuing an industry led initiative under proposed co- management arrangements. Options include a code of conduct for the Commonwealth Trawl Sector.
A reminder on best practice management of unwanted fishing gear has been included in the 2018 SESSF Management Arrangements Booklet.
Industry associations in the SESSF have been active in encouraging members to dispose of unwanted gear collectively.
Table 14: Conditions on the Part 13 accreditation for the SESSF. AFMA to:
a) Maintain management measures a) Ongoing. See section 4.2 for more information a) and b) Ongoing. clearly directed toward limiting the on actions designed to mitigate the impact of impact of fishing activity on fishing activity on ASL. Australian sea lions to levels which will assist in enabling the b) Ongoing: As specified in the ASL recovery of the species, including management strategy, AFMA continues to all subpopulations. monitor the effectiveness of the strategy in consultation with the Commonwealth Marine b) Continue to monitor and review Mammal Working Group. the adequacy of its Australian sea lion management measures, in
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 26 of 46
consultation with marine mammal experts.
AFMA to continue to collect and report AFMA implemented the Gillnet Dolphin Ongoing. on dolphin interactions, where possible Mitigation Strategy in May 2017. The strategy to species level, and continue to refine extended the individual responsibility approach management measures to minimise the for dolphin interactions across the whole gillnet bycatch of dolphins in gillnets. This sector to create incentives for fishers to innovate should include ongoing monitoring and and adopt best practice to avoid interactions. review of these measures, in consultation with marine mammal See section 3.13 for more information on AFMAs experts. work on dolphins.
AFMA to continue to work with industry The reduction of seal interactions in trawl Ongoing. and relevant experts to develop and fisheries remains a priority for AFMA. The implement management measures to Commonwealth Fisheries Marine Mammal minimise mortality of seals in the Working Group (CFMMWG) met in June 2017 to Commonwealth Trawl Sector of the discuss if there are any underlying factors fishery. contributing to interactions in trawl fisheries. The CFMMWG advised that the data provided would need further cleaning and modifications prior to factor analysis, and advised that funding should be sought to support a short project in regards to this. The trawl fishing industry through SETFIA is considering approaches to seal mortality mitigation.
AFMA to:
a) Ensure efficient and effective a) On 31 October 2011 AFMA amended Ongoing. Seabird Management Plans operators’ concession conditions to require
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 27 of 46 remain in place for CTS and GHT every trawl boat to have an AFMA approved sector automatic longline vessels; Seabird Management Plan (SMP). AFMA continues to work with operators to support b) ensure adequate monitoring is in the implementation of efficient and effective place to ensure compliance with seabird mitigation measures. For more Seabird Management Plans, and information refer to 3.12 or visit c) implement management www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/seabirds/. measures to address the risk of b) AFMA conducts regular aerial surveillance of interactions with seabirds in the trawl vessels to ensure that operators are Commonwealth Trawl Sector and using seabird mitigation devices in for Gillnet Hook and Trap sector accordance with their SMPs. automatic longline vessels. This should include implementing In 2014-15, a SETFIA led project trialled bycatch devices and/or offal alternative mitigation devices for trawl vessels management measures that have operating in the CTS. The results from that trial been demonstrated to be highly proved that both bird bafflers and seabird effective in reducing seabird sprayers demonstrated significant reduction in mortality. seabird interactions. From 1 May 2017 all CTS and GAB trawl operators were required to have an approved seabird management plan that defined one of the three approved seabird mitigation devices: bird bafflers; sprayers; or pinkies with specified offal retention procedures.
Offal management measures are currently in place for trawl, gillnet and line methods. AFMA is currently reviewing seabird management plans for all autolongline vessels.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 28 of 46 Appendix 1: Summary of progress against rebuilding strategies
Table 1: Upper Slope Dogfish Stock Rebuilding Strategy Criteria Actions
How is stock tracking against Upper Slope Dogfish stocks (Harrisson’s and strategy objectives? southern dogfish) are currently assessed at below the limit reference point and are subject to a rebuilding strategy.
A project to develop a cost-effective methodology for measuring baseline relative abundance of Upper Slope Dogfish, and recovery over time started in 2017.
Is the strategy meeting its Work is still ongoing to establish the baseline performance measures? relative abundance of Upper Slope Dogfish.
Management arrangements have been put in place in accordance with the Strategy. These include spatial closures, electronic monitoring, no commercial retention of dogfish and no allowing dogfish to pass through automatic longline de-hookers.
Has stock decline ceased, is Work is still ongoing to establish the baseline rebuilding apparent? relative abundance of Upper Slope Dogfish.
Is the stock likely to rebuild to B20 Unknown, pending completion of monitoring or BLIM within the proposed project. timeframe of the rebuild strategy?
If the strategy has identified N/A. stages, please identify which stage of the strategy is currently being applied to the stock
If triggers to next stage of N/A. management have been met and the strategy not moved to the subsequent stage, explain why.
What changes, if any, have been Since the Strategy was implemented, the made to the strategy since first following changes to management have established? occurred:
• In 2015, recognising the high survival rate of gulpers caught on hydraulic hand reels, this method was authorised by AFMA to operate in areas where the three gulper trigger applies (for example Murray Dogfish closure, Queensland and Brittania closure and Barcoo and Taupo closure). The trigger and 100 per cent monitoring that applies to longlining does not apply to this method. • In 2015, electronic monitoring was introduced in the Gillnet Hook and Trap and the AFMA observer program ceased. The AFMA observer program recommenced in mid-2017, primarily to get biological data on key target species, however observers will also undertake bycatch observations. • In 2016 the South East Trawl Fishing Industry Association finalised initial proof of concept trials of a gulper exclusion device (‘GED’) when trawling for royal red prawns off Sydney. The work was conducted off Sydney and outside gulper shark closures – outcomes can be seen here: http://www.setfia.org.au/gulper- exclusion-trial-successful. Industry through SETFIA are planning additional testing with AFMA assistance in 2018- 19. • In May 2016, closures of waters deeper than 183m to protect large school shark and gummy shark were removed for hook methods recognising the suite of management measures to project school shark. This allowed manual shark hook boats to fish in waters deeper than 183m subject to no-take provisions for upper slope dogfish and electronic monitoring operating on the boat. Gillnet is still restricted to waters shallower than 183m because of uncertainty about gulper sharks. • In March 2017, the Upper Slope Dogfish Research and Monitoring Workplan 2017-18 was accepted by SESSFRAG. This workplan largely continued the 2014-16 workplan to allow research on monitoring the recovery of dogfish to be finalised. The report on the 2014-16 workplan is attached.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 30 of 46
• A workshop was held in December 2017 to begin the process of developing a cost-effective long-term monitoring strategy for upper slope dogfish. The project team is now working to provide the details of options (and costings) for a monitoring program and baseline survey based on analysis of available data. This information will be presented at the next workshop.
AFMA is considering a change to auto-longline conditions to remove the requirement to slow the line when hauling and to cut off gulper sharks when in the water, but retaining the requirement not to allow Centrophoridae (excluding Deania sp) or Squalidae to pass through dehookers. This follows operational concerns raised by industry in meeting this condition. AFMA will take into account the advice from TSSC and will consult with industry, dogfish experts and SEMAC on any potential changes.
Has there been a different As above. approach applied to the management of the stock that is not identified within the rebuilding strategy? What are they and why?
Is the strategy due for a review? The strategy was due for its five year review in If so, what are the plans for this? 2017, however AFMA considered the available What is the progress or information and postponed the review until the outcomes of those initiated? research project ‘Research to support the upper slope dogfish management strategy: options for the monitoring the recovery of Southern Dogfish and Harrisson’s Dogfish’ is finalised in September 2018.
If the stock has been categorised In the absence of any evidence of recovery to by ABARES as ‘subject to above the limit reference level, upper slope overfishing/fishing mortality’ what dogfish (gulper sharks) remain classified as is the explanation? overfished because of the substantial depletion of Harrisson’s and southern dogfish in areas of southern and eastern Australia. The level of reported catch (including discards) has declined
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 31 of 46 over the past decade, and was very low in the 2014–15 and 2015–16 fishing seasons (0.7 tonnes and 0.9 tonnes, respectively). However, there is potential for unreported or underestimated discards, based on the large degree of overlap of current fishing effort with the core range of the species. Low levels of mortality can pose a risk for such depleted populations.
Although it has been estimated that the closures implemented in 2013 protect 16.2–25 per cent of the core distribution areas of these species, no evidence has yet been obtained showing rebuilding, and the effect of the closures remains to be seen. As a result, gulper sharks are classified as uncertain if subject to overfishing. Resolution of stock structure may result in one or more of the subpopulations being classified as not subject to overfishing (ABARES, 2017) Is there any relevant research Yes. A project to develop a cost-effective planned or underway? methodology for measuring baseline relative abundance of Upper Slope Dogfish, and recovery over time commenced in 2017.
If so, what are the likely The project is expected to be completed by timeframes for availability of new September 2018. information?
Knowledge gaps to be • Baseline relative abundance of Upper addressed. Slope Dogfish. • Expected recovery over time.
Table 2: School Shark Stock Rebuilding Strategy Criteria Actions
How is stock tracking against The stock was last assessed in 2012 at below strategy objectives? the limit reference point and is subject to a rebuilding strategy.
The School Shark Rebuilding Strategy was reviewed in 2014 (published 2015).
The objective of the rebuilding strategy is to rebuild the stock to 20 per cent of pre-fishing
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 32 of 46 biomass. Pup production is used as a proxy for breeding biomass.
SharkRAG reviewed the rebuilding time frame and recommended three times the mean generation which equates to approximately 66 years.
SharkRAG noted there is no reliable index of abundance and it’s not currently possible to reliably track the stock against the rebuilding objectives. A CSIRO research project using close kin genetic methodology to develop an independent index of abundance for school shark is due to be completed in early 2018 allowing a more robust assessment of stock status in late 2018
Is the strategy meeting its The stock biomass trend estimated by the performance measures? assessment model is the key performance measure of the rebuilding strategy. The index of relative abundance is estimated by pup production, which is a direct index of breeding biomass. As school shark is not targeted, CPUE data for stock assessment modelling is currently inaccurate, and there is currently no reliable index of abundance.
Until the recovery of school shark can be measured catches have been restricted within an incidental catch TAC.
Has stock decline ceased, is In 2017 SharkRAG noted trawl standardised rebuilding apparent? CPUE, although representing a small amount of catch, continues to show a sustained increase.
This increase in standardised CPUE suggests that catch levels were constrained to levels that allow rebuilding. A definitive answer will not be known until the outcomes of the close kin project and subsequent stock assessment in late 2018.
Is the stock likely to rebuild to B20 The most recent assessment for school shark or BLIM within the proposed was undertaken in 2012 notes that catches of up timeframe of the rebuild strategy? to 225 tonnes would allow for rebuilding in three mean generation times (being 66 years).
Standardised trawl CPUE data and anecdotal evidence from fishers suggests that the stock
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 33 of 46 may be recovering at a greater rate than predicted by the model. A more accurate rebuilding timeframe will be determined upon the conclusion of the close kin project.
If the strategy has identified The 2014 School Shark Rebuilding Strategy stages, please identify which does not have defined stages. Stage 2 of the stage of the strategy is currently 2008 rebuilding strategy is currently being being applied to the stock applied to the stock. The school shark TAC has been reduced to a level estimated to be unavoidable bycatch.
If triggers to next stage of N/A. management have been met and the strategy not moved to the subsequent stage, explain why
What changes, if any, have been The School Shark Stock Rebuilding Strategy made to the strategy since first was reviewed in 2014 and replaced by the established? School Shark Stock Rebuilding Strategy 2015. The key changes to the revised strategy are:
• a rebuilding timeframe of 66 years specified
• a method for determining an independent index of abundance specified.
Also included in the strategy are management arrangements implemented after the 2008 strategy that are likely to facilitate rebuilding. These include:
• limiting net height to 20 meshes deep
• the 20 per cent school shark to gummy shark catch ratio
• 5000 hook limit for temporary auto longline permits in South Australia.
The Commission determined a 215 tonne incidental catch TAC in 2017-18 subject to:
a) continuing to apply a school shark to gummy shark catch ratio;
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 34 of 46 b) continuing the existing condition for the release of all live caught school shark; and
c) monitoring discards and applying further management measures if total mortality is likely to exceed levels that support rebuilding of the stock.
Has there been a different N/A approach applied to the management of the stock that is not identified within the rebuilding strategy? What are they and why?
Is the strategy due for a review? The School Shark Stock Rebuilding Strategy If so, what are the plans for this? was reviewed in 2014 and replaced by the What is the progress or School Shark Stock Rebuilding Strategy 2015. outcomes of those initiated?
If the stock has been categorised The 2012 stock assessment update indicates by ABARES as ‘subject to that at current catches the stock will rebuild to overfishing/fishing mortality’ what the limit reference point of B20 within the is the explanation? biologically reasonable timeframe of 66 years. However, there remains uncertainty about state catches. The most recent ABARES Fishery Status Reports 2017 classifies school shark as overfished, and uncertain if the stock is subject to overfishing.
Is there any relevant research CSIRO are currently finalising a project which is planned or underway? using close kin genetics to determine the school shark stock size. The results from this project are expected to be available in early 2018, which will be used as the key index of abundance in a stock assessment in late 2018.
If so, what are the likely The close kin project will be completed in early timeframes for availability of new 2018, and will be used as the key index of information? abundance in a stock assessment in late 2018
Knowledge gaps to be • Need a measure of abundance for the addressed. stock.
• Uncertainty around state catches
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 35 of 46 Table 3: Blue Warehou Stock Rebuilding Strategy Criteria Actions
How is stock tracking against AFMA updated the Blue Warehou Stock strategy objectives? Rebuilding Strategy in 2014 and adopted the rebuilding timeframe to the limit reference point within a biologically reasonable timeframe of 16 years. This means the current objective is to have blue warehou rebuilt to or above the limit reference point by 2030.
There is currently no reliable index of abundance for blue warehou. In 2013, assessments indicated that both the eastern and western stocks of blue warehou were likely to have remained below 20 per cent of their unfished spawning biomass.
The standardised CPUE for both stocks continue to be low in 2017, however, the use of CPUE as an index of abundance is no longer considered reliable.
Is the strategy meeting its Uncertain. Blue warehou is a Tier 4 species and performance measures? CPUE is the primary performance measure. Given operators are actively avoiding blue warehou, CPUE is no longer a reliable estimate of abundance.
Has stock decline ceased, is Because CPUE is no longer a reliable estimate rebuilding apparent? of abundance, it is difficult to determine whether there has been any rebuilding.
Commercial catches of blue warehou have been below the bycatch TAC since 2011. Commercial catch increased in 2017 to above 20 tonnes; where previously they had been less than 15 tonnes since 2014. While it is difficult to assess whether stock decline has ceased, it is unlikely that commercial catches are preventing rebuilding.
There continues to be uncertainties regarding the stock status and other indicators of abundance are required.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 36 of 46 Is the stock likely to rebuild to B20 Due to uncertainty of the CPUE data and the or BLIM within the proposed stock assessment, it is currently unknown timeframe of the rebuild strategy? whether the species will rebuild to B20 within a biologically reasonable timeframe as required under the rebuilding strategy.
If the strategy has identified N/A. stages, please identify which stage of the strategy is currently being applied to the stock
If triggers to next stage of N/A. management have been met and the strategy not moved to the subsequent stage, explain why
What changes, if any, have been The Blue Warehou Stock Rebuilding Strategy made to the strategy since first was updated in 2014. The key changes to the established? revised strategy were:
• a revised rebuilding timeframe to be consistent with the HSP; stock to be rebuilt to their biomass limit reference point within 16 years (one mean generation time plus 10 years)
• the development of a template to streamline the assessment of the strategy against its objectives by ShelfRAG (now SERAG)
• a focus on improving current knowledge of stock status to allow for more informed management in the future through improved data collection and monitoring.
The AFMA Commission determined an incidental catch TAC of 118 tonnes subject to the adoption of a 50 tonne total mortality review trigger.
Has there been a different A code of conduct has been developed by the approach applied to the South East Trawl Fishing Industry Association management of the stock that is (SETFIA). The code includes move-on and not identified within the rebuilding reporting obligations to assist operators in strategy? What are they and avoiding incidental catches. why?
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 37 of 46 Is the strategy due for a review? No. If so, what are the plans for this? What is the progress or outcomes of those initiated?
If the stock has been categorised The ABARES Fishery Status Report 2017 by ABARES as ‘subject to classified blue warehou stocks to be uncertain overfishing/fishing mortality’ what as to whether the stocks are subject to is the explanation? overfishing (fishing mortality).
The report notes that total removals are below the incidental catch allowance, but the level of fishing mortality that will allow the stock to rebuild is unknown. Is there any relevant research This species is included in the non-recovering planned or underway? stocks project, planned for 2018.
If so, what are the likely The non-recovering stock project is expected to timeframes for availability of new start in 2018. Any new information from that information? project will be considered by the relevant RAGs.
Knowledge gaps to be Improving knowledge of stock status, including addressed. catch and discard monitoring and industry and ISMP data collection is required. Further work to determine specific locations and timing of blue warehou spawning events in the SESSF.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 38 of 46 Table 4: Eastern Gemfish Stock Rebuilding Strategy Criteria Actions
How is stock tracking against AFMA updated the Eastern Gemfish Stock strategy objectives? Rebuilding Strategy in 2015 and adopted the rebuilding timeframe to the limit reference point of one mean generation time plus 10 years (being approximately 19 years from 2008). This means the current objective is to have eastern gemfish rebuilt to or above the limit reference point by 2027.
Projections from the most recent assessment estimate recovery to a biomass larger than its limit reference point by 2025 while under a 100 tonne bycatch TAC. However, this conclusion depends strongly on average recruitment for the stock occurring in the future and whether catches remain within the 100 tonne incidental catch TAC.
When last assessed in 2010, eastern gemfish was estimated to be at 15.6 per cent of its unfished biomass (Little and Rowling, 2010), which is below its limit reference point of 20 per cent of the unfished spawning biomass.
Is the strategy meeting its Uncertain. There has been no formal performance measures? assessment of eastern gemfish since 2010. Standardised CPUE is primary indicator, however this cannot be used as a reliable index of abundance due to avoidance behaviour of operators.
In 2017, the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery Resource Assessment Group (SESSFRAG ) considered whether currently available data, would allow an updated eastern gemfish stock assessment. The RAG noted there was limited new data available and recommended that it be considered in the undercaught TACs and non-recovering stocks project. The project will consider alternative approaches to monitor the status of rebuilding stocks.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 39 of 46 Has stock decline ceased, is The 2010 assessment model was updated in rebuilding apparent? 2016 with new data from the fishery. While this was not a formal assessment, SESSFRAG noted that the outcome did not provide any indication of stock rebuilding.
Is the stock likely to rebuild to B20 Unknown. This is difficult to assess in the or BLIM within the proposed absence of an updated stock assessment. timeframe of the rebuild strategy?
If the strategy has identified N/A. stages, please identify which stage of the strategy is currently being applied to the stock
If triggers to next stage of N/A. management have been met and the strategy not moved to the subsequent stage, explain why
What changes, if any, have been The Strategy was updated in 2015. Key made to the strategy since first changes to the revised strategy are: established? • a revised rebuilding timeframe to be consistent with the HSP; stock to be rebuilt to their biomass limit reference point within the biologically reasonable timeframe of 19 years (one mean generation time plus 10 years)
• the development of a template to streamline the assessment of the strategy against its objectives by ShelfRAG
• a focus on improving current knowledge of stock status to allow for more informed management in the future through improved data collection and monitoring
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 40 of 46 Has there been a different A code of conduct has been developed by the approach applied to the South East Trawl Fishing Industry Association management of the stock that is (SETFIA). The code includes move-on and not identified within the rebuilding reporting obligations to assist operators in strategy? What are they and avoiding incidental catches. why? AFMA Compliance has undertaken operations to ensure all catch is being recorded. There was no evidence to suggest landed fish were not being recorded.
AFMA also maintained compulsory pre-reporting arrangements for fisher’s landing eastern gemfish during the species annual spawning migration (north of latitude 36° 45’ South, between 1 June and 30 September) to support data collection.
Is the strategy due for a review? No. If so, what are the plans for this? What is the progress or outcomes of those initiated?
If the stock has been categorised The ABARES Fishery Status Report 2017 by ABARES as ‘subject to classified eastern gemfish as uncertain with overfishing/fishing mortality’ what respect to overfishing. Biomass is below the limit reference point. Uncertainty remains around is the explanation? total fishing mortality and rebuilding to the limit reference point within the specified time frame. Is there any relevant research Included in the SESSF annual research plan is a planned or underway? project to investigate why some stocks are not recovering while under stock rebuilding strategies.
If so, what are the likely The non-recovering stock project is expected to timeframes for availability of new start in 2018. Any new information from that information? project will be considered by the relevant RAGs
Knowledge gaps to be Age and length data from the winter spawning addressed. stock.
Table 5: Orange Roughy Stock Rebuilding Strategy Criteria Actions
How is stock tracking against The Orange Roughy Stock Rebuilding Strategy strategy objectives? replaced the Orange Roughy Conservation Program 2006 (ORCP) in 2014 and adopted the rebuilding timeframe to the limit reference point
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 41 of 46 of one mean generation time plus 10 years (from the start of the ORCP). This means the current objective is to have eastern orange roughy rebuilt to or above the limit reference point by 2072.
Targeted fishing for orange roughy recommenced in the Eastern Zone and Pedra Branca area of the southern zone in 2015. Prior to this, all orange roughy fisheries except the Cascade Plateau remained closed to targeted fishing with incidental catch TACs.
Acoustic optical surveys were undertaken in the eastern zone during 2012, 2013 and 2016. The most recent accepted stock assessment for orange roughy in the eastern zone was conducted in 2017. The assessment indicated that the eastern stock was approximately 33.9 per cent of unfished biomass.
Is the strategy meeting its Yes. The most recent assessment of the performance measures? Eastern zone is above its biomass limit reference point. Management measures are in place in all other zones to enable a maximum rate of recovery. Research is carried out in a manner approved by AFMA and monitoring arrangements demonstrate performance in accordance with the Orange Roughy Rebuilding Strategy (ORRS).
Has stock decline ceased, is Yes, in the eastern zone and Pedra Branca area rebuilding apparent? of the southern zone.
Is the stock likely to rebuild to B20 Yes, orange roughy are a long lived, late to or BLIM within the proposed mature species and consequently recovery timeframe of the rebuild strategy? times will be protracted. One mean generation time is estimated to be around 55 years and as per the HSP the recovery timeframe will be around 65 years.
Eastern orange roughy has rebuilt above the limit reference point and AFMA is investigating assessments for the western and southern zones.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 42 of 46 If the strategy has identified N/A stages, please identify which stage of the strategy is currently being applied to the stock
If triggers to next stage of N/A management have been met and the strategy not moved to the subsequent stage, explain why
What changes, if any, have been N/A made to the strategy since first established?
Has there been a different Management controls are in place to ensure that approach applied to the targeting fishing in the eastern zone and Pedra management of the stock that is Branca do not pose an unacceptable risk to the not identified within the rebuilding stock. They include 100% observer coverage strategy? What are they and during spawning aggregations and minimum why? quota holdings to avoid unaccounted discarding.
Is the strategy due for a review? No. If so, what are the plans for this? What is the progress or outcomes of those initiated?
If the stock has been categorised No orange roughy stocks are classified as being by ABARES as ‘subject to ‘subject to overfishing’. This is expected to be overfishing/fishing mortality’ what contributed to by the closure of most areas deeper than 700 m and negligible catches. is the explanation?
Is there any relevant research • An acoustic optical survey of the eastern planned or underway? stock is planned for 2019.
• AFMA is investigating assessments in the southern and western zones.
If so, what are the likely • The results of the planned 2019 survey will timeframes for availability of new be included in the 2020 stock assessment. information?
Knowledge gaps to be • Biomass estimates in the southern and addressed. western zones
• Investigation uncertainty and improve the base case model
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 43 of 46 Table 6: Redfish Stock Rebuilding Strategy Criteria Actions
How is stock tracking against The 2017 assessment estimated female strategy objectives? spawning biomass is 928 tonnes in 2018. This is 8% of virgin stock biomass (projected assuming 2016 catches in 2017), which is below the rebuilding target of 20 per cent of unfished biomass (BLIM).
Is the strategy meeting its Uncertain. There has been no improvement in performance measures? the observed redfish catch per unit effort (CPUE). The 2014 assessment estimated a spawning stock biomass of 11 per cent of virgin stock biomass. The current assessment has downsized the expected recruitment in the 2014 assessment, which together with a decrease in CPUE has resulted in an estimated spawning biomass of 8 per cent of virgin stock biomass. Recent recruitment is expected to be above average, and so the scenario above is an unlikely worst case scenario.
Has stock decline ceased, is Total landed catch has been below the rebuilding apparent? incidental bycatch TAC since the implementation of the Strategy. Discard rates are high (estimated at 30 per cent in 2016), however have decreased compared to previous years (estimated at 50 per cent in 2015).
Is the stock likely to rebuild to B20 The most recent biomass projections from the or BLIM within the proposed 2017 assessment (Tuck 2017) predict that under timeframe of the rebuild strategy? the standard harvest control rule and recruitment model (which uses recruitments from the stock-recruitment curve), the spawning biomass is estimated to pass the limit reference point by approximately 2024 which is within the proposed timeframe of the rebuild strategy. The difference in stock status between a bycatch TAC of 50 t and 100 t is small, given the major driver for rebuilding is recruitment. However, projections from the assessment assume average recruitment (which may not occur) and do not account for any environmental influences such as climate change. If the strategy has identified N/A stages, please identify which
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 44 of 46 stage of the strategy is currently being applied to the stock
If triggers to next stage of N/A management have been met and the strategy not moved to the subsequent stage, explain why
What changes, if any, have been The rebuilding strategy was implemented in made to the strategy since first 2016 and there have been no suggested established? changes to management arrangements.
Has there been a different Not in 2017. approach applied to the management of the stock that is Current management measure to support not identified within the rebuilding rebuilding of redfish include an incidental catch strategy? What are they and TAC, limited entry, codend mesh size why? restrictions and T90 panels, and closures.
Is the strategy due for a review? No. If so, what are the plans for this? What is the progress or outcomes of those initiated?
If the stock has been categorised The stock status relative to fishing mortality is by ABARES as ‘subject to categorised as uncertain. Catch is above the overfishing/fishing mortality’ what Tier 1 and Tier 4 Recommended Biological is the explanation? Catches. It is unclear if total removals are above the level that will allow rebuilding.
Is there any relevant research In 2016 the RAG identified that only 12 per cent planned or underway? of the redfish otolith collection target had been met and requested AFMA to address this shortfall with the ISMP, noting that inadequate otoliths would degrade the ability of a future assessment to estimate stock status. Despite a targeted effort from the observer section in 2017, low redfish catches meant that only 21 per cent of the redfish otolith collection target was met. If so, what are the likely The next redfish assessment is scheduled for timeframes for availability of new 2020. information?
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 45 of 46 Knowledge gaps to be As above, ensuring that otolith collection targets addressed. are met.
SESSF Wildlife Trade Operation / Annual Report 2018 afma.gov.au 46 of 46 DECEMBER 2016 Report Monitoring Workplan Research and Upper-Slope Dogfish Annexe toAttachmentA
Box 7051, Canberra Business Centre, ACT 2610 / Ph (02) 6225 5555 / Fax (02) 6225 5500 / AFMA Direct 1300 723 621 afma.gov.au Contents
Contents ...... 2 1. Introduction ...... 3 2. Background ...... 3 3. Progress against Individual Action Items ...... 4
3.1 Action Item 1: Develop a cost effective methodology for measuring baseline relative abundance and recovery over time...... 4 3.1.1 Background ...... 4 3.1.2 Output ...... 4 3.1.3 Outcome: Ongoing ...... 5 4 Summary...... 6 1. Introduction
The Upper-Slope Dogfish Management Strategy (the Strategy) was designed primarily to strengthen the Australian Fisheries Management Authority’s (AFMA) management arrangements for two species of gulper sharks: Harrisson’s Dogfish (Centrophorus harrissoni) and Southern Dogfish (C. zeehaani). The management actions outlined in the Strategy also provide some protection for other Gulper Shark species, such as the Endeavour Dogfish (C. moluccensis) and Greeneye Spurdog (Squalus chloroculus). The Strategy applies to Commonwealth waters in AFMA’s jurisdiction, with New South Wales (NSW), Western Australia (WA) and other jurisdictions responsible for their own management arrangements. For a detailed background on the Strategy refer to the Upper- Slope Dogfish Management Strategy (AFMA 2012).
As a part of the Strategy, AFMA committed to developing a research and monitoring workplan. The Upper-Slope Dogfish Research and Monitoring Workplan 2014-16 (the Workplan) was subsequently developed by AFMA in consultation with the Upper-Slope Dogfish Research Plan Working Group; a sub-committee of the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery Resource Assessment Group (SESSF RAG).
The Workplan included a range of action items to assess the effectiveness of the Strategy in meeting its primary objective: to promote the rebuilding of Southern Dogfish and Harrisson’s Dogfish (henceforth referred to as Gulper Sharks). This report provides an analysis of the progress made to date in achieving those objectives set out in the Workplan that were due to be completed by the end of the 2014-2016 assessment period.
2. Background
Ongoing research will provide AFMA and its stakeholders with information on how to improve the implementation and ongoing effectiveness of the Strategy. Mechanisms for regular reporting on project progress to the relevant stakeholder groups are outlined within the Workplan 2014-2016. Key stakeholders include AFMA, the Department of Agriculture, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Science (ABARES), the Department of the Environment and industry members.
The objective hierarchy outlined within the Workpan details the project information needs and performance criteria. The aim of the initial Workplan was to develop a cost effective methodology for measuring baseline relative abundance of Gulper Sharks. Subsequent research will focus on obtaining estimates of baseline relative abundance, and measuring any recovery (increase in relative abundance) in Gulper Shark stocks over time. The Workplan provides a project structure against which the effectiveness of the Strategy can be assessed.
Periodic reviews of research outcomes will provide a feedback loop whereby management arrangements in the Strategy can be adapted as necessary to meet developments in the fishery and the improved understanding of Gulper Shark biology and stock structure.
afma.gov.au 3 of 6
and Monitoring Workplan Report / Upper-Slope Dogfish Research and Monitoring Workplan Report 3. Progress against Individual Action Items 3.1 Action Item 1: Develop a cost effective methodology for measuring baseline relative abundance and recovery over time. 3.1.1 Background
The Workplan for the period 2014–16 outlined the need to develop a cost-effective methodology for measuring baseline relative abundance of Gulper Sharks, and recovery over time.
The methodology should consider:
The sustainability and minimum number of reference sites to be sampled through time to achieve the objectives; Appropriate abundance indices; Cost effective and practical techniques for sampling gulper shark populations; The minimum level and frequency of sampling needed to detect changes in population over time.
Outcomes of the 2014–16 Workplan will inform the approach to measuring relative Gulper Shark abundance and recovery in future Workplans. Subsequent Workplans will focus on obtaining estimates of baseline relative abundance and recovery using the proposed methodology. The timeframe of future Workplans will also depend largely on the outcomes of the design study, and the proposed frequency of assessments.
3.1.2 Output
CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere in conjunction with Fishwell Consulting submitted a project expression of interest entitled “Research to support the upper slope dogfish management strategy: options for monitoring the recovery of Southern Dogfish and Harrisson’s Dogfish” in response to the AFMA Research Committee’s (ARC) call for project applications in November 2015. This call included a priority scope for the upper slope dogfish priority. The application expression of interest was considered by the ARC at its March 2016 meeting and was approved for development into a full application, taking into account the ARC’s recommendations that funding be split across two financial years with $15,180 allocated for 2016/17 and the remaining $100,000 for 2017/18.
The full project proposal contained two primary objectives:
1. Identify and detail options for the design of a monitoring program to cost-effectively provide long-term measures of status and recovery of populations of Southern and Harrisson’s Dogfish. 2. Investigate possible funding models to implement ongoing cost-effective monitoring and assessment.
afma.gov.au 4 of 6
and Monitoring Workplan Report / Upper-Slope Dogfish Research and Monitoring Workplan Report The ARC recommended May 2017 as a start date so the project could commence in the same financial year whilst also being conducted concurrently with the Upper slope dogfish management strategy review. The ARC approved the full proposal out-of-session in June 2016 for funding in 2016/17. The proposal provides a set of options for the design of a program of data acquisition and analysis that will cost-effectively provide long-term measures of relative abundance and recovery trajectories for populations of Southern and Harrisson’s Dogfish.
3.1.3 Outcome: Ongoing
There has been ongoing consultation and agreement about the relevance and benefit of this work between CSIRO, relevant sectors of the fishing industry, and AFMA, and this consultation assisted in the development of the methodology for measuring baseline relative abundance of Gulper Sharks.
The project proposal put forward by CSIRO and Fishwell Consulting details 7 key elements designed to form the basis for designing options. These options will be developed in consultation with stakeholders throughout the course of the project. The 7 key project elements are:
1. Evaluate and identify suitable measures (including relative abundance) and reference points to establish and monitor the status of populations of Southern and Harrisson’s Dogfishes in selected fishery closed areas. 2. Evaluate the potential of non-lethal monitoring techniques to identify trends in populations based on the measures and reference points developed. a) Capture by hook and line (auto-longline), and b) The utility of a photographic method (Baited Remote Underwater Video System, BRUVS). 3. Examine the potential of conventional tagging data to estimate population size in selected areas. 4. Evaluate the alternatives for estimating the scales and rates of movements inside and outside closed areas. 5. Establish a science-industry partnership to support ongoing and cost-effective monitoring. 6. Investigate possible funding models for the implementation of ongoing monitoring 7. Review of relevant work, including FRDC-funded projects
Success of the project will be measured against three key performance indicators:
1. Fishery managers and stakeholders are provided with options for a strategy to monitoring gulper shark status and recovery, and assess how management is aiding recovery. 2. The work is completed in accordance with AFMAs timetable for development of the upper slope dogfish Research and Monitoring Workplan. 3. The fishing industry is engaged and given full opportunity to contribute to the development of options for the monitoring strategy.
afma.gov.au 5 of 6
and Monitoring Workplan Report / Upper-Slope Dogfish Research and Monitoring Workplan Report Now that a research provider has been determined, the final two milestones from the initial Workplan may proceed. These milestones involved completion of an analysis of the most cost effective research methodology for the project, and the production of a final report detailing the findings of the study. Following this, subsequent Workplans can then obtain estimates of baseline relative abundance and recovery of Gulper Shark using the proposed methodology.
4 Summary
The action item detailed in Upper-Slope Dogfish Research and Monitoring Workplan 2014- 16 due for completion by the end of 2016 has been considered and is ongoing.
Through implementing the specific action items identified under the Workplan, the AFMA has demonstrated a commitment to the recovery of Gulper Shark stocks over time. AFMA will continue to work with investigators on implementation of the successful project proposal, and with other relevant stakeholders, to address the Strategy’s primary objective: to promote the rebuilding of Southern Dogfish and Harrisson’s Dogfish (henceforth referred to as Gulper Sharks).
The next Workplan should detail timelines and project milestones to progress the development of the 7 key project design elements as listed in this report. Baseline relative abundance of Southern and Harrisson’s Dogfish can then be obtained and estimates of stock recovery achieved.
afma.gov.au 6 of 6
and Monitoring Workplan Report / Upper-Slope Dogfish Research and Monitoring Workplan Report Attachment B: Progress of recommendations and conditions from the WTO accreditation of the SESSF
Table 1: AFMA’s progress meeting the conditions and recommendations of the WTO declaration for the SESSF from 25 February 2016 to 21 February 2019
Condition Level of Achievement Deadline Condition 1. Operation of the fishery will Fulfilment of this condition is undertaken, and reported be carried out in against, in the AFMA annual report. The latest report accordance with the can be found at www.afma.gov.au/about/corporate- management arrangements publications/. Ongoing for the SESSF in force under the FM Act. Condition 2. AFMA to inform the DoEE AFMA has reported changes to the SESSF of any intended material management arrangements carried out in accordance changes to the SESSF with the WTO conditions. management arrangements As that may affect the See Section 3 of the 2018 WTO Annual Report – required assessment against which changes to management arrangements. EPBC Act decisions are made. Condition 3. AFMA to produce and AFMA has submitted the report required under present reports to the Condition 3 annually. Previous annual report submitted DoEE annually, as per in March 2018 Appendix B to the Annually Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries – 2nd Edition. Condition 4. AFMA to: a) ensure that management measures are in place to meet the objectives of the rebuilding strategies and a & b) management strategies Implementation and progress of existing rebuilding for species listed as strategies are included in Section 3 and Appendix 1 of conservation dependent Annually the 2018 WTO Annual Report. These reports will be under the EPBC Act updated in November at the relevant RAG meetings 1999, and and will be included in subsequent WTO reports. b) continue to evaluate and report to the Department on the effectiveness of rebuilding strategies for conservation dependent listed species. Condition Level of Achievement Deadline Condition 5. AFMA to: a) continue regular review a) Draft ERAs have been developed for the of the ecological risk CommonwealthTrawl Sector (CTS) Danish seine, assessments (ERAs) in CTS otter trawl, Great Australian Bight Trawl the SESSF, ensuring Sector otter trawl and Gillnet Hook and Trap Sector that the cumulative (GhaT) shark gillnet methods. impact of all Draft ERAs for the GHaT scalefish automatic Commonwealth longline and shark manual longline sector are commercial fisheries in expected to be completed by the end of this year. the area is taken into Ongoing account, and b) Implement management b) The SESSF Ecological Risk Management (ERM) actions to address and Strategy outlines the ongoing work AFMA is doing mitigate risks and to mitigate risk to high risk species. A SESSF impacts for species that Fisheries Management Strategy (FMS) is being are identified as high drafted (under AFMA’s revised ERM Framework) risk. and is expected to be finalised in early 2019. It will incorporate components of the SESSF ERM Strategy to address and mitigate risks and impacts for species that are identified as high risk.
Table 2: Recommendations to AFMA on the ecologically sustainable management of the SESSF
Recommendation Level of Achievement Deadline AFMA to determine the Management arrangements are in place to minimise extent of the impact of fishing the impact of fishing on non-target shark species such on non-target shark species, as deepwater closures (including those in the upper- including seeking to identify slope dogfish management strategy), handling and the species impacted, and release protocols and a continued focus on accurate develop management actions reporting of discards. Ongoing to mitigate the impact for The FMS (being drafted) will contain updated bycatch non-target shark species that and discard workplans with species assessed as high are identified as high risk risk under the revised ERAs as a focus. through the ERA process. ERAs remain the key assessment tool to determine fishing impacts on non-target shark species. AFMA to consult with the See Section 9 of the 2018 WTO Annual Report Department in the development and finalisation Complete of the eastern redfish rebuilding strategy. AFMA to consider further See Section 9 of the 2018 WTO Annual Report promotion of best practice In addition, Phillip Island Nature Parks and SETFIA management of unwanted gained a Victorian Government grant for the fishing gear within the biodiversity response planning project reducing Commonwealth Trawl Sector pollution from marine environment users to reduce Complete marine waste and marine mammal entanglements. The project provides wind proof bins to fishing vessels that are domiciled, or work, in Victoria and audits waste disposal facilities available to vessels. Table 3: Conditions on Part 13 accreditation for the SESSF
Recommendation Level of Achievement Deadline Condition A. AFMA to: a) maintain management a) See Section 4.2 and 9 of the 2018 WTO measures clearly directed Annual Report for more information on actions toward limiting the impact of designed to mitigate the impact of fishing fishing activity on Australian activity on ASL. sea lions (ASL) to levels which will assist in enabling the recovery of the species, Ongoing including all subpopulations. b) Continue to monitor and b) AFMA continues to monitor the effectiveness review the adequacy of its of the strategy in consultation with the ASL management Commonwealth Marine Mammal Working measures, in consultation Group. with marine mammal experts
Condition B. AFMA to continue to collect See Sections 3.13 and 9 of the 2018 WTO Annual and report on dolphin Report for more information on AFMA’s work on interactions, where possible to dolphins. species level, and continue to refine management measures AFMA is reviewing the Gillnet Dolphin Mitigation to minimise the bycatch of Strategy (alongside the Small Pelagic Fishery Ongoing dolphins in gillnets. This should strategy review). The draft review will be include ongoing monitoring and presented to the Commonwealth Fisheries Marine review of these measures, in Mammal Working Group at the 30 October 2018 consultation with marine meeting. mammal experts. Condition C. AFMA to continue to work with AFMA is developing a protected species strategy industry and relevant experts to for seals across all Commonwealth fisheries. With develop and implement regards to the CTS, AFMA is: management measures to • engaging with industry and gear technologists minimise mortality of seals in to develop new seal mitigation devices. It is the Commonwealth Trawl expected the devices will be further developed Sector of the fishery. and tested when formal co-management Ongoing arrangements are in place between AFMA and SETFIA. • trialling electronic monitoring on otter board trawl and Danish seine vessels. Footage will be analysed for the frequency and nature of seal interactions.
Recommendation Level of Achievement Deadline Condition D. AFMA to: a) ensure efficient and effective a) See Sections 3.12 and 9 of the 2018 WTO Seabird Management Plans Annual Report or visit remain in place for CTS and www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/seabirds/. GHT sector automatic Seabird Management Plans remain in place for longline vessels. all CTS and GHAT automatic longline (ALL) operators and any new entrants to the fishery require a vessel-specific SMP. b) Ensure adequate monitoring b) CTS – Observers are tasked with ensuring that is in place to ensure mitigation devices are correctly deployed and compliance with Seabird remain effective. Management Plans, and A trial of electronic monitoring in the CTS is underway and will determine whether camera footage can be used to detect seabird interactions and if mitigation devices have been deployed correctly.
GHaT – the ALL sector is monitored through the electronic monitoring program. Every shot is filmed and a portion of the footage is reviewed at random for catch composition and the deployment of tori lines and brickle Ongoing curtains. c) implement management c) CTS – of the 29 active otter board trawlers in measures to address the the CTS, 26 are using bafflers, one is using risk of interactions with bird sprayers and two part-time vessels are seabirds in the using pinkies with retention of offal. Commonwealth Trawl All methods have proven effective at mitigating Sector and Gillnet Hook and seabird interactions, and the remaining three Trap sector automatic operators are being encouraged to install longline vessels. This should bafflers as the most effective mitigation. include implementing AFMA are consulting with operators, who bycatch devices and/or offal report interactions, to determine the nature of management measures that the incidents, and enable continual have demonstrated to be improvement of mitigation devices. highly effective in reducing seabird mortality. GHaT – a comprehensive report on seabird interactions in longline and dropline sectors was presented to the TAP stakeholder group meeting (21 August 2018). The information was for the 2016-17 and 2017-18 TAP seasons. Attachment C: Schedule of stock assessments for the SESSF 2018-2023 (last updated at SESSFRAG Aug 2018)
Last assessed Species MYTAC in 2018-19 season and 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 AFMA management comment assessment tier SESSFRAG advice to push back because of low Alfonsino 4th year of a 3 year MYTAC 2014 3 3 catches SESSFRAG requested GABRAG to review the Bight Redfish 3rd year of 5 year MYTAC 2015 1 GABFIS and catch rates during the MYTAC period Blue Eye Trevalla Single year TAC 2017 4/5 4 4 Tier 4 for slope, Tier 5 for seamounts
Blue Grenadier 5th year of a 3 year MYTAC 2013 1 1 Under-caught and above target
Blue Warehou N/A 2014
Deepwater Flathead 2nd year of a 3 year MYTAC 2016 1 1 SESSFRAG recommended a revised CTARG not Deepwater shark east Single Year TAC 2017 4 4 including catch from inside the closures SESSFRAG recommended a revised CTARG not Deepwater shark west Single Year TAC 2017 4 4 including catch from inside the closures SESSFRAG recommended postponing this 2017 (not Elephant Fish Single year TAC ? assessment pending further advice on assessment accepted) approach. Flathead 2nd of 3 Year MYTAC 2016 1 1
Gemfish - East N/A 2010 1 1 Advice from GABRAG is to move to a Tier 4 for the Gemfish - west 2nd year of a 3 year MYTAC 2016 4 4 CTS component of the stock. Move assessment to SERAG SESSFRAG advice for SharkRAG to consider Gummy Shark 2nd year of a 3 year MYTAC 2016 1? 1 moving the assessment back by 2 years Jackass Morwong 3rd year of a 3 year MYTAC 2015 1 SESSFRAG advice to consider how to assess this John Dory 1st year of a 3 year MYTAC 2017 4 and other species with conflicting data Annual assessment given the cyclical nature of stock Mirror Dory Single year TAC 2017 4 4 4 4 4 4 abundance Ocean Perch 1st year of a 3 year MYTAC 2017 4 4
Orange Roughy - south N/A 2000
Orange Roughy - east 1st year of a ? year MYTAC 2017 1 1
Orange Roughy - west N/A 2002 Limited effort, bycatch TAC
Orange Roughy - Cascade Plateau N/A 2009 Limited data Last assessed Species MYTAC in 2018-19 season and 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 AFMA management comment assessment tier Orange Roughy - Albany & Esp N/A N/A Limited effort, bycatch TAC
Oreo Smooth - Cascade Long term TAC (catch dependent) 2010 Limited data
Consider approach to assessment at SESSFRAG Oreo Smooth - other 3rd year of a 3 year MYTAC 2015 5? 2019
Oreo Basket 1st year of a 3 year MYTAC 2017 4
Pink Ling 3rd year of a 3 year MYTAC 2015 1 1
Redfish N/A, bycatch TAC 2017 1 1
Ribaldo 1st year of a 3 year MYTAC 2017 4 4
Royal Red Prawn 1st year of a 3 year MYTAC 2017 4 4
Saw Shark 1st year of a 3 year MYTAC 2017 4 4
School Shark N/A (Index of Abundance start 14/15) 2012 1 1 Apply close kin genetics index of abundance
School Whiting 1st of a 3 year MYTAC 2017 1 1 Stock structure work prior to 2020 assessment
Silver Trevally 1st year of a 3 year MYTAC 2017 4 4
Silver Warehou 3rd year of 3 year MYTAC 2015 1 1
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023