MSC Assessment Report for Spencer Gulf Prawn

MOODY MARINE LTD

Ref: 82110 v3

Assessors: Richard Banks (Lead Assessor and P3), Dr Kevin Stokes (P1), Geoff Dews (P2).

MSC Assessment Report for

Spencer Gulf Prawn (Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus) Fishery

Client: World Wildlife Fund and the Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Association Inc

Version: 3 Public Comment Draft Report

Certification Body: Client Contact: Moody Marine Ltd Alison Cross Moody International Certification World Wildlife Fund Merlin House California Marine Office Stanier Way 171 Forest Avenue Wyvern Business Park Palo Alto, CA 94301, USA Derby DE21 6BF UK Peter Trott, Fisheries Programme Manager, Level 13, Tel: +44 (0) 1633 544663 235 Jones St, Ultimo, NSW 2007 Australia Fax: +44 (0) 1633 675020 Simon Clark SGWCPA PO Box 8 (South Quay Boulevard) Port Lincoln SA 5606, Australia

FN 82052 v1 Page 1 CONTENTS

1 SUMMARY ...... 4 1.1 THE ASSESSMENT TEAM ...... 4 1.2 ASSESSMENT TIMELINE ...... 4 1.3 ASSESSMENT OUTCOME...... 4 1.4 SCORES FOR EACH PRINCIPLE ...... 4 1.5 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 4 1.6 CONDITIONS AND TIMESCALES ...... 5 1.3 THE FISHERY PROPOSED FOR CERTIFICATION ...... 7 1.4 REPORT STRUCTURE AND ASSESSMENT PROCESS ...... 7 1.5 STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS ATTENDED ...... 8 1.6 OTHER INFORMATION SOURCES ...... 9 2 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS USED IN THE REPORT ...... 14 3 BACKGROUND TO THE FISHERY ...... 15 3.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 15 3.2 BIOLOGY OF THE TARGET SPECIES ...... 15 3.3 HISTORY OF THE FISHERY ...... 17 3.4 FLEET AND GEAR DESCRIPTION ...... 17 4 STOCK ASSESSMENT ...... 19 4.1 INFORMATION ...... 19 4.2 STOCK ASSESSMENT AND REFERENCE POINTS ...... 21 5 FISHERY MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK...... 22 5.1 HARVEST STRATEGY ...... 22 5.2 HARVEST CONTROL TOOLS...... 25 5.3 RESEARCH AND DATA ...... 26 6 ECOSYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS ...... 27 7 GOVERNANCE ...... 43 7.1 MANAGEMENT BODIES ...... 43 7.2 FISHERIES REGULATIONS ...... 46 7.3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ...... 47 7.4 CONSULTATION PROCESSES ...... 48 7.5 INCENTIVES...... 49 7.6 THE FISHERIES SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN...... 49 7.7 DECISION MAKING PROCESS ...... 56 7.8 ENFORCEMENT AND SURVEILLANCE ...... 57 7.8.1 Fisheries Services ...... 57 7.8.2 The Committee at Sea ...... 58 7.9 RESEARCH PLANS...... 59 7.10 PERFORMANCE REVIEW PROCESS ...... 60 8 OTHER FISHERIES AFFECTING TARGET STOCK ...... 61 9 STANDARD USED ...... 61 9.1 PRINCIPLE 1 ...... 61 9.2 PRINCIPLE 2 ...... 62 9.3 PRINCIPLE 3 ...... 62 10 BACKGROUND TO THE EVALUATION ...... 64 10.1 EVALUATION TEAM ...... 64 10.2 PREVIOUS CERTIFICATION EVALUATIONS ...... 65

FN 82052 v1 Page 2 10.3 INSPECTIONS OF THE FISHERY ...... 65 11 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ...... 66 11.1 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ...... 66 11.2 STAKEHOLDER ISSUES...... 66 12 OBSERVATIONS AND SCORING ...... 67 12.1 INTRODUCTION TO SCORING METHODOLOGY ...... 67 13 LIMIT OF IDENTIFICATION OF LANDINGS FROM THE FISHERY ...... 67 13.1 TRACEABILITY WITHIN THE FISHERY ...... 67 13.2 AT-SEA PROCESSING ...... 67 13.3 POINTS OF LANDING ...... 67 13.4 ELIGIBILITY TO ENTER CHAINS OF CUSTODY ...... 67 13.5 ACTUAL ELIGIBILITY DATE ...... 68 14 ASSESSMENT RESULTS ...... 68 14.1 CONDITIONS ...... 68 14.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 74 15 APPENDICES ...... 75 15.1 APPENDIX A: SCORING...... 75 15.2 APPENDIX B: SCORING TABLE ...... 78 15.3 APPENDIX C: RISK-BASED ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK ...... 133 15.4 APPENDIX D: PEER REVIEW REPORTS ...... 141 15.4.1 1. Peer Reviewer Biographies...... 141 15.4.2 Peer Review Report A ...... 142 15.4.3 Peer Review Report B ...... 150 15.5 APPENDIX E: CLIENT ACTION PLAN...... 155 15.6 APPENDIX E: STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ...... 160 15.7 APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW REPORTS ...... 161 15.8 APPENDIX G: POST PEER REVIEW EMAIL CLARIFICATION ...... 211 15.9 APPENDIX H:REGISTERED COMPANIES / VESSELS WITHIN UNIT OF CERTIFICATION: ELIGIBLE TO SELL MSC CERTIFIED PRODUCT...... 215

FN 82052 v1 Page 3 1. SUMMARY

This report provides information on the assessment for the Spencer Gulf Bottom Trawl Prawn (Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus) Fishery. The assessment is by Moody Marine, against the Marine Stewardship Council‟s Principles and Criteria for sustainable fishing. The assessment team used the default assessment tree contained within the MSC Fishery Assessment Methodology version 2 (FAM v2).

The Assessment team

Richard Banks Lead Assessor with P 3 responsibility Dr Kevin Stokes Assessor with P1 responsibility Geoff Dews Assessor with P 2 responsibility

Assessment timeline

Announcement of Main Assessment 15 June 2010 Site Visit and Stakeholder consultation 6 September 2010 Expected Date of Completion 10 July 2011

1.3 Assessment outcome

The fishery attained a score of 80 or more against each of the MSC Principles and did not score less than 60 against any Indicators. It is therefore determined that the Spencer Gulf King Prawn Fishery be certified according to the Marine Stewardship Council Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fisheries.

1.4 Scores for each Principle

Principle 1: 83.8 Principle 2: 81.0 Principle 3: 87.9

1.5 Recommendations

The assessors make 6 recommendations:

Recommendation 1 (SG 1.2.3): The design of the Stock Assessment Surveys and consequent interpretability should be tested.

Recommendation 2 (SG 1.2.3): SARDI should undertake CPUE standardisation to better understand the utility or otherwise of CPUE in future Management Plans and also within possible future assessment processes (e.g. production modelling to estimate Bmsy).

Recommendation 3 (SG 2.1.3/SG 2.2.3): Increase the precision in monitoring the information on retained and bycatch species, utilising November, February and April surveys, and implement a comprehensive system of observer recording of the discard species and bycatch rates through these preseason surveys and during fishing operations.

Recommendation 4 (SG 2.2.2/SG 2.4.2): Completion of the Management Plan according to the timelines set.

Recommendation 5 (SG 2.3.1): National guidelines set to determine levels of vulnerability status of ETP species

FN 82052 v1 Page 4

Recommendation 6: To further develop the management strategy for ETPs following a ERA for syngnathids, or any other at risk ETP species, with mitigation measures designed but subject to a review by independent experts. The derivation of the strategy should include active participation of affected stakeholders, including eNGOs. This should be completed by the first annual review (2013).

1.6 Conditions and timescales

The assessors require 7 conditions to be implemented.

Condition 1 (SG 1.1.2): A clear explanation of the use of reference points and triggered actions, clearly linked to the requirements for limits and targets in the FAM P1.1.2, should be prepared and agreed for inclusion in the new Management Plan. Limits and targets adopted in the new Management Plan should explicitly consider the role of prawns in the SG ecosystem. It is noted that this condition could be approached in a number of ways. For example, a clear articulation of the relationship between the management strategy and MSC PI 1.1.2 might suffice. Alternatively, either a stock assessment (to estimate Bmsy) or management strategy evaluation (to demonstrate expected output performance) could be carried out. The client is required by the first surveillance (2012) to provide a plan for necessary work in support of this condition with a clear outline of the approach to be taken. Further, it is required that by 3 years after certification is granted, work will be completed sufficiently to ensure clarity as to the targets and limits set and to provide confidence that they explicitly or implicitly meet PI 1.1.2 requirements at the 80 scoring level or better.

Condition 2 (SG 2.3.3): The Condition is to strengthen the monitoring and reporting processes for ETP interactions:  Logbooks must contain explicit reference to Syngnathid species and other ETP species, indicating the state (dead, damaged or released alive);  Independent trawl surveys conducted generally in November, February and April, to include data on the seasonal distribution and abundance of syngnathids, or any other ETP in trawled areas  The distribution and abundance of ETPs in areas outside the trawl areas should be determined through independent surveys to develop an understanding of the success or otherwise of mitigation measures that are in place.

Condition 3 (SG 2.4.3): The Condition is to strengthen the information available to allow any detection of an increase in risk to habitat as a result of fishing or other exogenous environmental variables, within the Gulf. The outputs will require the following levels of analysis:

 Detailed presentation of existing habitat maps to allow for accurate assessment as to the spatial distribution of the types of habitats that are trawled and to assess the habitats that support key species in order to monitor changes in habits conditions and associated elements that may be creating cumulative impacts.  Continuous monitoring the information from logbooks and independent surveys will also verify the distribution and abundance of benthic species to assess the actions of spatial and temporal management decisions.

A detailed plan to achieve this should be in place at the first annual surveillance audit. The results

FN 82052 v1 Page 5 benthic interactions will be incorporated into an annual bycatch report, commencing from the second annual review onwards, which will be made available for public scrutiny, and used to assist the development of additional management mitigation measures, if deemed appropriate. Evidence that this condition has been implemented, will be required by the second annual review.

Condition 4 (SG 2.5.3): Based on the outputs from Condition 2 and 3, and Recommendation 3, continuous information should be collected in order to detect the ecosystem outcomes management measures implemented under the management strategy, once in full operation. The information should be presented in the annual by-catch report, identifying any possible risks to the trophic balance. Evidence that this condition has been implemented, will be required by the second annual review (2013).

Condition 5 (SG 3.1.2): PIRSA to improve participation of external stakeholders (i.e. an environmental eNGOs) in the formulation of management decisions affecting ecosystem based management, consistent with the strategies outlined in the Hollamby report. Examples of improved participation must relate to eNGO participation in risk assessments and input into the formulation of bycatch mitigation strategies. The position of an environmental eNGO on the SGWCPFA Research Committee should be formalised. Evidence that this process is taking place must be introduced by the first surveillance audit (2012).

Condition 6 (SG 3.2.4): A Research Plan is required to clearly outline the strategically important activities as appropriate to achieving fishery-specific and ecosystem-orientated research outputs consistent with the management plan. A strategic research plan should be formulated in agreement with all the important stakeholders to be implemented as from the start of the New Management Plan (2013), and reviewed biannually.

Condition 7 (SG 3.2.5): SARDI and the SGWCPFA Research Plans and their outputs are subject to independent external review once formulated. In addition, the performance of the Management Plan should be subject to an annual internal review and occasional external review. The external review will have been completed by the fourth surveillance audit (2015).

2. INTRODUCTION

This report sets out the results of the assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn (Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus) Fishery against the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing.

The report aims to provide clear justification for the assessment scores that have been attributed to the fishery, and identify the sources of information that have been used to support these. In order to provide useful background and information for a wider readership, in the main part of the report is a more qualitative account of the fishery in question. However, it should be reiterated that no primary research has been undertaken to inform this report and source material relies on published materials, separate support data provided by the management organisations, Primary Industries and Resources, South Australia (PIRSA) and the Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Association (SGWCPA), the principal research organization, South Australia Research and Development Institute (SARDI), and outputs from stakeholder interviews. The report is not intended to comply with the standard editing norms expected for scientific journals.

FN 82052 v1 Page 6

The fishery proposed for certification

The MSC Guidelines to Certifiers specify that the unit of certification is "The fishery or fish stock (=biologically distinct unit) combined with the fishing method/gear and practice (=vessel(s) pursuing the fish of that stock)." The fishery proposed for certification is therefore defined as:

Species: King prawn (Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus)

Geographical Area: All South Australian waters of Spencer Gulf that are north of the geodesic line joining Cape Catastrophe (Latitude 34º 35.4‟S, Longitude 136º 36.0‟E), Eyre Peninsula and Cape Spencer (Latitude 34º 9.6‟S, Longitude 135º 31.2‟E), Yorke Peninsula

Method of Capture: Otter (bottom) trawl

Stock: Spencer Gulf King Prawn fishery (Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus)

Management System: Input restrictions (39 boats) restricted to temporal closed periods, closed areas and output controls (quotas and size limits)

Client Group: Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association and World Wildlife Fund

In the course of the certification it is possible that further companies/vessels may join the client group. This would be in accordance with the MSC‟s stated desire to allow fair and equitable access to the certification.

Report Structure and Assessment Process

The aims of the assessment are to determine the degree of compliance of the fishery with the MSC Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing, as set out in Section 8.

This report sets out:  the background to the fishery under assessment and the context within which it operates in relation to the other areas where the target species is fished  the qualifications and experience of the team undertaking the assessment  the standard used (MSC Principles and Criteria)  stakeholder consultation carried out. Stakeholders include all those parties with an interest in the management of the fishery and include fishers, management bodies, scientists and environmental Non-Governmental Organisations (eNGO‟s)  the methodology used to assess („score‟) the fishery against the MSC Standard.  a scoring table with the Scoring Indicators adopted by the assessment team and Scoring Guidelines which aid the assessment team in allocating scores to the fishery. The commentary in this table then sets out the position of the fishery in relation to these Scoring Indicators.

The intention of the earlier sections of the report is to provide the reader with background information to interpret the scoring commentary in context.

Finally, as a result of the scoring, the Certification Recommendation of the assessment team is presented, together with any conditions attached to certification.

In draft form, this report is subject to critical review by appropriate, independent, scientists („peer review‟). The comments of these scientists are appended to this report. Responses are given in the peer review texts and, where amendments are made to the report on the basis of peer review

FN 82052 v1 Page 7 comments; these are also noted in the peer review text. Following peer review, the report is then released for public scrutiny on the MSC website.

The report, containing the recommendation of the assessment team, any further stakeholder comments and the peer review comments is then considered by the Moody Marine Governing Board (a body independent of the assessment team). The Governing Board then make the final certification determination on behalf of Moody Marine Ltd.

It should be noted that, in response to comments by peer reviewers, stakeholders and the Moody Marine Governing Board, some points of clarification may be added to the final report.

Finally, the complete report, containing the Moody Marine Ltd Determination and all amendments, will be released for further stakeholder scrutiny.

Stakeholder meetings attended

Information used in the main assessment has been obtained from interviews and correspondence with stakeholders in this fishery, notably:

Stakeholder Persons met Date and Venue organisation 1 PIRSA, SGWCPFA Martin Smallridge, Alice Fistr, Keith West Beach, Adelaide, 6 and SARDI Rowling, C Dixon, T Ward, G Hooper, A September, 2010 Hogg (present am only). K. Hollamby. 2 PIRSA Martin Smallridge, Acting Director Adelaide, 7 September, 2010 3 SARDI C Dixon, G Hooper, Mike Steer, Shane West Beach, Adelaide, 7 Roberts, Tony Fowler, Kate Rodda September, 2010 4 WWF Peter Trott West Beach, Adelaide, 6 September, 2010 5 Independent consultant Neil Carrick Adelaide, 8 September 2010 6 Conservation Council, Kathryn Warhurst, Chris Ball, James West Beach, Adelaide, 8 South Australia Brook September, 2010

7 Conservation Council, Kathryn Warhurst West Beach, Adelaide, 8 South Australia September, 2010

8 SGWCFA Barry Evans, Tony Lukin, Greg Palmer, Port Lincoln, 9 Nathan Hood, Karen Hollamby September, 2010 9 Fisheries Services Andrew Carr, Mark Spencer Port Lincoln, 10 September, 2010 10 Ocean Watch Trust Nathan Bicknell Port Lincoln, 10 September, 2010 11 SGWCPFA, Observer Jenny Kranz, Greg Palmer Port Lincoln, 10 scheme September, 2010 12 SGWCPFA Karen Hollamby Port Lincoln, 10 September, 2010 13 Department of Kathryn Read Telephone interview, 6th Sustainability, October, 2010 Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPAC)

FN 82052 v1 Page 8

Other information sources

Published information and unpublished reports used during the assessment are listed below:

Principle 1 support references

Carrick, N. (1996) Key factors which affect prawn recruitment and implications to harvesting prawn stocks. Final report for Fisheries Research and Development Corporation 91/003.

Carrick, N. (2003) Spencer Gulf Prawn (Melicertus latisulcatus) fishery. Fishery assessment report to Primary assessment report to PIRSAfor the Prawn Fishery Management Committee, SARD, RD 03/0079-2.

Dixon, C.D. (2010). Presentation during site visit to SARDI, Tuesday 7th September 2010

Dixon, C.D., Hooper, G.E. and S.D. Roberts (2010). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery 2007/08: Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries. SARDI Research Report Series No 511.

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

Roberts, S.D., Dixon C.D., and Ward T.M., (2005) Assessment of juvenile prawn (Melicertus latisulcatus) surveys in Spencer Gulf, South Australia. Report to PIRSA Fisheries. SARDI Aquatic Sciences RD04/0211–2, SARDI Research Report Series No 95.

SGWCPFA (1984). Constitution of the Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Inc

SGWCPFA (2009). The Committee At Sea Charter

SGWCPFA (2010a). Charter – Research Sub-Committee, Approved by the Research Sub-Committee 24 May 2010

South Australian Western King Prawn Daily Fishing Logbook Form (sighted at SGWCPFA offices, Port Lincoln)

South Australian Western King Prawn Fishing Unloading Form (sighted at SGWCPFA offices, Port Lincoln)

Zacharin W, Dixon C and Smallridge M (2007) Towards self-management for the Western King Prawn Fishery in Spencer Gulf, South Australia, PIRSA, http://www.sardi.sa.gov.au/fisheries/publications/2008_publications

Principle 2 support references

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Industry South Australia (2005). On Boat Management System. FRDC and SGWCPFA

FN 82052 v1 Page 9 Burridge, C., Pitcher, R., Wassenberg T., Poiner I. and Hill B., 2003. Measurement of the rate of depletion of benthic fauna by prawn (shrimp) otter trawls: an experiment in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Fisheries Research 60: 237 -253.

Carrick, N. (1997). A preliminary assessment of bycatch from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australia Fisheries Assessment Series 97/02 57 pp.

Currie D., Dixon C, Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S., and Ward T. (2009). Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390

DEWHA (2009). The Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Australian Commonwealth Government

DEWHA (2009). Assessment of the South Australian prawn trawl fishery. Australian Government, Department of the Environment, Water and Heritage and the Arts

Dixon C., Svane I. and Ward T. (2005). Monitoring and assessment of bycatch and by-product species of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery. SARDI Research Report Series No. 102

Dixon C., (2010). Trawl tracts 22m all seasons.pdf (SARDI, unpublished) Doroudi, M., PIRSA (2010), Introduction of size limit on bugs, Letter from PIRSA, 3 December, 2010.

Haddy J., Courtney A., and Roy D (2005). Aspects of the reproductive biology and growth of Balmain bugs (Ibacus spp.)(Scyllaridae). Journal of Crustacean Biology 25 (2): 263-27.

Hollamby 2010; Letter to PIRSA from SGWCPFA dated 28 October 2010

Kailola, P., Williams, M., Stewart, P., Recihelt, R., McNee, A., Grieve C. (1993) Australian Fisheries Resource Bureau. Bureau of Resources and the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, Australia, 422pp.

Marine Park South Australia. Government of South Australia. www.marineparks.sa.gov.au. Accessed October 28th 2010

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

PIRSA (2003). Ecological assessment of the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Gulf St Vincent Prawn Fishery and West Coast Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Management Series.

Roberts, S. and Steer, M. (2010). By-products assessment in Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery with an emphasis on developing management options for Balmain Bug. SARDI Report 439

Rodda K, and Svane I and Thomas,P.(eds) (2007). FRDC Prawn Fishery Bycatch and Discards: marine Ecosystems Analysis – Population effects. FRDC Report 2003/023 pp 263-332.

Shark Advisory Group and Lack M. 2004 National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (Shark-plan) May 2004. Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Canberra Act

Shirley, J. Sorokin, Currie D. (2009). The distribution and diversity of sponges in Spencer Gulf, Report to Nature Foundation Inc. SARDI Research Paper No. 334

FN 82052 v1 Page 10

Steer M., Lloyd M., Jackson W. (2007a). Southern calamari (Sepioteuthis australis) fishery. Fishery Assessment report to PIRSA. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences) Adelaide RD 0006-3.

Smith, H. (1972). Blue swimmer crabs in South Australia – their status, potential and biology. Wildcatch ~Fisheries (SA) 6:6-9.

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc, (2010). Minutes of meeting Port Lincoln 2010

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc, (2010). Annual Report, 1 July to 30 June 2010. South Australia.

SGWCPFA, (2010). Management Committee Code of Conduct

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc, (2008). Annual Report. South Australia.

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc, (2009). Annual Report. South Australia.

SGWCPFA Letter to PIRSA dated September 2010.

Steer M., Hall K. (2005). Estimated abundance and biomass of the unique spawning aggregation of the giant Australian cuttlefish (Sepia apama) in Northern Spencer Gulf, South Australia. Report to Coastal Protection Branch, Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia. SARDI Research Report Series No. 97.

Svane I., Rodda K. and Thomas P. (2007). Prawn fishery bycatch and discards: marine ecosystem analysis – population effects. FRDC Project 2003/023

Svane I (2003). Prawn fishery bycatch and discard: Fates and consequences for a marine ecosystem. FRDC Report 1998/225, pp 1-130

Thomas, P and Chick R. (2007). Physiological stress and post-discard survival of quantitatively important bycatch species. In: Prawn Fishery Bycatch and Discards: marine Ecosystems Analysis – Population effects. Svane, I., Rodda, K. and Thomas, P. (eds) FRDC Report 2003/023 pp 263-332.

Zhou, S., Griffiths, S., (2008). Sustainability Assessment for Fishing Effects (SAFE): a new quantitative ecological risk assessment method and its application to elasmobranch bycatch in an Australian trawl fishery. Fisheries Research 91, 56-68.

1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 Zhou, S., Griffiths, S., Miller, M., (2009). Sustainability assessment for fishing effects (SAFE) on highly diverse and data-limited fish bycatch in a tropical trawl fishery. Marine and Freshwater Research 60, 563-570.

Principle 3 support references

Commonwealth of Australia, The Fisheries Management Act, 1991

DEWHA (2009a) Assessment of the South Australian Prawn Trawl Fishery, October 2009. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl/index.html

FN 82052 v1 Page 11 DEWHA (2009b) Ministerial Decision, October, 2009. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl/index.html

DEWHA (2009c), Commonwealth of Australia, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Accreditation of a Plan of Management For The Purposes of Part 13, SA Prawn Trawl Fishery management regime, 26 October, 2009

Econsearch (2010). Economic Indicators for the Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries 2008/09, A report prepared for Primary Industries and Resources South Australia. Available at http://www.econsearch.com.au/pages/completed-projects/fishing-aquaculture/fish10.php

EPBC Act, 1999, Significant Impact Guidelines - Matters of National Environmental Significance, DEWHA, http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/nes-guidelines.html

Fisheries Council of South Australia (2010), Minutes of the Meeting, No‟ 14, 16 March, 2010. Accessed from http://fisheriescouncil.sa.gov.au/council_meetings_-_minutes

Government of South Australia, Fisheries Management Act 2007

Government of South Australia, Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Paper No. 54 September 2007 South Australian, Fisheries Management Series

Hollamby, K.L., McShane, P.E., Sloan, S., and Brook, J., (2010). Competition to collaboration: exploring co-management models for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Project No. 2007/025, Fisheries Research and Development Corporation

Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (2008), Agreement for Coordinator At Sea Real Time Management for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Between Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (“Customer”) and Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association

PIRSA, Management Plan (September 2007) for the South Australia Spencer Gulf Fishery, Paper No 54, South Australia Fishery Management Series, PIRSA, http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries/commercial_fishing/prawn_spencer_gulf__and__west_coast_fisher y/management_plan

PIRSA (2009). Ecological Assessment of the South Australian Prawn Fisheries Spencer Gulf, Gulf of St. Vincent and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Reassessment Report, Prepared for the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage, and the Arts for the purposes of Part 13 and 13(A) of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, 11 September 2009. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl/submission-sep09.html

PIRSA Fisheries Services (2010). Annual Risk Assessment (Unpublished).

SARDI (2009), Research Project Scope and Costing: Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Core Stock Assessment.

SGWCPFA (1984). Constitution of the Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Inc

SGWCPFA, (2008a). Memorandum of Understanding Between, The Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association (SGWCPFA) and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, acting through the South Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences (“SARDI Aquatic Sciences”), Implementation of Industry-Based Research in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery.

SGWCPFA (2009). The Committee At Sea Charter

FN 82052 v1 Page 12

SGWCPFA (2010a). Charter – Research Sub-Committee, Approved by the Research Sub-Committee 24 May 2010

SGWCPFA (2010b). Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Research Sub-committee, Minutes of Meeting held 30 March 2010

SGWCPFA (2010c), Minutes of the Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Management Committee meeting held 31st March 2010

SGWCPFA (2010d), Minutes of the Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Management Committee meeting held 31st March 2010

SGWCPFA (2010e). Letter from Glen Davis, Independent Chairperson (SGWCPFA) to Hon Michael O‟Brien MP, Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, 29 April 2010.

Weire A and Lok P (2007), Precaution and the Precautionary Principle: two Australian case studies, Productivity Commission, Commonwealth of Australia.

FN 82052 v1 Page 13 3. GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS USED IN THE REPORT

AAT Administrative Appeals Tribunal AFMA Australian Fisheries Management Authority CB Certification Body CCSA Conservation Council for South Australia CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort CRC Cooperative Research Centre CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific Industry Research Organisation. DEWHA Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (now Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ESD Ecologically Sustainable Development ETP Endangered, threatened and protected FAM Fisheries Assessment Methodology FCSA Fisheries Council of South Australia FMC Fisheries Management Committee FPV Fishery patrol vessel FRDC Fisheries Research and Development Corporation HS Harvest Strategy ITQ Individually Transferable Quota IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature LRP Limit Reference Point MAFF Minister for Agriculture Food and Fisheries MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance MPA Marine Protected Area MSC Marine Stewardship Council MEY Maximum Economic Yield MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield NRIFS National Recreational and Indigenous Fishing Survey OVI Objectively verifiable indicators PI Performance Indicator PIRSA Department of Primary Industries and Resources, South Australia PSA Productivity Susceptibility Analysis PV Patrol Vessel RBF Risk Based Framework SGWCPFA Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association SARDI South Australian Research and Development Institute SARFAC South Australian Recreational Fishing Advisory Council SAS Stock Assessment Survey SEWPAC Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities SICA Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis TAC Total Allowable Catch TACC Total Allowable Commercial Catch TRP Target Reference Point TSSS Threatened Species Schedule Subcommittee (South Australia) UoC Unit of Certification WSFA Wildcatch Fisheries (SA) WWF World Wildlife Fund

FN 82052 v1 Page 14

4. BACKGROUND TO THE FISHERY

Introduction

The Spencer Gulf prawn fishery includes all South Australian waters of Spencer Gulf that are north of the geodesic line joining Cape Catastrophe (Latitude 34º 35.4‟S, Longitude 136º 36.0‟E), Eyre Peninsula and Cape Spencer (Latitude 34º 9.6‟S, Longitude 135º 31.2‟E), Yorke Peninsula (Figure 1). Prawn fishing in the Spencer Gulf cannot be undertaken in waters less than 10m depth. The northern grounds are known as Middle-Bank, Yarraville Basin, the Stones, Musgrave Shoals and the Channel. The southern grounds are known as Wallaroo, Shoalwater, Cowell, Main Gutter, Western Gutter, Arno Bay, Corny Point, Wardang, Thistle, and Rosalind Shoal. The fishery is based on catches from a small area of the Gulf (<15%), with over 60% of the catch taken from two fishing grounds (Southern end of trawl region 1 and Wallaroo), which cover less than 8% of the Gulf (Svane 2009).

Figure 1: Location of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery, South Australia

1. Northern Area (Middle Bank, Channel, Yarraville Basin, Stones and Musgrave shoal) 2. Wallaroo 3. Shoalwater 4. Cowell, Arno and Western gutter 5. Main gutter 6. Wardang 7. Southern Gutter 8. Corny Point 9. Thistle Island and Rosalind Shoal Source: Palmer et al

The major ports for the Spencer Gulf fleet are Port Lincoln, Wallaroo (south of Port Broughton), Port Adelaide (about 150 km east, in Gulf St. Vincent) and Port Pirie (Figure 1).

Biology of the Target Species

Information on the biology of Western King Prawn (Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus) is provided in Hooper et al (2009). The following is a synopsis of the extensive material in that document. References are not included below but can be found in Hooper et al (ibid).

FN 82052 v1 Page 15

The species is distributed throughout the Indo-west Pacific with populations in South Australia (Spencer Gulf, Gulf of St Vincent and the West Coast) being the most southerly and in the lowest temperature range. The species is benthic, preferring sandy substrates (rather than seagrass or other vegetated areas). Both juveniles and adults display strong diel and lunar behavioural changes. These behavioural changes affect catchability, and hence fishing practice. P. latisulcatus distribution is affected by salinity as well as substrate, preferring higher salinity areas. Important nursery areas are characterized as being hyper-saline.

Prawns are crustaceans with five pairs of swimming legs (pleopods) as well as five pairs of walking legs (pereiopods) with the front three having claws. They are nocturnal and burrow into the seabed during the day and emerge at night to feed. Adult King prawns aggregate, mature, mate and spawn in deep water between October and April, with the main spawning period between November and February. Females may spawn on multiple occasions during one season. During the peak spawning period, females tend to be more prevalent in the catch, due to increased feeding activity associated with ovary development. At other times the catch is generally male based. Larger female prawns are proportionally more fecund than smaller prawns. The proportion of female prawns with fertilized eggs increases with size. Therefore, the combination of the short spawning season, increased catchability of females, disproportionate fecundity levels and varying fertilization success, means that the harvest of prawns, particularly larger size classes of females, during the peak gravid (November) and spawning (December) periods, has substantial implications on recruitment to the fishery and thus sustainable management (Zacharin et al (2007)). A critical period is between November and February with fishing limited to short periods in November and December, and then closed until March.

Whilst adult M. latisulcatus have an offshore life phase, the juvenile phase is spent in shallow near shore environments generally associated with mangroves and/or tidal flats. Prawn larvae undergo metamorphosis through four main larval stages: nauplii, zoea, mysis and post-larvae. The length of the larval stage depends on water temperature, with faster development in warmer water. Wind patterns and tidal currents influence the distribution of prawn larvae, with the highest densities found in the north of Spencer Gulf (Carrick 1996).

Post-larvae settle in inshore nursery areas when 2–3 mm carapace length (CL) and can remain there for up to 10 months, depending on the time of settlement (Carrick 1996). The post-larvae produced from early spawning events settle in nursery areas during December or January where they grow rapidly and then migrate to deeper water in May or June. Alternatively, post-larvae produced from spawning after January settle in nurseries from March and then grow slowly. They “over-winter” in nursery areas before recruiting to trawl grounds in February the following year (Carrick 2003). The effects of over-wintering on adult growth and survival are unknown.

In the Spencer Gulf, spatial and temporal differences in juvenile prawn abundances are evident (Roberts et al. 2005). Even so, inter-annual patterns are generally consistent across sites. Abundances were greatest between February and May, with key nursery sites identified as False Bay, Shoalwater Pt, Plank Pt, Mt Young, 5th Creek and Port Pirie, all in the north of the gulf (Carrick 1996; Roberts et al. 2005).

Growth of the King prawn in Spencer Gulf is highly seasonal and increases with increasing temperature. The highest growth period is immediately after the spawning period is completed, as prawns reduce the energy spent on reproduction. Female prawns grow faster and attain a larger size than males.

FN 82052 v1 Page 16

History of the Fishery

The trawl fishery has operated since 1967 and became a restricted access fishery in 1968. The number of commercial boats operating in the fishery has remained constant at 39 since 1976. All are issued with a license and fish exclusively in the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery (P. latisulcatus) with an allowance to retain byproduct species of slipper lobster (Ibacus spp.) and southern calamary (Sepioteuthis australis). These two byproduct species collectively account for less than 5% but are included in the assessment (Section 7.2).

Fleet and Gear Description

Fishers use a demersal otter trawl, which consists of towing a funnel-shaped net leading into a bag (commonly referred to as a cod end) on the sea bottom behind a boat (Figure 2). Otter boards (or trawl-doors) are used to keep the trawl nets open both horizontally and vertically as well as keeping the net in contact with the sea bottom while being towed. The speed of trawling, the size of the net opening and the pressure wave created in front of the net determines how effective the net operates along with mesh size, trawl board size and weight of chain. The net is rigged with a head rope, foot- rope and a drop chain attached to the foot rope. This chain setup is to induce the prawns to ‘jump’ from off the sea bottom as a freight response to the oncoming trawl and into the net as it moves over sea bottom. The configuration of the chains on the foot rope differs between vessels and is altered according to the sea bed the trawl is being pulled over.

A separate large-mesh bag attached inside the cod end bag is commonly known as a ‘crab bag’. This inner large mesh cod end bag acts to retain blue crabs and large fish, sharks and rays, while prawns flow through to the cod end. The crab bag may reduce blue crab mortality and incidental damage to prawns (Palmer comments during stakeholder discussions (2010)) and improves the on-board separation of by-product and prawns. The vessels in the Spencer Gulf are restricted to towing twin nets (Figure 3). Because of the size and headline of the trawls (a maximum 29.26m in total or 14.63 m per net), the trawls are also relatively light. Some distinguishing features from this fishery, which facilitate light bottom trawling (Palmer, pers com, July 2009) and reduction in by-catch and waste accumulation, are:  The slight angle of the trawl boards, too acute angle would result in heavier contact with the sea bottom;  The position of the headline rope is towed in a position that is in front of the footline;  There is sufficient space between the drop chain and the foot rope to allow for some escapement of species.

Trawling is undertaken at restricted periods during the dark of the moon. Fishing takes place only at limited periods (i.e. no more than 14 nights per month) in the months of November, December, March, April, May and June but generally trips last for 10 nights (pulse fishery). Trawl shots are of short duration relative to other prawn fisheries in Australia, averaging approximately 50 minutes and no more than 60 minutes. After each shot, the cod end is emptied immediately into a hopper -sorting system, which immerses the catch in seawater prior to sorting. As the catch is dumped on the sorting tray, the content of the crab bag is divided from the prawns and other by-catch species by separation racks. This catch separation strategy reduces the time by-product is out of the sea, which also improve the prospects of by-catch survival (See Section 5) and improves prawn quality by reducing crushing.

FN 82052 v1 Page 17

Figure 2:Trawl Net Configuration

Figure 3:Double rig trawl gear

After separation, prawns are graded mechanically. To suit market demand, prawns are then either cooked before being packed and snap frozen or packed and snap frozen uncooked. At the end of each fishing trip, the catch is off-loaded and either consigned as frozen product direct to markets or transported to fish processing factories for packaging or value-added processing.

FN 82052 v1 Page 18

5. STOCK ASSESSMENT

Information

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

Catch and effort data have been collected for the fishery since its inception in 1968 (Figure 4). Catches from the fishery increased rapidly from 1968, reaching 2,521 tonnes in 1974. Effort peaked during 1981/82 at around 44,000 trawl hours. At that time, it was believed that the harvesting of smaller size classes of prawns in the immediately preceding years was responsible for the downturn in subsequent catches, and so the SGWCPFA, in collaboration with SARDI (Aquatic Sciences), investigated strategies to change effort patterns in order to target areas with larger size prawns. These were integrated into a Management Plan (PIRSA, 2007). Annual catches have since ranged between 1,400 and 2,400 t, averaging 2020 t in the last 5 years.

Figure 4: Recorded catch and fishing effort in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery

Source: Dixon et al, 2010

CPUE is not expected a priori to provide a good index of biomass within or across years and problems

FN 82052 v1 Page 19 with CPUE interpretation are well considered by Dixon et al (2009). No CPUE standardisation has been attempted. Annual (nominal) CPUE has generally increased since the inception of the fishery (Figure 5). In 2007/08, CPUE was 110.0 kg/h, equaling the highest level since 2001/02 (110.0 kg/h) and a 0.9% increase from the 2006/07 season (109.0 kg/h). Fishing nights have declined regularly and significantly in response to the harvest strategies deployed by the fishers. These are enshrined in the Management Plan. Trawl hours recorded in the last 5 years have averaged 17,000 trawl hours (Palmer, pers com, July 2009).

Figure 5: Annual catch and catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) for Spencer Gulf from 1968 to 2007/08

Source: Dixon et al, 2010

Following variable surveys starting in 1981 aimed at understanding the distribution and abundance of prawns in the Spencer Gulf, in-season “spot surveys1” and “Stock Assessment Surveys2” (SAS) have been undertaken in most years since 1989. The spot surveys are industry-driven surveys of targeted area in which catch rates and size-frequencies are recorded. Stock assessment surveys are carried out three times in the fishing season. The first stock assessment survey is in November, prior to the commencement of the fishing season. The second survey in February is to assess the resource after the December harvest period, prior to fishing in March. The third survey is conducted in April, toward the end of the season and during the period with the highest commercial catches per night. Spot surveys are carried out by the SGWCPFA in December March and May. They are coordinated by the SGWCPFA while the SAS are coordinated jointly by the SGWCPFA and SARDI. The purpose of the surveys is to provide in-season measures that provide confidence as to the state of the stock and which can be used within the agreed management plan. The SAS provide information on relative abundance, and distribution, prawn size, and recruitment. Since 2005, three SAS have been conducted annually (in February, April, and October-November). Details are given in Dixon et al (2010). The SAS are spatially extensive and are repeated at standardised time periods in order to inform implementation of the harvest strategy (see section 6.1.1 and 8.6) but they are not designed to ensure robust statistical interpretation. The extensive sampling, however, covering the full range of the prawn stock, should

1 Spot surveys comprise 2 to 3 vessels fishing for 1 night in each period at 20 minutes per shot 2 Stock assessment surveys comprise 9 vessels fishing for 2 nights in each period at 30 minutes per shot

FN 82052 v1 Page 20 lead to unbiased relative indices so long as the annual spatial prawn distributions are reasonably stable.

Stock Assessment and Reference Points

“Fishery Assessment” and “Stock Status” reports are provided annually (Dixon et al, 2010). For the purposes of MSC Principle 1 scoring under the MSC FAM, the need for a stock assessment is to use information to draw inferences about stock status or surrogates for status-related reference points. Usually, the stock assessment process would use formal quantitative procedures to draw statistical inferences about stock abundance or exploitation rate relative to, e.g., Bmsy or Fmsy. For Spencer Gulf P. latisulcatus there is considerable information on biology and fishing but the “stock assessment” process does not attempt to make any specific inferences about status. Rather, it is a process whereby agreed indicators (primarily based on the SAS, catch rates and length distributions) are presented so that pre-agreed management actions can be triggered and guided (see section 6.1.1 on Harvest Strategy). The suite of reference points is complex, including a wide range of in-season and annual measures which are used to guide annual harvest strategy setting and in-season, adaptive management.

The suite of reference points outlined in the SG Prawn Management Plan (PIRSA, 2007) to guide management and performance measurement does not explicitly relate to Bmsy. Indeed, estimation of Bmsy has been problematic with previous attempts leading to unrealistically high estimates of MSY (N Carrick and C Dixon, pers. comm., Sept 2010.).

Given the lack of formal, inferential stock assessment, it is worth considering conceptually the status of the stock. The fishery has been exploited since the mid/late 1960s and annual catches have fluctuated around 2,000 t, without trend, since 1973/74. In the history of the fishery, catches have only fallen below 1,500 t when the pre-Christmas (i.e. November/December) catches in the previous season have exceeded 500 t (Dixon et al, 2009; Hooper and Roberts, 2009; also presentation by C Dixon, SARDI, during site visit). Generally, pre-Christmas catches have been much lower and in all years, even following those with low overall catch, subsequent recruitment and annual catches have been good (e.g. 1987/88, 2002/03). Pre-Christmas catches in recent years have concentrated on smaller prawns and have been focused away from spawning sized prawns, providing a high degree of protection for in-season spawning biomass. A November Stock Assessment Survey has fluctuated without trend since 1993/94 with an average catch rate of 100 kg/h (C Dixon, presentation 2010). Surveys conducted in February and April also show non-trending patterns, and size structure of catches and in surveys also shows no trends or signals of concern. All indications are that the stock has fluctuated around a highly productive level, which is arguably consistent conceptually with Bmsy or better, and well above a level at which reproductive capacity might be impaired.

It is also potentially instructive to consider how the fishery would have been scored at P1 had the Risk Based Framework (RBF) been applied for scoring purposes. In fact, during the site visits, a Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) was carried out following the FAM Guidance. FAM Tables B4.1, B4.2 and B4.3 were used. Across meetings in Adelaide and Port Lincoln there was complete agreement as to all Productivity scores and good agreement as to Susceptibility scores. Overall scores were as follows. Productivity 1.14:. Susceptibility 1.43. The overall PSA score is 1.83 which translates to a score of 97.3 using FAM 4.4.2(a) and a final PI score of 95 applying FAM 4.4.2(b). A summary of the PSA scores is shown in Appendix B. The PSA score is therefore similar to that obtained using the default scoring approach.

FN 82052 v1 Page 21

6. FISHERY MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

Harvest Strategy

Harvest strategies for the SGPF are the mechanism for managing fishing effort using spatial and temporal closures. Specifically, this involves the legislation of appropriate closure lines (a series of GPS co-ordinates) and times and dates of trawling. The harvest strategy is designed to ensure that the fleet targets areas of high catch rate of appropriately sized prawns, thus ensuring biological sustainability (goal 1) and promoting economic efficiency (goal 2).

The harvest strategy functions at two scales: harvest strategy development and harvest strategy management. Harvest strategies are developed prior to the commencement of commercial fishing during each harvest period (usually November, December, March, April, May and June). The development phase involves the determination of suitable areas of the Gulf to open to fishing based on data obtained from either fishery-independent, “stock assessment surveys” (SAS) or industry- driven, spot surveys.

Once established, the harvest strategy is managed on a daily or even hourly basis during the fishing run by the “Committee At Sea”, a group of skippers that include SGWCPFA representatives and the “Coordinator At Sea”. Management of the harvest strategy is informed by data obtained during commercial fishing and involves reducing the area opened to fishing to avoid areas with small prawns or unsuitable catch rates.

Harvest strategy development rules are determined in a two-step process. Firstly, the nature of the harvest strategy to be employed is determined from the index of future and current biomass. In turn, the nature of the strategy and the period of harvest determine the output control rule for the following period. The harvest strategy is then developed by industry using the output control rule and fishery independent or spot survey data (dependent upon the harvest period).

The nature of the harvest strategy may be conservative, standard or maximum, and is dependent upon the relative indices of future and current biomass obtained from fishery- independent surveys (mean 20+ prawn grade catch rate and total mean catch rate, respectively). Standard strategies aim to capture the normal harvest strategy protocols that industry has employed in most years. Conservative strategies aim to reduce the amount of prawns harvested when indices of biomass are poor. Maximum strategies aim to take advantage of a high relative biomass by enabling more prawns to be harvested.

It is acknowledged that external factors can substantially affect fishery-independent survey results. Thus, the process for determining the nature of harvest strategies does not force the development of conservative harvest strategies if the lower threshold value is not reached for any given single survey. However, if survey results are unfavourable for two consecutive surveys (i.e. total mean or recruit catch rate

Box 1: Actions taken in the event that harvest strategies fail to comply with stock assessment indicators 1. Notify the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries and participants in the fishery as appropriate. 2. Undertake a detailed review including an assessment of the additional performance measures (Tables 4 and 5) where appropriate. Provide a synopsis of the causes and implications of failure to achieve the minimum desired performance. 3. Where appropriate, consult with key stakeholder groups regarding the need for alternative management strategies and the collection of additional data.

FN 82052 v1 Page 22 4. Provide a report to the Minister, within three months of the initial notification, on the effects of breaching the performance indicator, including any recommendations on management strategies. 5. Minister or Director of Fisheries to consider recommendations, endorse supported strategies and implement as appropriate.

The following table and decision tree, table 1 and figure 6, (or table 5 and figure 6 in the management plan) enable the determination of the nature of the harvest strategy from stock assessment survey catch rate data. The nature of the harvest strategy is determined immediately after a stock assessment is conducted and it applies until the next stock assessment is completed.

Table 1: Measures for harvest strategy development. Values presented in kg/hr and (lb/min) Measure Survey Lower Upper Fishery-independent survey mean 20+ grade November 10 (0.4) catch rate February 50 (1.8) Values in kg/hr and (lb/min) April 40 (1.5) Fishery-independent survey total mean catch rate. November 95 (3.5) 135 (4.9) Values in kg/hr and (lb/min) February 120 (4.4) 160 (5.9) April 160 (5.9) 220 (8.1) Source: PIRSA, 2007

Figure 6: Decision tree to determine the nature of harvest strategy from fishery-independent survey results.

Output control rules aim to restrict the catch and effort for the harvest period to sustainable levels. To achieve this, the rules vary according to the nature and timing of the harvest strategy, see table 2 (or table 6 in the management plan).

November and December coincide with the early spawning period for King prawns in Spencer Gulf. Studies show that relative egg production increases with increasing prawn size (Dixon et. al. 2006a), thus smaller prawns are targeted during this period to protect egg production and take advantage of the higher relative price of smaller prawns prior to Christmas. To minimise the possibility of recruitment overfishing, total catch is used as an output control for these periods. If the nature of the harvest strategy is conservative, total catch should not exceed 350 t for this period (350 t for each fishing trip prior to Christmas). Up to 450 t and up to 600 t may be harvested if the nature of the

FN 82052 v1 Page 23 strategy is standard or maximum, respectively. The total catch for the period is estimated by the Committee At Sea during the fishing run.

For the March and April runs, conservative, standard and maximum strategies will be developed using <200, <220 and <240 prawns/7 kg as a target size, respectively. During May and June the respective mean sizes for each strategy would decrease to <220, <240, and <260 prawns/7 kg. Once determined, the output control rules are applied to survey data to develop the harvest strategy. Additionally, there are a number of conservative harvest strategy mechanisms that can be implemented that are not considered within the Management Plan, including reducing fishing effort (later start / earlier finish times each night or total number of nights fished), conserving fishing effort within areas of mixed prawn grades, and reducing the overall fishing area available during a trip.

Table 2: Output management parameters (Quasi seasonal quotas and average sizes) Harvest period November & December March & April May & June Strategy nature Con Std Max Con Std Max Con Std Max Mean size (no./7kg) <250 <200 <220 <240 <220 <240 <260 Total catch (t) <350 <450 <600 NA NA Con=conservative, Std=standard, Max=maximum

Once fishing has commenced, the Coordinator at Sea in consultation with the Committee At Sea manages the harvest strategy. Harvest strategy closure lines may be adjusted on a daily or hourly basis, if prawns of an unacceptable size or catch rate are harvested. These changes reduce the area available to fishing by removing access to the area of small prawns or low catch rate. Further, trawling times (hours the fishery is open during a night) and the duration of the harvest strategy can be adjusted when necessary.

Harvest strategy management is informed by data that is collected during commercial fishing and reported to the “Committee At Sea”. The data reported to the Committee At Sea may include: daily catch weight estimates, catch weight per grade, and mean prawn size (count per 7 kg bucket).

Prawn size data are provided at appropriate spatial scales to enable refinement of the harvest strategy closure lines. The threshold values for management of commercial prawn size data are the same as those for the output control rule.

Data on the indicative total catch per vessel are used for two purposes. Firstly, during November and December the estimates of all vessels‟ catches are summed to give an indicative cumulative catch for the fleet. This figure is used to ensure adherence with the output control rule for catch during this period. Secondly, if the minimum average catches per vessel per night fall below threshold levels, an area (or all areas) may be closed to fishing.

The data and values used for harvest strategy management are termed at-sea decision rules and are presented in table 3 (or table 7 of the management plan). Other rules governing at sea decision- making are described in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Industry Code of Practice. The harvest strategy is not tested by simulation. It has been developed through experience and can best be termed an empirical harvest strategy.

Table 3: At sea decision rules for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Harvest period November & December March & April May & June Strategy nature Con Std Max Con Std Max Con Std Max Total catch (t) <350 <450 <600 N/A N/A Mean size (no./7 kg) <250 <200 <220 <240 <220 <240 <260 Minimum average 350 kg 400 kg 400 kg catch (kg) per boat per night Con=conservative, Std=standard, Max=maximum.

FN 82052 v1 Page 24

Harvest control tools

The regulations that currently govern the management of the SGPF are the Fisheries (Scheme of Management – Prawn Fisheries) Regulations 2006 and the Fisheries (General) Regulations 2000. The SGPF is managed by input and output controls, through limits on catch levels at different periods and limits on the size of prawns captured. Most importantly, the fishery is managed in real time adaptive mode as the system is dynamic. The fishery manages effort, catch and prawn size on a “quasi-quota” over 5-6 fishing periods with catch and effort “allocated” in proportion to biomass of the stock, annual recruitment strength, the amount of effective spawners (females > 42 mm carapace length (CL), the maturation and spawning status and size composition of prawns over grounds. It has been demonstrated that there is a relationship between the amount of spawners and subsequent recruitment levels to the fishery. Furthermore, there are rigid management arrangements and input restrictions including: limited entry, vessel and gear restrictions, fixed and dynamic closures and strategies to ensure fishery sustainability. Trawling in the Spencer Gulf only takes place in the “night” with trawling prohibited between sunrise and sunset. Table 4 provides an overview of the current management arrangements for the fishery.

Table 4: Management controls in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Management tool Current restriction Permitted species Melicertus latisulcatus, Ibacus spp., Sepioteuthis australis Limited entry licensing 39 licenses License transferability Permitted Corporate ownership Permitted Spatial and temporal closures Adjusted based on survey results Closed areas No trawling in waters shallower than 10m Method of capture Demersal otter trawl Trawl rig Single or double rig Trawling times Not during daylight hours Maximum headline length 29.26 m, 14.63 per net Minimum mesh size 4.5 cm Maximum vessel length 22 m Maximum vessel power 272 kW Catch and effort data Daily and monthly logbook submitted monthly Landing locations Landings permitted anywhere in the State with pre notification Landing times Landings permitted at any time during the specified operating days Source: PIRSA, 2007

Licenses are transferable and corporate ownership is permitted. Any boat used in the fishery must be registered and be appropriately endorsed upon the license under which it is being operated. Boats must not exceed an overall length of 22 meters and the main engine must not exceed 365 continuous brake horsepower. Both single and double rigged otter trawl nets are permitted to be used in the fishery with a minimum cod-end mesh size of 4.5 centimeters and a maximum headline length of 29.26 meters. Permanent closures to trawling exist in shallow waters (<10 m depth).

In addition, there are a number of gazette area closures (north of Point Lowly, west of Port Broughton, adjacent to Shoalwater (near Cowell), and from Wardang (near Port Victoria) to Corny Point), which were first introduced voluntarily by the Association. These closures have been implemented to protect important habitats, juvenile prawn grounds and the benthic communities they support. The remaining trawl grounds are primarily sand and mud sediments, with relatively low

FN 82052 v1 Page 25 species diversity and biomass. Seasonal closures aim to protect the spawning biomass, to maximise value by allowing for sufficient growth and to maximize capture efficiency, which is lowest during winter months.

Research and Data The SGPF and the Association contributes significant investment into research each year for economic, environmental and social outcomes. SGPF licence holders contribute financially to research through their licence fees for surveys, other ecological research, economic research and through Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) levy payments. The Association contributes financially to specific projects that are of benefit to its members or that meets a need more generally for the fisheries it works for. The projects undertaken by the Association need to meet the objectives and vision of the Association and are at the discretion of the Association‟s Management Committee or one of the Association‟s sub-committees, where a budget has been allocated for that work. Financial contributions made through licence fees are for core fisheries management activities, which ensure that there is an equitable distribution of costs across all licence holders. Association activities are not necessarily those considered essential for fisheries management, but are conducted to advance, promote and safeguard the industry, although the Association is contracted by government to perform some activities specifically for fisheries management.

Historically, extensive research has been conducted on King Prawns within the Spencer Gulf since the late 1970‟s and the first prawn surveys were conducted in 1981, carried out on several occasions throughout the year. The surveys were aimed at improving the understanding of prawn distribution and abundance in Spencer Gulf. A sound understanding has been gained from this research including biological characteristics, the spatial distribution of adults and juveniles and the processes associated with spawning and recruitment of King Prawns.

Prawn surveys are still conducted since the first survey in 1981; three fishery independent „stock assessment surveys‟ and usually three fishery-dependent „spot surveys‟ are conducted each fishing season. The primary objective of stock assessment surveys is to determine the status of the resource (PIRSA, 2007). The results of the survey are used explicitly to determine the harvest strategies for the following fishing periods. The conduct of regular stock assessment surveys provides confidence that gross over-fishing is unlikely to occur, as the harvest strategies are tailored to match the results observed in the surveys. Stock assessment surveys are carried out in November, February and April at 208 fixed shots throughout the Spencer Gulf each fishing season (PIRSA, 2007). PIRSA, 2007, set out the data collected for each survey to include: total catch weight; catch weight per commercial prawn grade; mean prawn size; sex-specific length frequency; and reproductive index (November and February only).

In between stock assessment surveys the SGPF fleet undertakes spot surveys. Dixon and Sloan, 2007, set out the data collected for each spot survey to include: catch weight total; catch weight per commercial prawn grade; and mean prawn size. Spot surveys usually target areas with high catch rates or known catches to determine if smaller fish have moved into the area or if more area could be opened to the fishery. Spot survey data is then used in conjunction with information from the previous stock assessment, prawn fishing and historical data to develop a harvest strategy for the fishing period. Spot surveys, along with „Real Time Management‟ (explained later in this Chapter), enables the fishery to avoid the capture of small prawns as the adult distribution changes throughout the season; providing certainty that gross over-fishing is unlikely to occur.

Information gathered through stock assessment surveys, spot surveys and commercial fishing logbooks are collated and analysed by SARDI. This information is presented to PIRSA in reports:  Survey Report (three per year, one for each survey); presents the interim results from the fishery- independent survey and compares the results with previous data collected for the same fishing period  Status Report (one per year); provides a brief on the previous fishing season soon after the season is finished

FN 82052 v1 Page 26  Fishery Assessment Report (one per year); provides a detailed analysis of a fishing season, including all information gathered from surveys and commercial catch data and undergoes a rigorous review / verification process. Fishery Assessment Reports are publicly available and can be accessed via the SARDI website.

Occasional by-catch research has also been conducted in the SGPF. In 1997 an extensive by-catch study was undertaken in the SGPF, based on information obtained over many years. Fishery independent surveys of by-catch then began (in 1997), although discontinued for a period and recommenced in 2000. In March 2002, a voluntary logbook system was introduced by SGWCPFA to record by-catch information. SARDI prepared a consolidated report in 2005 on by-catch and by- product from historic research, „Monitoring and assessment of by-catch and by-product species of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery‟, (Dixon et al., 2005). Then in 2006 the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery began funding a three-five year independent by-catch and by-product research project, finalised in 2009 „Fishery-independent by-catch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery‟ (Currie et al., 2009).

In addition, the Association has supported numerous research projects, utilising prawn licence holders FRDC levy contributions, to gain further understanding of the environment in which the SGPF operates, by-catch survival and reduction, economic improvements and prawn distribution, movements and abundances. FRDC funding is an integral component for the SGPF to undertake projects of significant value that would not ordinarily be achieved. The Association‟s Research Sub- Committee is responsible for strategic research priority setting, which has been developed around environmental, economic and social outcomes and not just prawn specific research.

7. ECOSYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS

7.1 Introduction

In general the long term impacts to the ecosystem and the local environment from demersal otter prawn trawling is either a result of the contact of the otter boards to the substrate, the mesh size in the throat and cod end of the net, the length and configuration of trawl wings, gear that is fitted to reduce bycatch, the length of the tow (or shot length), the time of day or night of the tow, water depth and configuration of the chains and sweeps used at the opening of the trawl or a combination of these factors.

Most of the concerns about the impacts of the fisheries are the removal or alteration of the composition of the bycatch and or benthos. Over the long term if escapement from the trawl is sufficient and there are minimum changes to the benthos, the escaped population will provide a stable population and there will be minimal changes to the bycatch species and supporting ecosystem.

Information on the ecological consequences of prawn trawling in Spencer Gulf comes from research projects that have concentrated on documenting the magnitude and composition of non-target (bycatch) species captured incidentally during commercial fishing operations (Carrick 1997), determined fates and consequence of discarded bycatch (Svane, 2003: Svane et al 2007; Dixon et al. 2005) impacts on benthic habitats and assemblages (Svane et al 2007 and fisheries-independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of SGPF (Currie et al. 2009). Natural annual environmental variations and random between-year variations as well as land based pollutants make long term trawling effects difficult to quantify all the effects of benthic trawling in Spencer Gulf.

There has been substantial research into the risk of capture of turtle in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery by Carrick (1999). Information on the spatial and temporal distribution of sea turtles as well as an investigation on the likelihood of catching a turtle in Spencer Gulf showed that turtles are of low risk of capture as turtles do not naturally occur in the region.

FN 82052 v1 Page 27

Targeted studies on by-catch have focused only on small areas of Spencer Gulf, hence, there is limited supporting information on the overall impacts at the scale of the fishery. There are few consistent patterns on the dominant component of the composition of the catch from the prawn trawlers in the Spencer Gulf. This lack of consistent patterns is possibly a result of the spatial and temporal differences among bycatch surveys and the lack of studies to identify indirect effects of habitat modification.

A survey by Currie et al. (2009) showed that overall species abundance and biomasses were highly correlated and the distributional patterns of abundance and biomass were broadly similar. Spatially the western side of the gulf supported the highest abundances and biomasses while the eastern side and in particular the southeastern region, supported the lowest abundance and biomass (Currie et al. 2009). Species richness was generally higher in areas supporting low numbers of individuals and biomass (Currie et al. 2009).

There is no information as to the distribution of bryozoans and sponge prior to the commencement of commercial prawn trawling so it is not possible to determine long-term alterations to these species. The absence of several widely distributed species, of slow growing poriferans in the trawled areas, suggests that benthic prawn trawling may have adversely affected these particular taxa. The low biomass of fish on the trawl grounds may be explained by the lack of sponges and other erect sessile fauna that provide suitable habitat for many species. Studies by Currie (2009) identified a strong north-south gradient in the species composition of the benthic communities. The regional differences among the communities appears to be larger than the variation resulting from the effects of trawling (Currie 2009) although Svane et al (2009) concluded that the differences in community structure among five sites in Spencer Gulf was primarily due to differences in trawl effort rather than biophysical factors.

Fish, benthos, blue crabs, sharks and rays dominate the bycatch although the relative abundance of each group varies among the regions (Dixon et al. 2005). The most abundant species in the Main Gutter region was fish, while benthos dominated the North region. Dixon (2005) showed that blue crabs were the most abundant species in the North region during the prawn surveys, and Wallaroo region during the bycatch surveys.

The report by Dixon (2005) indicated that the capture by trawling of rays and sharks varied considerably across the region. This sampling undertaken by Dixon (2005) was influenced by the presence of large rays that dominated the bycatch weight in some areas.

7.2 Retained non target species

The two by-product species which are permitted to be retained by the South Australian Prawn Fisheries are Slipper lobster (Ibacus peronii) and southern calamary (Sepioteuthis australis). Based on catch records there is a high degree of certainty that these retained species are within biological limits although the target reference points have not been defined.

Slipper lobster is a long-lived, slow growing species with low fecundity, exhibiting localised movement and reproduction recruitment patterns (Roberts and Steer 2010). Surveys indicate that lobsters are widely distributed, and are at a higher abundance in November at the commencement of the trawl season and there are higher catch rates in the northern region of Spencer Gulf (Currie 2009). There is no evidence to suggest that this species is likely to be in a state of irreversible harm based on information from three surveys (2008/09) and bycatch survey (2007).

Southern calamary is the most common species in southern Australian waters and a key component of the marine ecosystem as a primary consumer of crustaceans and fish and as a food source for a variety of predators.

FN 82052 v1 Page 28 Although catches from the multi-scale fishery are regularly documented (Steer et al 2007) there is uncertainty in the stock assessment of calamary due to poor information on the catch relating to the recreational and prawn fishing sectors.

7.2.1 Stock status As from the 2001/02 fishing season it became mandatory to record all by-product. Fishery- independent data and commercial catch and effort data provides information to assess biology, catch composition and spatial and temporal trends in catches for both retained species in Spencer Gulf during 2004/05 (Roberts and Steer 2010). Fishery-independent data from Spencer Gulf in 2006/07 provided additional information (Roberts and Steer 2010).

The marine retained species (calamary and Slipper lobster) are likely to be within biologically based limits; however target reference points have not been defined. This assessment is based on independent bycatch surveys, log book and observed information (Currie et al 2009, Roberts and Steer 2010; Carrick 2007; Svane, 2005; Svane et al 2007). Due to the nature of the gear used in the demersal trawl there are likely to some localised depletion of calamary and slipper lobsters. Localised effects will be reduced due to the fact that prawn trawling operates in limited areas for limited periods and trawling is only undertaken during the night. As will be shown, the localized depletion of calamary is less likely to be in response to prawn trawling.

Slipper lobster (Balmain Bug)

Slipper lobster constitutes less than 1% of the total bycatch by weight of the total catch (Curries et al 2009).

The recorded catch of retained species of bugs has increased from 1.1 t (2001/02) to 7.2 t (2008/09). The estimated bug catch calculated from the 2008/09 fishery independent prawn surveys was 85,109 animals with an estimated total weight of 14.1 t. The discrepancy between retained and estimated total catch has been attributed to (i) by-product being discarded (ii) by-product being used for personal consumption and or (iii) uncertainty in reporting (Roberts and Steer 2010). There is no requirement to report discard of retained species.

There is evidence that there is localised depletion of slipper lobster in areas of high fishing effort but there was no detected depletion in regions of low or medium trawl effort (C Dixon pers comm. 2010). Fishing operations are restricted to < 13% of the total area of the Spencer Gulf for less than 60 days of the year. The fishery utilises up to only 60 nights of trawling each year and the longest continuous trawling period is 14 nights, although the total number of nights trawled for the past few years has been just over 50 nights and most fishing trips by the fleet are less than 14 nights, varying from 10 to 7 nights in duration. Each individual vessel operates as a „fleet‟ and decision of when, where and for how long are made as a group decision with the Committee At Sea coordinating the fishing strategy.

Calamary

Calamary constitutes between 1% to 5% of the total byproduct by weight of the total catch (Currie et al 2009) and under the MSC guidelines this species is allowed to be considered under section 2.2 Performance Indicators (Section 7.2.2 FAM) retained species.

Following the mandatory reporting of by-catch (in the 2002/03 season) the catches of calamary has varied around 25t, peaking at 30t in 2003/04. There is a discrepancy between the retained and estimated total catch due to (i) by-product being discarded, (ii) by-product being used for personal consumption and (iii) uncertainty in reporting (Roberts and Steer 2010).

Target reference points have not been defined for calamary and it is difficult to isolate the effects of fishing on the overall population due to the species rapid growth rates and natural fluctuations in populations, which is linked to temperature and available food source (Roberts and Steer 2010).

FN 82052 v1 Page 29

The calamary species is ubiquitous throughout the Spencer Gulf trawl grounds and there are some overlaps with the calamary distribution and the prawn trawl areas. Calamary have a peak spawning season but reproduce throughout the year resulting in continuous recruits migrating onto the offshore nursery grounds. This possibly masks any evidence of localised depletion on the trawl grounds. Due to the fact that the species are short lived and exhibit rapid growth the populations are capable of increasing rapidly in response to favourable environments (Roberts and Steer 2009). The trawling fleet catches (~90t) over the season and does not appear to compromise the sustainable harvest of the species (Roberts and Steer 2009). It has been demonstrated that there has been a strong spatial and seasonal difference in the catch rates in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Catch rates are significantly higher from April to June than November to March. The nature of the „pulse fishery‟ (as described above) creates periods of no fishing from the prawn trawls, hence assisting in any localised recovery in the abundance of the species.

The size distribution of calamary indicates the SGPF has less direct impact on spawners than a multi species fishery and the recreational sector. The multi species fishery and recreational fishery target large individuals. There is no evidence that this species is likely to be in a state of irreversible harm.

7.2.2 Management strategies

Slipper lobster

The present management plan minimises the impacts on by-catch and by-product species by gear control, permanent closed areas and the promotion and the development of environmentally friendly practices. The limited levels of effort (maximum 60 nights effort per year) as well as trawling being concentrated in a small area (<13% in areas of the Gulf) along with supported closed areas are sufficient to ensure that the species are a low risk. There is a management strategy in place to support the over-exploitation of bycatch or localized depletion of the species in the form of closed areas, restrictions of trawling to water depths > 10m and the land of berried females. Bugs have the highest survival (100%) recorded by all species tested over 1-3 days in tanks and remained alive after one hour tests of exposure to air.

As a precautionary measure and in order to sustain Slipper lobster, the South Australian government has legislated the protection of egg-bearing female. A minimal legal size (MLS) was in the process of being introduced as a license condition as a management tool (Hollamby 2010; Letter to PIRSA from SGWCPFA dated 28 October 2010, and Doroudi 2010; Letter to SGWCPFA from PIRSA dated 3 December 2010) to be used in conjunction with the protection of berried females (berried females to be returned to the water). The introduction of a size limit will provide the potential for a future increase in stock biomass (Roberts and Steel 2010) based on fifty percent maturity in Spencer Gulf. A carapace width of 117 mm is being implemented to protect the current biomass. The South Australian Government legislated the protection of egg-bearing female slipper lobsters under the Fisheries Management (General) Regulation 2007. A minimal size limit will be in place once the license condition is realised (as is done in other Australia states with the same species captured in prawn trawls) and has the support of Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishermen‟s Association (Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc, (2010). Size limits are an appropriate management option for slipper lobster due to their hardy nature and post-trawl survival. In absence of yield per recruit of egg per recruit models for most slipper lobster species, setting MLS that ensures at least 50% of females breed at least once before recruitment into the fishery is a common alternative (Haddy et al. 2005)

Calamary

Calamary species are widespread throughout Australia and New Zealand (Roberts and Steer 2010) and there is no evidence of localised depletion on the trawl grounds. This is attributed to the fact that calamary reproduce throughout the year so there is a continuous recruitment into the fisheries

FN 82052 v1 Page 30 although the species does have a peak-spawning season. There is a strategy in place to support the over exploitation of calamary through closed areas, adopting a pulse fishing strategy that allows for only a maximum of 14 consecutive days fishing per month and a restriction on the gear size and configuration.

7.2.3 Information

Slipper lobster bug

Information is available on catch of retained species of slipper lobster. Information is obtained from fishery independent trawl surveys, to assess distribution patterns and densities, size of animals, and bycatch rations. A bycatch database has been developed and is being enhanced to allow data analysis and to address sustainability issues relating to the fishery. An extensive study on bycatch has been undertaken in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery (Carrick 1997).

A set of management recommendations, to aid ecologically sustainable fishing of South Australia‟s prawn fisheries, has been promoted by the Commonwealth Government (hence exemption from the export controls of the EPBC Act (1999)). Three of these recommendations related to ongoing monitoring of bycatch and a study by SGWCPFA and SARDI for the examination of available historical data from logbooks from 2002-2004, bycatch surveys conducted during 2004/05 and prawn surveys since 1994 (Roberts and Steer 2010).

There is considerable data available on the distribution and abundance (catch rate) of common bycatch species, which is useful in identifying potential indicator species (Dixon et al 2005). However the interpretation of prawn survey data is limited due to spatial and temporal replication and considerable uncertainty in reliability of some data.

Calamary

Information is available on catch of retained species although evidence suggests that the full extent of calamary bycatch is not accurately recorded. A new commercial logbook was implemented in March 2002 to include mandatory recording of by-product (for both calamary and slipper lobster). A voluntary monitoring program for calamary was established and validated by comparing sales receipts and observer data. The data spanned a period of 9 years from 1992/93 to 2000/2001 and included detailed daily catch and location (PIRSA 2003). The SGPF report that the retain amount of the species is approximately 18.1 to 39.8% of the recorded landings from the commercial Marine Scalefish fishery.

The calamary distribution pattern is wide throughout the Gulf. They are short-lived (<12 months) and exhibit rapid growth. The rate of growth is determined by environmental factors of temperature, and available food.

The calamary stocks are shared with prawn trawler fisheries, and targeted by the Marine Scalefish Fishery and recreational fishing sector. The long-term trends in catch have remained relatively stable despite the Marine Scalefish Fishery targeting mature calamary on the inshore spawning grounds. It is unlikely that trawling has detrimentally affected the population viability of calamary because less than 13% of the Spencer Gulf is used for trawling, the number of days available to fishing is managed and there is minimal impact on larger spawners in comparison to other stakeholder groups (PIRSA 2003).

Mandatory reporting of landed by-product began in the 2002/03 fishing season with catches varying around 25t, peaking at 30.8t in 2003/04 fishing season. The estimated total weight of catch of calamary from the 2008/09 fishing season was 93.2t, which represents 4-fold increase in the actual retained catch of 22.7t (Roberts and Steer 2010). The discrepancy is outlined in Roberts and Steer (2010) was likely due to by-product being discarded, personal consumption and uncertainty in reporting.

FN 82052 v1 Page 31

7.3 By-catch species

There is qualitative information on the amount of main bycatch species affected by the prawn trawl fishery and the information is adequate to support measures to manage the by-catch and the information is adequate to support a partial strategy. There has been historic targeted research conducted in Spencer Gulf on the bycatch and by-product species captured by the prawn trawl fishers (Currie et al. 2009). Data is available from three main sources: bycatch data collected during surveys conducted by the Spencer Gulf prawn fishers; bycatch data obtained during non-targeted fishery- independent bycatch survey; and commercial logbooks. The research projects in relation to bycatch has concentrated on documenting the magnitude and composition of the no-target species (Carrick, 197) the fate of the bycatch after it is returned to the sea (Svane, 2003: Svane et al. 2007) and the impacts on benthic communities (Svane et al. 2007). These have limited use with determining the overall impacts at the scale of the fishery due to the studies being focused on small areas of Spencer Gulf (Currie et al. 2009).

7.3.1 Stock status

The prawn fishery is concentrated in relatively small areas of the Spence Gulf. The amount of nights fished per year varies according to the real time fishing strategy but has been less than 60 nights for over ten years.

Resulting bycatch levels as a consequence of prawn trawling in the Spencer Gulf is difficult to quantify using a ratio to target species. This is due to the fact that as trawl intensity increases the amount of bycatch declines resulting in less bycatch in areas that are trawled with greater intensity (C. Dixon pers. Comm.). Catch samples (based on 395 species collected from 120 sites with total weight of 4.2 tonnes) indicated that the bycatch-to-prawn ratio was 2.0;1 in areas subjected to high trawling and 3.2:1 in areas subjected to moderate intensity and 8.7:1 in area of low intensity trawling history (Currie et al. 2009). However, the overall species composition, abundance, and distribution of bycatch are poorly documented for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery.

During the prawn surveys conducted in February 2003/04 in Spencer Gulf the mean abundance of trawl by-catch was highly variable among regions despite only small differences in catch weight of prawns (Dixon et al 2005). Fishery independent surveys (Currie et al. 2009) found that communities were similar at sites with different trawling histories. Currie et al. (2009) concluded that at whole of Spencer Gulf scale, putative trawl-related differences in community structure were small compared to those associated with north to south gradient.

Catches of by-product reported in commercial logbooks are likely to be underestimates of the total bycatch because there is only mandatory reporting on retained species at present (Dixon et al 2005).

The dominate bycatch categories in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery are benthos sponges, sand trevally, leatherjackets, blue swimmer crabs, sharks and rays (Svane et al 2007). In addition the operations of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery may also capture ecologically significant species such as protected and endangered species (Dixon et al. 2005).

The sand trevally, leatherjackets and blue swimmer crab are motile benthic scavengers and along with western king prawn accounted for over 80% of the total abundance and over 50% of the total biomass of bycatch from independent by-catch surveys (Currie et l. 2009). The prevalence of scavenging species should be considered as noteworthy. Svane et al. (2007) found that discarded by-catch is quickly consumed by the large number of generalist predators and scavengers at a rate eight times higher than in some tropical fisheries. Although there is no baseline study prior to the commencement of trawling in Spencer Gulf to confirm any changes in species populations, studies from other areas suggest that the discard of unwanted catch may lead to increases in the size of some scavenging populations (Wassenberg and Hill, 1990; Kaiser and Spencer, 1996; Ramsay et al 1998).

FN 82052 v1 Page 32

Sand trevally (pseudocaranx wrighti): The distribution of sand trevally is found throughout the region. There are two species of trevally recorded in Spencer Gulf: sand trevally (P.wright) and silver trevally (P dentex), but only sand trevally are found in trawls (Svane et al. 2007). Studies on the total by-catch of the Spencer Gulf suggests that it would be difficult to determine any changes in abundance of this species due to the capture by the prawn trawl operations (C Dixon pers. comm. 2010). This is related to the fact that the species is widely distributed over the region and only 12-13% of the total area of the Spencer Gulf is trawled, although Svane et al. (2007) found that the species caught in prawn trawls were primarily juveniles and this influences the age structure of the population. There is speculation that the population of sand trevally is enhanced by the presence of tuna farms in the area. It is thought that the food used in the tuna farms also attracts and supports trevally populations – this has not been confirmed through any targeted studies.

Leatherjackets (Thamnaconus degeni) Leatherjackets (Thamnaconus spp.) account for the most significant volume of fish by-catch and catches tend to relate to incidental high volume as opposed to regular interactions (Thomas and Chick 2007).

Due to the small size of this species it is speculated that some individuals would escape through the mesh in the nets (C. Dixon pers. comm. 2010). This small species (<20 cm) are a scavenging species, which occurred at 75% of fishery-independent survey sites and accounted for 47% of total abundance and over 20% of the total biomass. Males attain a larger size than females and the onboard hopper sorting process rapidly returns larger specimens to the water supporting a higher survival rate.

Blue swimmer crab (Portunus pelagicus) Blue swimmer crabs are distributed throughout the coastal waters of the tropical regions of the western Indian Ocean and the Eastern Pacific (Kailola et al 1993) and when captured in abundance can influence the quality of prawns due to crushing in the process of sorting on-board. This is reduced by the use of „crab bags‟ in the cod end. In South Australia there is a distinct seasonal pattern of adult crab movements into shallow inshore waters during the warmer months of September to April and to deeper offshore waters during the winter months of May to August (Smith 1982). An issue, and a management inconsistency, is the fact that trawling is active during the seasonal crab closure (November / December). However the species are known to be in the northern area when trawling is being carried out.

Blue swimmer crabs have the highest biomass density of discards and one of the highest average densities recorded for a Portunid crab (pers. Comm. Carrick 2010). Studies based on fishery independent trawl sampling strategies indicate it is possible to detect 30% declines in annual biomass density at an acceptable probability level (0.05) (PIRSA, 2003).

Sharks and rays (Heterodontus portjacksoni) Port Jackson sharks are widely distributed and highly successful scavengers with high resilience to fishing mortality. This species is the most common elasmobranch species encountered (>61% of the total bycatch volume). Tagging studies show that individuals are not migratory and do not move long distances and are often caught on more than one occasion within 10km of initial response (Rodda et al. 2007). Port Jackson sharks show little physiological response to trawl capture and have a very high chance of post-capture survival (K Rodda pers comm. Nov 2010).

South Australia is a signatory to the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks which sets a minimum data set for collection of shark species in a fishery by the quantity of discarded through logbooks (Shark Advisory Group and Lack, 2004). There have been a number of generalisations in the literature regarding the negative interactions of prawn trawling on Elasmobranchs. No shark “finning” takes place in South Australian prawn fisheries and generally the abundance of pelagic and

FN 82052 v1 Page 33 wide ranging species are relatively low compared to most other Penaeid fisheries. Research in the Spencer Gulf has demonstrated that the survival of most species of sharks, rays and skates captured in the fishery is high, especially on vessels with hopper conveyor systems and crab racks.

Coastal stingarees (Urolophus orarius) There is limited information about the biology, habitat requirements, ecology, and population size or populations dynamics of stingarees, although it is known that they are a live-bearing species. This species is rarely caught in trawls although 40 specimens were reported from 515 trial shots as noted in Dixon et al. (2005). The distribution of the species is restricted and likely endemic within South Australia and this range limit is considered to be a threat to the species. From trials and observations the species has a high mortality (Thomas and Chick 2007) even though on-deck survival may be classified as high. Coastal stingaree species are recommended from interim listings as Vulnerable under legislation based on the modification of IUCN and TSSS criteria used for South Australia. Advice to the Minister from the Threatened Species Scientific Committee, dated 21 December 2009, under the Commonwealth EPBC Act stated that the species was not eligible for inclusion in the list referred to in Section 178 of the EPBC Act.

Flounder (Pseudorhombus jenynsii) and flathead (Neoplatycephalus spp.) These species are bottom dwelling and are vulnerable to capture by benthic prawn trawling. However field experiments indicated the survival of flounder and flathead is higher with the use of onboard hopper/conveyor sorting which is used on all the vessels in the fleet. Flounder and flatheads (the short tooth flounder and 3 species of flathead) have a relatively long lifespan (>4 years).

King George whiting (Sillaginodes punctata) The species is geographically extensive and is targeted by recreational and commercial fishers and in South Australia is the most valuable marine scale fishery (in 2000/01 the total value dropped to second behind sardines). Juvenile King George whiting are predominately distributed in shallow areas and not subject to trawl interaction as there is permanent closure of trawling in waters < 10m in depth. The migration of the species is in a southerly direction from the sheltered waters of the Gulf‟s into oceanic waters and there is some crossover between the prawn trawl areas and migration patterns of the species. The mortality from the capture of this species by benthic prawn trawling is dependent on physical damage from the trawl net, but the adoption of onboard hopper and conveyor sorting systems reduces individual fish exposure away from the water. It is not clear what net avoidance whiting have because there is little evidence available to determine the percentage of whiting that are caught when the trawl is in contact with the benthos and what percentage is captured when the net is hauled and whether the amount of whiting that is capture is influenced by the length of the shot.

Snapper (Pagrus auratus) Snapper are evenly distributed across the region with significant spatial and inter-annual variation influenced by the inter-annual variable in recruitment. When the level of recruitment of the species is low the number caught in the prawn nets is low and when recruitment is high there is more observed capture of the species. Research indicates snappers caught in the trawl are alive (83%) (indicating they may have been captured as the net is hauled) on landing and assumed to survive when returned to the water. Predominantly the snapper bycatch consist of juveniles less than one year old. Catches of snapper are mainly in the north (C Dixon pers comm. 2010) and the capture of mature snapper by trawling is rare (PIRSA 2003). This is likely as a result of mature animals having more ability to avoid net capture (Carrick 1997).

Giant cuttlefish (Sepia apama) Historically this species was targeted as a bait fishery but due to concerns of over exploitation this fishery is permanently closed. The species has a unique mass spawning which is likely to be habitat related; rocky reefs in the northern Spencer Gulf. This is the only known dense aggregation of spawning cuttlefish in the world and as such has been identified as rare and of national significance (Baker 2004, M Steer pers comm. 2010) and is considered likely to have undergone speciation. Assessments based on estimates in 1998 to 2001 and reported catch in 1997, and in the absence of any

FN 82052 v1 Page 34 formal assessment for 2002 to 2004 suggest the population of the aggregation may have declined However as reported by Steer and Hall (2005) in 2005 estimated biomass was 33.7% lower than that of 2001 but there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the biomass estimates with standard deviations ranging from 15.1 to 25.9%. . Steer and Hall (2005) also noted that the apparent decrease in cuttlefish spawning biomass in 2005 was a long-term consequence of increased exploitation from 1996 to 1998.

The risk based framework was applied to species with significant degrees of encounter-ability (Sand trevally, Blue swimming crabs and Degen‟s leatherjacket), or where they were perceived by the stakeholders to be of potential risk (Cuttlefish (CCSA)).

7.3.2 Management strategies

Currently there are no decision rules developed and adopted for each of the bycatch species for the Spencer Gulf. The Committee-At-Sea allows for management responses to be initiated in real time in response to bycatch (SGWCPFA, Annual Report 2009/10). These responses are area closures and modification to time of trawl (starting later into the night) and represent a strategy to manage the bycatch. For example a closure north of Point Lowly was put in place to protect juvenile prawns, fish nursery and breeding areas as well as important benthic communities that the marine species rely on (SGWCPFA, Annual Report 2009/10).

There have been a number of generalisations in the literature regarding the negative interactions of prawn trawling on Elasmobranchs. No shark “finning” takes place in South Australian prawn fisheries and generally the abundance of pelagic and wide ranging species are relatively low compared to most other Penaeid fisheries. Research in the Spencer Gulf has demonstrated that the survival of most species of sharks, rays and skates captured in the fishery is high, especially on vessels with hopper conveyor systems and crab racks..

The Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery (PIRSA September 2007) sets out objectives to minimise fishery impacts on bycatch and by-product species by maintaining a limit on the amount of gear used in the fishery, maintain permanent closed areas, promote the development of environmentally friendly practices. A risk analysis is due to commence shortly, with the intention to introduce additional bycatch mitigation measures by prior to the implementation of the 2012 management plan (Hollamby, pers com 2010).

Prawn trawlers are not permitted to operate in depths < 10 m, which is in line with the management objective of not exploiting breeding stock to ensure population sustainability.

The Spencer Gulf prawn fishery can be described as a pulse fishery. During the last four years there has been less than 55 nights spent at sea fishing for one vessel over the season. Of the 55 nights spent fishing no one trip was longer than 14 consecutive nights as the fishing strategy is based on fishing between the quarter moons. This pulse fishery provides some means of reducing ecological impacts that may otherwise result from continuous trawling.

All of the vessels have modified their nets to reduce the impacts of blue swimmer crab on the quality of prawns. The crab bags are large mesh „false‟ cod ends that capture the crabs before they enter a smaller mesh cod end where most of the prawns are retained. The inner bag (smaller mesh cod end) is spilled into a „bucket‟ which has seawater running into it, which then puts prawns onto a conveyor belt – the prawns are removed from the conveyor belt into little tubes where they are then automatically sorted and the conveyor belt puts everything back into the sea. The use of the crab bag decreases haul and shooting time resulting in efficiencies in trawl time. However the adoption of the crab bag does not reduce the capture of the by-catch but increases efficiency of fishing operations and increased quality of the target species.

Since the fishery has not as yet conducted its risk analysis, nor introduced specific by-catch mitigation

FN 82052 v1 Page 35 strategies that will address any additional defined risks, the assessors have interpreted the by-catch management strategy as in place, but also note its partial implementation. The SICA was applied to 9 species (through a workshop process (I.3) Only those species scoring 2 or more were subjected to the PSA analysis. These were identified the species interactions as „Low Risk‟

7.3.3 Information

There is sufficient information contained in the voluntary and compulsory logbook, independent trawl surveys (and field experiments) to assess discard species composition, distribution patterns and densities, size of animals, bycatch ratios and survival of discards from trawls (SARDI 2003). A bycatch database has been developed and has been enhanced to allow for data analysis and to address sustainability issues relating to the fishery. This information is sufficient to support a partial strategy to manage the main bycatch species.

In March 2002 a voluntary logbook was introduced to better identify the species of bycatch taken and the quantities of bycatch taken. There have been alterations to the logbook, which made it compulsory to record ETP species and included data on threatened, endangered and protected species information.

7.4 ETP

The fishery has the potential to directly interact with three species of turtles (leatherback, loggerhead and green), Syngnathids, fur seals, sea lions, dolphins and the white shark. Since 2008, the reporting of all interactions with Threatened, Endangered and Protected (TEP) species has been mandatory for all South Australian fishers

There are no interactions with the trawl nets between turtles, seals or dolphins in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Some evidence suggests there are isolated collisions between vessels and dolphins in heavy seas (NGOs pers comm.). There is no evidence from observer information that there are other significant interactions between this fishery and ETP sea mammals, sharks or seabirds.

Generally ETP species populations are small on the trawl grounds, the fecundity is low and population dispersal is restricted (PIRSA 2003).

Currie (2009), suggested that due to lack of precise information it is difficult to determine the ecological consequence for Syngnathids interaction with the prawn trawl fishery although it is recognised the species of leafy sea dragon is slow moving and may be caught in trawl nets whilst attached to algae or other floating plant material in the water column. It is likely many of the Syngnathids are returned to the water alive but their subsequent fate is uncertain.

7.4.1 Status

Surveys show that there are some encounters with Syngnathids but indications are that these interactions are low to moderate. The ecology effect on Syngnathids population is unknown. Generally the species populations are small on the trawl grounds, the fecundity is low and population dispersal would be restricted. Due to low numbers in the bycatch it may not be possible to detect significant differences in annual trend unless there is substantial decline (example > 50%) in numbers (PIRSA, 2003).

Syngnathids are listed as a marine species under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and are protected from activities that may result in their death or injury (DEWHA, 2009). In South Australia the family Syngnathidae is fully protected under the Fisheries Act 2007 due to the uncertainty regarding their conservation status (PIRSA 2006). There are no specific criteria have been established by DEWHA to evaluate levels of vulnerability, nor are there any established national guidelines in place to determine levels of vulnerability status of ETP

FN 82052 v1 Page 36 species in Australia and there ecological effect on the Syngnathid population is unknown. However, the fishers have introduced voluntary closed areas to mitigate against interactions and these measures are likely to reduce the impact level to below significant (failing to achieve this criteria requiring referral to the Minister under the EPBC Act). The EPBC Act allows for reassessment regarding the status of Syngnathids in 2014 and will use evidence from surveys and logbook data from various fisheries. In order to increase the quality of information presently available, monitoring and reporting process for syngnathids interaction could be strengthened via surveys and logbooks (SARDI 2003). Seven of the 395 by-catch species collected during the survey are listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) as threatened, endangered or protected. All seven species belong to the Family Syngnathidae, which comprise seahorses, seadragons and pipefish.

There is no data on the relative composition and distribution of Syngnathids in waters shallower than 10m and hence it is unclear if the inshore waters of the Gulf support relatively higher number of species and individuals than offshore waters (Sorokin et al. 2009). The habitat of the leafy sea dragon is primarily seagrass meadows where trawling does not occur (DEWHA, 2007). Whilst they are not often found in the sandy and muddy bottom of the SGPF trawl grounds, it is recognised that this species is a slow moving animal and maybe caught in trawl nets whilst attached to algae or other floating plant material in the water column, or migrating between sites. In the past, the SGPF fleet has moved out of areas found to have a significant amount of seaweed because of the increased risk in catching leafy sea dragons. These areas are now closed to trawling under an industry code of practice.These areas, Wardang closure” and “Broughton closure” are known as hatchings.

SARDI has recently undertaken an assessment of by-catch interactions (Currie et al (2009). One syngnathid was captured in an area of high trawl intensity, while seven individuals from six different sites were captured in areas of moderate trawl intensity. Most syngnathids were captured from areas of low trawl intensity (65 individuals from 18 sites).

There are several reasons why it is difficult to use the findings from this fishery-independent survey to quantify sygnathid capture during commercial fishing. Firstly, the survey provided only a snapshot and does not account for the effects of seasonal variation on population abundance e.g. migration. Secondly, information on historical trawling effort is only available at the scale of fishing block and thus the effort applied at specific site locations is unknown. Finally, the depletion rates associated with commercial prawn trawl effort are unknown.

Information on the numbers of Syngnathids taken in prawn trawl nets is now recorded through the voluntary logbook entry and through fishery-independent surveys to identify high-risk areas where leafy sea dragons may be encountered. The Committee At Sea has also, when encountering interactions in the past, responded by establishing voluntary closed areas.

From independent surveys in 2007 seven species were collected. Of these, Potbelly seahorse (Hippocampus bleekeri) is CITES listed and vulnerability = low (FISHBASE), Weedy Seadragon (Phyllopteryx taeniolatus) is moderate vulnerability (FISHBASE), Leafy Seadragon (Phycodurus eques) low to moderate (FISHBASE), Tiger pipefish (Filicampus tigris) moderate vulnerability (FISHBASE), Brushtail pipefish (leptoichthys fistularius) moderate to high vulnerability (FISHBASE), Rhino pipefish (Histiogamphelus cristatus) low to moderate vulnerability and Spotted pipefish (Stigmatopora argus) low vulnerability (FISHBASE).

7.4.2 Management

The Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association has voluntarily closed areas known to be abundant or indicate likely habitat components and have advised PIRSA that an increase in the size of the closure at Wardang to further protect seahorse, pipefish and seadragon has taken place voluntarily (Letter to PIRSA dated September 2010). These closures are likely to reduce the level of impact (failing to achieve this criteria requiring referral to the Minister under the EPBC Act). These

FN 82052 v1 Page 37 temporal closed areas are gazetted under legislation through section notices issued prior to fishing and during fishing (when changes are made to the fishing area). The Australian Government‟s Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries – 2nd Edition suggests that the fishery will maintain low bycatch levels and minimise interaction of protected species and manage impacts on the wider ecosystem but it is not defined as to how these limits are to be established or measured.

The Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery maintained self-imposed closures during 2009/10 fishing season through gazettal notices associated with harvest strategies for each trip. Closures include north of Point Lowly (since 1973) Port Broughton (since early 1970‟s with and extension of closure made in 1981), Shoalwater area (since 2000) and Wardang (since 2002 and extension of closure made in 2010). Closure at Shoalwater extends to the shore adjacent to the Cowell fishing area and was implemented to protect reef areas containing high biodiversity. Wardang closure was implemented to protect the delicate communities and marine species in the area (Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc, 2010. Annual Report). The Wardang and Broughton closures area are identified as hatchings and are closed to trawling under an industry code of practice (Currie 2009).

Spencer Gulf has a system of protected areas (Upper Spencer Gulf Marine Park 6% of South Australia‟s marine park network, Eastern Spencer Gulf Marine Park 3% of South Australia‟s marine parks network, Southern Spencer Gulf 11% of South Australia‟s marine parks network) that supports fauna, flora and habitats which contribute to maintaining biodiversity in Spencer Gulf and wider South Australians marine waters (www.marine parks.sa.gov.au).

7.4.3 Information

Information from commercial fisheries is available from Wildlife logbooks, which have been initiated to facilitate the recording of TEPs interactions. ID cards and pamphlets have been distributed to fishers and industry associations to increase the accuracy of the Wildlife logbook entries, but without an appropriate risk assessment it is difficult to have confidence in an assessment of impacts (Zhou et al. 2009 and Zhou et al 2008).

FN 82052 v1 Page 38 7.4.4 Other ETPs

Turtles: Three turtle species (leatherback, loggerhead and green) have been recorded in South Australia; however, capture of a turtle in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery is extremely rare. Between 1977-2002, the commercial fleet, with 448 independent observer days, and trawl effort exceeding 647,218 hours, captured only 2 turtles. The primary reason for limited interaction is that there are no turtle rookeries in the Spencer Gulf (the nearest turtle rookeries are situated some 1,800 nautical miles from the Spencer Gulf at 25 50‟ S). In addition, the seasonal temperature of the Spencer Gulf, the oceanographic processes (currents and fronts) and food resources (for leatherback) would impose barriers (or limits) on turtle feeding.

The Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery was successful in having a United States of America embargo lifted in 1999/2000 by US Congress, in recognition of having very low levels of by-catch and no occurrences of turtle interactions as researched by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Sharks: Great White sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) are protected under State legislation and as a result, the protection of this species is highly profiled within the general community. To date, there has been one interaction recorded in the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery (the shark was returned to the water alive). No interactions have been recorded for the grey nurse shark (Carcharias taurus). There has been no capture of great white or grey nurse sharks in fishery independent research surveys conducted in the Spencer Gulf from 1980-2003, which has involved more than 10,000 trawl shots ranging from 30-60 minutes duration. Hence, the risk of capture of these sharks in trawling is considered extremely low and would be a rare event. The incidence of entanglement of sharks is considered to be very low given the low trawl speeds of the trawl nets as well as the short duration of trawl shots. It is highly likely that these predators are able to avoid trawl nets during trawling operations.

Fur Seals and Sea Lions: The Sub-Antarctic fur seal (Arctocephalus tropicalis) is listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act but is not found in inshore waters that are trawled by the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. The pinniped that could be encountered in the Spencer Gulf by prawn trawlers is the Australian Sea-lion but there have been no recorded interactions . The low speed of the trawl nets, short trawl times, as well as the agility of sea lions to avoid fishing gear is thought to explain the low occurrence of entanglement.

Dolphins: All dolphins found in South Australian waters are protected under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972. The risk to dolphins as a by-catch of prawn trawling operations is considered to be low. The low speeds of trawling coupled with the short duration of the trawl shots makes it highly unlikely that dolphins are caught as a by-catch of the fishing operation.

7.5 Habitat

The benthic habitats can be broadly described as either seagrass; sand /gravel; mud/shale or hard bottom. The distance from the top of the Gulf and to lesser extent depth contributes to the variation in the community structures although it is not likely that variation is the primary casual factor in structuring the benthos (Currie et al 2009). The five study sites surveyed by Svane (2007) constituted different environments. The bottom of Spencer Gulf is variable with sediment characteristics ranging from fine sands, hard coarse sand and gravel, mixed sand and patches of gravel and sandy plains. At two sites the course sediment grains are usually covered by so-called rhodoliths, which are calcium carbonate fragments of biological origin covered with coralline algae (Svane et al 2007).

7.5.1 Status

There are documented areas of high intensity and low intensity fishing, which account for 8% to 15% of the total area of the Gulf. These areas have been trawled since the commencement of the prawn

FN 82052 v1 Page 39 fishery in the Spencer Gulf in 1968. Figure 5 shows that that the total benthic area that is in contact with trawl doors and area of the Gulf. is only a small proportion of the total area. Evidence over the years demonstrates that the trawl foot-print has been limited

Figure 5: Spencer Gulf Trawl foot-print, 2004-2008

Source: Dixon, C, trawl tracks_22m_all seasons_pdf.

FN 82052 v1 Page 40 The actions of demersal otter-trawls have modified the habitats in the trawled areas but it is difficult to quantify the level of impacts due to the lack of pre trawling information and temperature and salinity variables. There would appear to be evidence (Shirely 2009) that the fishery is affecting sponges with an associated decline in the abundance of fish species in areas of high intensity trawling. Currie (2009) reported low biomass of poriferans and bryozoans in heavily trawled areas supporting the generalization that these taxa are particularly susceptible to demersal trawling. However the prawn grounds have been subject to bottom trawling since 1968 and it‟s unlikely that further serious of irreversible harm will result from this fishery. It has been demonstrated by Burridge et al (2003) that benthos have resilience to impacts to benthic trawls especially in area of low intensity.

7.5.2 Management Strategy

A key part of the management strategy is to limit the area to the existing trawl area and not allow any expansion into other areas. There is also a possibility of using technology in gear design to reduce contacts with benthos using trawl mounted cameras in the future and to maintain the present gear configurations at the present limits. The Committee at Sea decisions are also based on volume of bycatch caught in particular areas. This could be further qualified with attention given to accurately mapping trawl area habitats and accurately recording interaction with sessile organisms.

7.5.3 Information

There is sufficient data available to map the areas that are heavily trawled based on trawl logbooks. There is data available to separate the benthic damage caused by fishing as opposed to natural variability of salinity and temperature.

7.6. Ecosystem Outcome

Patterns of total abundance and biomasses in the Spencer Gulf may, in part, reflect differences in oceanographic conditions (Currie et al. 2009). The rich nutrient water from the shelf waters influences the level of biomass in the Spencer Gulf. Surveys within the Spencer Gulf showed a higher total biomass on the western side of the gulf. This is contrasted by the generally lower abundances and biomasses where nutrient-depleted water flows outward into the open ocean. Species richness was inversely correlated with total abundance and biomasses and was high in the eastern gulf and low in the west (Currie et al. 2009).

Conclusions from the fisheries independent survey as presented by Currie (2009) showed that mean abundance and biomass was substantially lower at high trawl intensity sites. However the differences among trawl intensity areas were not statistically significant mainly due to the extremely high abundance and biomass at a small number of sites in the north and south of the Gulf.

7.6.1 Ecosystem Strategy

Based on the history of prawn trawling being focused on a small percentage of the area in the Spencer Gulf in water with depths greater than 10m and the dynamic nature of the Spencer Gulf ecosystem that is influenced by fluctuations in salinity, unique tidal „dodge‟ flows and increasing land based pollutions, it is unlikely that there will be any further reduction in ecosystem structure and function attributed to demersal prawn fishing.

The reduction in CPUE between 07/09 and 08/09 and reduction in number of nights trawled over the last four years also supports the conclusion that the present level of prawn trawl activity is unlikely to disrupt key elements of the ecosystem. Historically trawl strategies were not homogeneous with fleet activities being concentrated to areas that have historically produced good catches.

On the basis of available information it can be inferred that this fishery is highly unlikely to disrupt the key elements underlying ecosystem structure and function to a point where there would be serious

FN 82052 v1 Page 41 irreversible harm.

7.6.2 Ecosystem Strategy

There is a strategy in place associated with input controls of number of days trawled and area of operation along with technical measures to limit the impacts of the trawl gear on the ecosystem. Gear size is restricted in the management plan and there is constant development (T 90 mesh design is being considered) to reduce the bycatch of non-commercial and ETP species. The onboard handling of bycatch and target species allows for efficient return of non-retained species to the water. There are restrictions on the type and size of gear that is used in the fishery as well as restrictions on the power of the vessels. The SGWCPFA are in the process of initiating measures to confirm a reliable technique for capping horse-power for individual vessels.

The Marine Parks Act 2007 (Marine Parks Act) came into operation on 29 November 2007 and has been developed to protect and conserve the marine environment and provides for displaced commercial fishing effort compensation (SGWCPFA 2008).

7.6.3 Information Monitoring

Present information suggests that main ecosystem impacts are known and there is sufficient detail in the research to determine the impacts of the fishery. There is no evidence of trophic cascades in any of the associated species by-catches or associated species.

The fishery has supported research into investigating the effects of discards from prawn activities on benthic communities of populations and possible consequences to the ecosystem from the actions of trawling. Research has been carried out by SARDI in conjunction with the Spencer Gulf Prawn fishery to develop some understanding towards a marine trophic dynamic model through information of the bycatch mortality and recapture. There is good understanding of the ecological links between important bycatch species and their population facilitating a broader understanding of the current ecosystems and local environments where trawling operations occur (Currie et al 2009).

FN 82052 v1 Page 42

8. GOVERNANCE

Management Bodies For the purpose of this assessment, the key components of the governance and fishery management framework for the Spencer Gulf King Prawn fishery are the State Government, and the co- management framework, supported by the Industry Association, Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association. The following organisations are identified as being central to the Fisheries management system.

The South Australian Government, Department of Primary Industries and Resources, South Australia (PIRSA)3 has management jurisdiction for King prawns from the low water mark out to three nautical miles and within all State internal waters that includes the Spencer Gulf. Fisheries compliance activities are undertaken by „Fisheries Services‟, a Department of PIRSA.

The Fisheries Council of SA is identified as an independent peak advisory body for the Minister on Fisheries Management with its functions defined in the Fisheries Management Act 2007. The Council is responsible for:

 Preparation and Review of Management Plans  Promotion of Co-management of Fisheries and Research, Education and Training  Advice to the Minister on Fisheries Management, Fees, Fisheries Research and Development Fund, the allocation of access to aquatic resources in particular fisheries, Advisory Committees, Codes of Practice, Council Strategic Plan and Council Budget

The Act specifies the role of a Fisheries Council, which is drawn from expertise with knowledge of commercial, recreational and traditional fisheries, fish processing, conservation, research, business, law and economics, as well as the management. With the exception of PIRSA (management), and SARDI (research) specific stakeholder organizations are not involved at FCSA level.

The Council may establish sub committees to investigate specific issues on its behalf. These sub committees draw on a wide range of expertise, but not specifically from the stakeholder organizations (Hollamby, pers. com., September, 2010). There are presently 5 working groups: Technology Working Group, a Cost Recovery Working Group, Fisheries Strategic Plans Working Group, Rules Review Working Group, and a Fisheries Consultative Processes Working Group.

Spencer Gulf is one of 10 fisheries falling under the ambit of the FCSA.

The Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association Inc4 (the Association) is the industry body tasked with implementing parts of the fisheries management framework. It is a voluntary independent seafood sector entity that represents Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishery licence holders. It is a non-profit primary resources development organisation that formed in 1968 and was incorporated in South Australia on 14 February 1984. It has a strong membership base, consisting of 38 members from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery and 3 members from the West Coast Prawn Fishery (all but one Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishing licence holders are members).

The rules of the Association, as required under the Associations Incorporation Act 1985 (SGWCPFA, 1984), are set out in the Constitution of the Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Inc. They include membership, duties, powers and appointment of the committee, general meetings, and alteration of the rules. The committee (or governing body) of the Association is the „Management Committee‟. The Constitution allows for establishing sub-committees and in so

3 http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries 4 www.prawnassociation.com.au

FN 82052 v1 Page 43 doing the Management Committee prescribes the name, role, membership and other arrangements as necessary for that sub-committee. The Constitution also prescribes the appointment of a Coordinator At Sea for the management of operational prawn fishing activities within the Spencer Gulf. Two staff, the Executive Officer and the Administration Officer, are employed by the Association to carry out management and administration functions. The Executive Officer operates as part of the management team and represents the Association for management activities.

The Management Committee has established a number of sub-committees for the efficient running of Association business. Sub-committees must consist of at least one member of the Management Committee, but can have government and other stakeholder representation. Sub-committees that have been established are as follows:

 Committee At Sea provides Real Time Management (fishery management) services for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery whilst at sea.  Research Sub-Committee; prioritises research needs, conducts investigations, reviews research proposals and reviews and discusses outcomes of research activities.  Cost Recovery Sub-Committee; reviews and discusses the proposed PIRSA Fisheries licence fees and activities charged, and makes a recommendation to the Management Committee for their approval.  Environmental Management System (EMS) Sub-Committee; reviews, amends and updates the „On Boat Management System‟ as required.  Promotions Sub-Committee; markets and promotes the Association, the prawn fishing industries it represents, and the product to „increase the price of prawns‟.

The Association has developed a number of documents to ensure the effective and professional running of the Association, its committees and fishing activities, some of which are agreements between the Association and its members. Documents include:

 Management Committee Code of Conduct  Committee At Sea Charter  Prawn Survey Contract (between the Association, licence holders and skippers)  Bad Weather Deed  Skippers Code of Practice  Wallaroo Marina Code of Conduct

Important to the process of evolving co-management arrangements are the Management Committee Code of Conduct (Code of Conduct), Committee At Sea Charter and the Prawn Survey Contract. These documents are further explained to provide an understanding of the structure, professionalism and management of the Association. The Association‟s governing body, the Management Committee, is elected from its membership, in addition to the appointment of an Independent Chairperson. The Management Committee is responsible for the management and financial wellbeing of the Association and it is these responsibilities and the Management Committee member responsibilities for and whilst at meetings that are detailed in the Code of Conduct. Committee At Sea members, not elected to the Management Committee, are also required to attend a number of Management Committee meetings. Committee At Sea members are also bound by the responsibilities laid out in the Code of Conduct, provided for in the Committee At Sea Charter.

A Committee At Sea Charter (SGWCPFA, 2009) has been developed and approved by the Management Committee of the Association. The principal aim of this document is to ensure that Committee At Sea members provide leadership within the SGPF fleet by being aware of their responsibilities, fishing obligations and decision rules and support sustainable fishing practices within the SGPF including harvest strategies developed by the Management Committee. The Charter also outlines membership to the Committee At Sea, membership obligations, voting rights of members as well as review of the Charter. Ultimately, the Committee At Sea is responsible for management of fishing activities and amendment of harvest strategies whilst out at sea (Real Time Management).

FN 82052 v1 Page 44 Therefore, it is imperative that the Committee At Sea acts responsibly within the framework of the Management Plan and other legislative controls.

The Association contracts the services of registered survey licence holders, skippers and vessels to conduct surveys. The contract outlines observer presence, equipment required, records to be kept and other management functions. To support surveys (participating crews and observers), a manual in addition to specialist equipment (survey box) is provided to each participating survey vessel at the time of survey. These survey boxes are returned to the Association at the end of each survey to allow for: equipment checking and repairing or replacing where required; stocking of appropriate forms and materials; and for documentation and instructions to be added as necessary.

The Association has a contract with the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries to provide Coordinator At Sea and Real Time Management services (MAFF, 2008). The functions provided by the Association, through the Coordinator At Sea, Committee At Sea, Executive Officer and the Management Committee, are provided for as a schedule to the contract. In addition, the Management Plan outlines operational activities, under which the fishery operates. Specifically, the Management Plan provides the framework for decision-making including the role of the Association and the decision rules.

The Association has a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with SARDI (SGWCPFA, 2008a), to provide a number of research services for the management of stock assessment surveys. This MoU permits recovery of costs by SARDI, for the Association‟s activities in undertaking stock assessment surveys, which are then paid to the Association. The research costs recovered from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery and paid to the Association are for essential „core‟ management activities. Core management activities are defined as those activities that must occur for the fishery to be able to operate in accordance with legislation and subordinate regulations, policies and plans.

The Association is also committed to the ongoing research and ecologically sustainable development of the SA prawn industry. The Research Sub-Committee is set up with active participation from PIRSA, SARDI and CCSA. There are 10 members of this Committee, (6 fisher representatives, the EO of the Association, PIRSA, SARDI and the Conservation Council), each having voting rights (Charter for the Research Committee, SGWCPFA, 2010a). A stakeholder representative from the Conservation Council of South Australia (CCSA) holds a position on the Committee for a period of twelve (12) months on a trial basis until 31 March 2011. Stakeholder representation from the CCSA will be reviewed on completion of this term with a view to continuing on a permanent basis.

The South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI) is the research organization responsible for the research and monitoring programs for the South Australian prawn fisheries5. SARDI provides PIRSA Fisheries with an annual stock assessment report for each of the three area fisheries, Spencer Gulf, West Coast and Gulf of St Vincent. SARDI also provides the Association with survey reports presenting fishery-independent survey results and the SARDI Spencer Gulf Prawn status report. The partnership arrangement between the Association and SARDI is defined in a MoU (SGWCPFA, 2008a), as mentioned above.

The fishery has been assessed by Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPAC, formerly the Department of Environment, Water Heritage and Arts, DEWHA) as an Ecologically Sustainably Managed Fishery under part 13 and 13(A) of the EPBC Act 1999 (DEWHA, 2009). DEWHA has played a critical role in evaluating the fishery‟s environmental credentials. PIRSA submitted an environmental assessment report to DEWHA in September 2003 (PIRSA, 2003), and the subsequent recommendations have been integrated into the Management Plan (Table 11, PIRSA 2007). Of the 9 recommendations provided by the DEWHA, several relate specifically to the ongoing monitoring and reporting of by-catch for South Australian prawn fisheries. These include: a) the development and implementation of harvest strategies for all by-product species,

5 http://www.sardi.sa.gov.au/fisheries

FN 82052 v1 Page 45 b) monitoring of by-catch indicator species to detect long-term trends, and c) mandatory reporting of interactions with ETP species.

Fisheries Regulations

The Fisheries Management Act 2007 provides a broad statutory framework to ensure the ecologically sustainable management of South Australia’s fisheries resources6. The five objectives of the Act are: 1. Proper conservation and management measures are to be implemented to protect the aquatic resources of the State from over-exploitation and ensure that those resources are not endangered; 2. Access to the aquatic resources of the State is to be allocated between users of the resources in a manner that achieves optimum utilisation and equitable distribution of those resources to the benefit of the community; 3. Aquatic habitats are to be protected and conserved, and aquatic ecosystems and genetic diversity are to be maintained and enhanced; 4. Recreational fishing and commercial fishing activities are to be fostered for the benefit of the whole community; and 5. The participation of users of the aquatic resources of the State, and of the community more generally, in the management of fisheries is to be encouraged.

The Fisheries Management Act 2007 embraces Commonwealth management principles as laid down in Commonwealth Legislation (The Fisheries Management Act (Commonwealth) 1991) and the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act, 1999), which acknowledge the precautionary approach, stakeholder participation and the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management.

The components of the Act include license conditions, sub ordinate regulations, the definition and operational requirements of the Fisheries Council and the detailed requirements for a Fisheries Specific Management Plan (Section 8.6 below).

The Commonwealth Government has a commitment to negotiate indigenous land use agreements under the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993.The SA Fisheries Management Act 2007 (FMA 2007) acknowledges land use agreement made by the Commonwealth and provides for (Section 60) the Minister and a native title group party to such an agreement to develop management arrangements for aboriginal traditional fishing. The FMA 2007 does not affect native title in any other way.

All Legislation and actions may also be subject to scrutiny from the Ombudsman. PIRSA is required to respond to Freedom of Information requests.

There are also a number of sub-ordinate regulations dealing with management policies that need to be

6 Prior to this the primary legislative control was the Fisheries Act 1982. This laid down the principles of co management through the establishment of the Prawn Fisheries Management Committee (FMC). The FMC has provided the principal forum for input into fisheries management and research issues for all stakeholders of South Australian fisheries since 1995. Some relevant changes from the Act is the creation of the Fisheries Council, definition of its role, and the creation of a Management Plan which set output indicators to monitor performance.

FN 82052 v1 Page 46 in place for particular fisheries such as license terms and conditions7, fees8 establishing reserves with restrictions on fishing and other activities9 and VMS10.

Roles and responsibilities

The Current fishery management structure relating South Australian fisheries is summarised below

Figure 7: Relationships between the key components of the fishery management arrangements

The Minister

Fisheries Council

PIRSA Fisheries Association

Management arrangements

Functions, roles and responsibilities are categorised into three groups: Fisheries Council for South Australia, responsible for the formulation of the overarching Management Plans, and advice to the Minster (Section 8.1); Government (PIRSA); and industry (The Association). Under the current arrangements PIRSA retains the following management functions:

 Government policy development  Legislative development and enactment  Licensing functions  Development of the management plan, including establishing sustainability benchmarks, in consultation with the Association and other stakeholders  Addressing fisheries access and allocation issues  Participating in development of harvest strategies  Formalising and implementing all harvest strategy decisions made by the Association‟s Management Committee  Conducting ecological risk assessment and establishing ecosystem benchmarks  The cost recovery process, including determining service levels required and licence fee setting.

Responsibility for the management functions that are delegated to industry under current co- management arrangements are as follows:

 Coordinating and managing stock assessment and spot survey activities, including contracting vessels to conduct surveys, organising survey logistics and industry based observer coverage.

7 Fisheries Management Regulations (2007) 8 Fisheries Management (Fees) Regulations 2007 9 Fisheries (Aquatic Reserves) Regulations 2007 10 Fisheries (Vessel Monitoring Scheme) Regulations 2007

FN 82052 v1 Page 47 This activity is conducted under an exemption issued under Section 115 of the Fisheries Management Act, which is provided to the Association annually.  Development of harvest strategies following industry-coordinated spot surveys and stock assessment surveys. The harvest strategies developed under this arrangement require government approval and are implemented by government using Section 79 of the Fisheries Management Act through published notices in the government gazette.  Management of harvest strategies during fishing through the Association‟s Committee At Sea, primarily by spatially managing harvests to avoid the capture of small prawns.  Fleet management, including dissemination of fishing notices, area closures and other information.  Management of the observer program, in close consultation with SARDI and the CCSA11.

CCSA sits on the Association‟s research sub-committee.

Consultation processes

PIRSA Fisheries has a well-established consultative co-management and collaborative arrangement in place in partnership with the Association. Both PIRSA and the Association recognize the importance of broader stakeholder involvement, inclusive of the conservation sector, largely represented by two bodies: Conservation Council for South Australia, and WWF, Australia.

All decisions on changes to legislation are subject to public announcements and a 3-month consultative process. Consultation reports are circulated via the FCSA. This may also include provisions for workshops and public meetings, covering for example, Environmental Risk Assessment. (Smallridge, I2)

Lower level decisions such as gazettes involve consultation with affected parties, notably the fishers. These explain the rationale for decisions taken and how they will be applied. In usual circumstances gazettes relating real time management decisions are effective from the decision by the Committee at sea and subsequently put in place by PIRSA.

FCSA sessions are not open to the public. The minutes and resolutions of the Council are published on their website: www.fisheriescouncil.sa.gov.au.

There is a view from stakeholders (Warhurst (I6)) that the transition from the Fisheries Management Committee (FMC), a consultative forum as part of the 1982 Act, to the FCSA, has marginalized key organisations from central decision-making at policy level. It is noted that FCSA has a working group to evaluate the current Fisheries Consultative Processes. CCSA also comment (Warhurst, I6), that access to meeting minutes and reports, is extremely slow, taking up to 6 weeks before in the public domain. A review of the website bears this out. Materials show the last accessible minutes (FCSA, 2010) reported as 16 March with the date of this assessment, 9 October.

CCSA does participate in the SGWCPFA Research Sub-Committee (Section 8.9). CCSA‟s current status on the SGWCPFA Research Committee is on a trial basis. On the positive note, CCSA (Warhurst, I6) states that the participatory process and interaction with SGWCPFA is very harmonious as compared with some of the other regional fisheries organisations. However, there is a tendency for weighting against the conservation interests (C.Warhurst ibid) in the event of a vote,

11 The three fishery independent stock assessment surveys a year use independent observers deployed on nine vessels, November, February and April, currently four of these vessels use industry representatives whereby a deckhand from these vessels swap from one vessel to another. These deckhands had to undertake an observer training program which was run by Industry and SARDI over a couple of days to be qualified. The observer programme is very useful tool for assessments such as ground-truthing logbook data (Hooper G, and Dixon C, email, 17 February, 2011)

FN 82052 v1 Page 48 though it is acknowledged that voting status is given, and fishers on the grouping have strong leanings towards environmental protection. It is also noteworthy that, on occasions, the Committee discusses and agrees management decisions emanating from Research Results (SGWCPA, 2010b), which are in turn submitted to the SGWCPFA for approval. PIRSA/FCSA has facilitated active engagement of CCSA by providing support grants for costs. For further details on research activities see Section 8.9.

It is noted that several priority areas have been identified for ENGO participation (Hollamby, et al, 2010). These are listed below.

 Active participation with the Association and with the government, but also more generally in the consideration of future management initiatives among stakeholders  Active participation on any relevant Association sub-committees (involving stakeholder representatives)  Greater involvement in management planning  Proactive input into environmental management issues including: o participation in the ecological risk assessment process o evaluation of ecosystem benchmarks o development of strategies to manage impacts on threatened, endangered, and protected species (TEPS) o assisting in a shared approach to habitat protection (e.g. threats to the Spencer Gulf ecosystem more generally)  Participation in conflict resolution (informally through improved communication among stakeholders, and formally through the Fisheries Council of South Australia).

PIRSA will be identifying areas where participation in these areas can be best accommodated, but it is evident that the existing process under assessment does not facilitate active engagement on these issues. It is noted that these areas are of critical importance to the evolution of the Management Plan, and to date that evolution has been slow (Section 8.6).

Incentives

The cost of research, fisheries management, and compliance are fully cost recovered to Government through license fees (Hollamby, I11). There are no known adverse management incentives that could undermine sustainability. Input and output measures, supported by limited entry licensing, quota and effort limits, are regarded as sufficient mechanisms to regulate fishing activity (Smallridge, I2).

An annual economic assessment is undertaken of the indicators (Econsearch, 2010)12 including the gross value of production, cost of management, financial performance (indicators including profit at full equity, cash operating surplus, return on investment, etc), determination of major cost increases, regional economic impacts and economic rent. This assessment demonstrates adherence to free market practices.

The Fisheries Specific Management Plan

The Management Plan is developed by the Fisheries Council of SA (formerly the Fisheries Management Committee under the 1982 Act), with the support of PIRSA. The Spencer Gulf Management Plan pre dates the Act, having been formulated in September 2007. The current Management Plan is set to run until 2013. The powers contained in Section 14 of the Fisheries (Management Committees) Regulations 1995 (the FMC regulations, now defunct) provide the legal basis for the preparation of this Management Plan. The Management Plan to be developed under the Fisheries Management Act 2007 will be consistent with Section 43 and 44. The current Management Plan (Box 2) is an expression of the policy that applies in relation to the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery to inform the exercise of any discretionary decision-making powers in the legislation, as they apply to

12 http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries/commercial_fishing/river_fishery/economic_performance_indicators

FN 82052 v1 Page 49 the fishery.

The current Management Plan aims to achieve outcomes that are consistent with broader Government objectives for the management of the marine environment. These include:

 The National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development;  The Precautionary Principle, as set out in the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment;  The Australian Government „Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries‟, which relate to the requirements of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; and  The National Policy on Fisheries By-catch.

The Plan:

 Sets out the management objectives and implements a strategy for achieving these  Identifies research needs and priorities  Sets out the resources required to implement the plan  Describes the biological, economic and social characteristics of the fishery  Identifies the impacts or potential impacts of the fishery on its associated ecosystem or ecosystems, including impacts on non-target species of fish or other aquatic resources  Identifies any ecological factors that could have an impact on the performance of the fishery  Assesses the risks to the ecosystem and set out strategies for addressing those risks  Sets out methods for monitoring the performance of the fishery and the effectiveness of the plan, including performance indicators, trigger points for review or action and progress reporting.

FN 82052 v1 Page 50 Table 5: The Management goals, objectives and strategies for the management of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery during 2007-2012. Goal Objectives Activities 1. Maintain an 1a. Spencer Gulf prawn  Maintain a restriction on the number of licenses and the total ecologically stocks harvested at amount of gear in the fishery; sustainable ecologically sustainable  Develop spatially and temporally explicit harvest strategies for prawn biomass levels each fishing period in line with established target and limit reference levels and decision rules;  If the stock is determined to be operating below the established limits, the fishery will be managed to promote recovery to ecologically viable stock levels, within agreed timeframes. 1b. Sufficient biological  Collect fishery-dependent information through commercial and ecological logbooks; information exists to  Maintain the fishery-independent prawn survey program; inform management  Assess the status of the stock through quantitative stock decisions assessment;  Collect appropriate environmental data to aid assessment;  Review and update the strategic research and monitoring plan 2. Ensure 2a. A fishery exploited  Within a framework of sustainable exploitation, develop optimal for maximum economic harvest strategies that match target size with market utilization and value requirements; equitable  When targets are reached, allow for higher exploitation levels distribution to capture economic benefits from the fishery (subject to the constraints outlined under goal 1) 2b. An economically  Develop management arrangements that allow commercial efficient fleet operators to maximise operational flexibility and economic efficiency;  Undertake economic surveys of the commercial fishery to assess economic performance against a set of economic indicators. 2c. Equitable public  Review appropriateness of access arrangements between access sectors once within the life of the Management Plan  Develop a mechanism for altering access arrangements should a change be required 3. Minimise 3a. Minimise fishery  Maintain a limit on the amount of gear used in the fishery; impacts on the impacts on by-catch and  Maintain permanent closed areas. ecosystem by-product species  Undertake a risk assessment to determine the vulnerability of by-catch and by-product species to overfishing from prawn trawling;  Develop mitigation strategies for by-catch and by- product species deemed at high risk of overfishing from prawn trawling.  Promote the development of environmentally friendly fishing practices. 3b. Avoid the incidental  Undertake a risk assessment to determine the vulnerability of mortality of endangered, endangered, threatened and protected species to fishing threatened and protected operations species  Improve data recording systems to capture fishing interactions with endangered, threatened and protected species  Develop management measures to avoid interactions with endangered, threatened and protected species. 3c. Minimise fishery  Maintain a limit on the amount of gear used in the fishery impacts on benthic  Maintain permanent closed areas habitats and associated  Promote the development of environmentally friendly fishing species communities gear and fishing practices  Develop strategies for assessment of impacts on habitat and

FN 82052 v1 Page 51 associated species communities. 4. Enable 4a. Industry delegated  Industry manage the spot survey process and develop harvest effective and greater responsibility in strategies (with reference to PIRSA Fisheries and SARDI); participative management  Industry manage all at-sea operations of the fleet; management  Develop an improved industry decision-making structure to of the fishery satisfy governance requirements;  Develop explicit allocation of prawn resources between sectors;  Develop a process for the industry association to review the necessary ecological assessment report to the CDEH for export accreditation. 4b. Management  Promote stakeholder input to the management of the fishery, arrangements reflect through established co-management processes; concerns and interests of  Ensure that social and cultural issues are given appropriate the wider community consideration when new management strategies are being developed;  Communicate management arrangements to the wider Community. 4c. Management  Undertake annual compliance risk assessment; arrangements are  Implement a cost-effective compliance and monitoring complied with program to address identified risks;  Promote high levels of stakeholder stewardship through established management processes and Fishwatch activities. 4d. Costs of  Ensure stakeholders are involved in development of management of the management arrangements for achieving management fishery funded by the objectives; relevant stakeholders  Determine the annual real costs of management, research and compliance for the fishery;  Recover an economic return from commercial licence holders, sufficient to cover the attributed costs of fisheries management, research and compliance in line with established cost recovery principles. Source: PIRSA, 2007

The extent to which the SGPF is achieving the range of stated goals and objectives is assessed using a combination of indicators designed to measure performance of the fishery. These performance indicators may be biological or non-biological. Each performance indicator is measured against a limit reference point that may be quantitative or non-quantitative. Limit reference levels represent the minimum acceptable level of fishery performance. If performance falls below limit reference levels, measures to improve performance must be developed, following the management responses outlined in section 5.3.1 of the management plan.

Each performance indicator is related to a specific goal and objective. The following table, table 5, defines the suite of performance indicators, their related objectives and reference points. Importantly, the values provided are the initial values set for the first year of the life of this Management Plan. These limit reference points may be changed on an annual basis if additional scientific information is available that suggests change is appropriate. The reasoning behind these changes should be documented. The limit reference pints have not been changed within the confines of the existing Management Plan.

These performance indicators are reported on by PIRSA Fisheries. They are assessed from a number of sources that include both the stock assessment and economic reports. Biological reference points are calculated from either fishery independent survey data or commercial logbook data. Recruitment indices are measured as the square root of the number of juvenile prawns (males <33 and females <35 mm CL) captured per nautical mile trawled following Carrick (2003).

FN 82052 v1 Page 52

FN 82052 v1 Page 53 Table 6: Performance indicators for assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Objective Performance Indicator Objective Verifiable Indicators 1 b Fishery independent surveys 3 surveys completed 1 b Stock assessment report Completed 2 b Economic report Completed 1 a Indices of future and current biomass Neither index is below lower threshold levels 1 a Recruitment index >35

1 a & 2 a Total commercial catch (t) >1800 1 a & 2 a Mean commercial CPUE (kg/hr) >80 2 a % vessel nights with mean size >280prawns/7 <2% kg 2 b Gross Value of Production (GVP) <0% change 2 b Management Costs >10% incr. 2 b Return on investment <0% change 4 a Committee comply with harvest strategy Committee develops all harvest strategies based on decision rules results of surveys and in accord with decision rules 4 c Fleet complies with harvest strategies Fleet operates within prescribed open areas and times described in every harvest strategy Source: Management Plan (2007)

The performance indicators in the table above (table 9 of the Management Plan) measure the success of strategies to address the impacts of fishing on the ecosystem. These indicators are assessed on a 5- year cycle to coincide with the life of this Management Plan. The evidence suggests that fisheries specific control rules are in place, and these are well defined and measurable, and consistent with achieving outcomes expressed under MSC Principle 1. However, the policy of implementing an ecosystem strategy (see table below), is only at a state of partial implementation.

The table below evaluates the progress made towards a policy of reducing ecosystem impacts.

Table 7: Performance indicators measured for 5-year assessment of ecosystem impacts for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Objective Performance Indicator Measurement Objective Verifiable Indicators Frequency (Extracted from I xx) 3 a & 3 b Undertake a by-catch risk Within 5 years Still to be implemented following assessment bycatch survey, undertaken on 2007, published in 2009. RA delayed because of priority for other fisheries approaching New Management Plan 3 a Develop mitigation strategies Prior to the Ongoing with some experimental work for high-risk species. conduct of the and some gazetted initiatives n place: next risk - Closure of sites because of assessment potential risk to syngnathids; - Crab bags and hoppers, also reducing time stingarees are ondeck - Precautionary size limit for slipper lobsterrs set to protect 50% of the biomass 3 a Measure the success of each Within 1 year of No evaluation made of existing risk mitigation strategy. development of mitigation strategies. Timeline for the mitigation completion, early 2011. strategy 3 a Measure the effectiveness of 5 years after the 2009 assessment has identified a lower mitigation strategies by previous risk number of at risk species, but higher assessing differences in assessment level risk assessment still to take place consecutive risk assessments.

FN 82052 v1 Page 54 3 b Develop measures to record Within 5 years Completed, linked to established interactions with endangered, closed areas. However, no additional threatened and protected work completed on further mitigation species. strategies. 3 b Develop measures to reduce Within 5 years Successfully reduced the risk to some interactions with endangered, species. Other mitigation strategies to threatened and protected be prepared under proposed risk species. assessment and mitigation measures. Due for completion by 2012. 3 c Maintain permanent closed Annual Completed and ever increasing areas gazetted sites. 3 c Develop strategies to assess Within 5 years Ongoing but also subject to impacts on benthic habitats and forthcoming risk assessment. associated Communities Source: PIRSA (2007), with authors comments based on reported findings

The conclusion from the above table is that there is a strategy in place for managing and maintaining by-catch, but after 3 years, within a 5-year Management Plan life cycle, the strategy has only been partially implemented (DEWHA, 2009b). The Risk Assessment process is reportedly delayed because of other fishery priorities (Hollamby, I 10). It is noteworthy that work on a Risk Assessment has to be undertaken prior to the commencement of a new Management Plan for the SGPF (Alice Fistr, SGWCPFA, 2010c). A risk assessment was planned for later in 2010, but has not been undertaken although work has commenced to begin the process. Progress towards mitigation strategies would have to evolve from this, and be clearly stipulated in the Management Plan for 2013 onwards. As indicated in the section on by-catches, management mitigation actions delivered to date have been in response to real time interactions from the fishers, but not linked to any formal risk assessment process.

The table below illustrates the current allocation of responsibilities under the Management Plan. Hollamby, et al, 2010) makes recommendations for changes, but these have not been implemented and cannot form part of this evaluation.

Table 8: Operational functions for managing the SGPF under current co-management model

Process Task / Duty

Sector

SARDI

Association

Conservation Conservation PIRSA PIRSA Fisheries

TEPS reporting (interactions) M TEPS impact assessment M I Review of stock assessment survey data for harvest M I D strategies Review of spot survey data for harvest strategies M I D Determine spatial harvest strategies (areas open to M I D Harvest Strategies fishing) Catch / effort (number of nights) restrictions M I D Gazettal / implementation of fishing notices M I I Amendments to fishing notices M I Coordination of Committee at Sea (to direct fishing D operations) Catch and prawn size data collection during fishing M

FN 82052 v1 Page 55 (logbook) Closing original harvest strategy areas nightly (RTM) D M Notifying the fleet of changes M D Fishing trip report M Survey development and design I I D Survey coordination and logistics D Survey data collection D Spot Surveys Survey data collation, verification and analysis M D Survey authorisation D Assessment of effectiveness of Harvest Strategies M M External review of stock assessment M Survey data collation M Coordinate and manage the survey M M I Survey development and design I M I Survey logistics I I D Survey data collection I D Survey data verification and analysis M I Research Manage fishing logbook program, including validating M Stock assessment returns surveys, catch & Logbook data: collate, enter, maintain database (storage) M effort data, and by- Assessment of fishery against Management Plan M I I catch / by-product Assessment of effectiveness of Harvest Strategies M D I research Collection and storage of other biological data M Data collation and analysis M Fishery assessment report Report writing M (X1) Peer review I M Data collation and analysis M Stock status report (X1) Report brief I M Survey interim reports Data collation and analysis M (x3) Report writing I M Develop observer program I M I D Observer Program Facilitate observer training I M D Maintain observer database I I D M = Managing Authority; D = Delegated Authority; I = Input Source: Hollamby, et al, 2010

Decision making process

The Minister, with the advice of the FCSA, makes strategic policy decisions and is responsible for the formulation of the Management Plan. These decisions conform to the principles of the Act, and endorse the Precautionary and the ecosystem based approach to fisheries management.

Management Plans are formulated by PIRSA, in consultation with the SGWCPFA. Decisions made are derived from the defined activities and take account of available research results, as well as monitoring decisions. These decisions are delegated to the management organisations, PIRSA and SGWCPFA. Explanations are provided for actions or lack of actions by the organisations tasked with implementation (as above). Failure to comply with objectively verifiable indicators results in a report submitted to the Minister detailing the reasons for non-compliance (SGWCPFA, 2010e). Formal reporting processes are therefore implicit. . PIRSA Fisheries takes responsibility for the following:  Full independent audit process of all delegated functions

FN 82052 v1 Page 56  Enforcement and compliance functions  Conducting ecological risk assessment  Leading development of the next management plan in consultation with the Fisheries Council of SA, the Association, its research sub-committee and other stakeholders  Establishing ecosystem benchmarks in consultation with the Association and with the conservation sector  Collating logbook data and providing this to the research provider under confidentiality agreements  Cost recovery of core management processes delegated to the Association.

The Association undertakes the following tasks:  Developing, implementing and managing harvest strategies in consultation with PIRSA  Contracting research and stock assessment services, including stock assessment surveys, subject to audit / oversight of research performances by a research sub-committee and the government  Managing the spot survey data and authorisation  Management of qualified observers  Further delegation of management / administration services may be considered based on performance audit and assessment and willingness by government, industry and other stakeholders.

Enforcement and Surveillance

There are two components of compliance applied in the SGPF. PIRSA Fisheries Services is responsible for fisheries Monitoring, Control and Surveillance. The Association and its Committee at Sea undertakes day to day real time compliance and verification processes.

i. Fisheries Services

PIRSA Fisheries West Region operates from two offices, Port Lincoln and Kadina. Compliance officers are responsible for a number of fisheries in the region, in addition to the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. There are 6 officers based in Port Lincoln, and 4 in Kadina, both under the supervision of a Regional Manager.

Sea Patrols are undertaken by PV Southern Ranger, which operates with a minimum of 6 officers.

An intelligence gathering system exists for the public to call in - Fishwatch

Costs involved in ensuring compliance within the SGPF are charged back to industry, through the cost recovery process. Therefore, the Association provides input into the risk assessment process and compliance strategy. The risk assessment is reviewed regularly and the compliance of the SGPF informs the program for the next PIRSA Fisheries Services strategy.

The focus of activities by compliance officers is based on Three Principles: Education, Deterrence and Enforcement. Fisheries Services prepare an annual Risk Assessment, identifying the main risks, strategies and actions.

The main risks for the three Regional Prawn fisheries are identified as:

 Take protected / non-protected species (Medium level)  Fish in closed areas (Low level)  Use of illegal fishing gear (Medium level)  Interactions with obstructions placed on the sea-bed (Low level).

Strategies include:

FN 82052 v1 Page 57

 Education and awareness, through parties understanding their respective obligations and development of industry communication and relationship  Deterrence through physical presence and inspections at sea and on land  Enforcement through successful prosecutions

Target actions are:

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

Boardings take place at sea, where the primary activity is to check for finfish. Ad hoc monitoring occurs on land to check on violations, as well as regular landing inspections. Actions may be determined as part of a regular review or through intelligence provided by industry.

Penalties are laid down in the Fishery Regulations. Provision is made for a penalty point system which when accumulated can result in permanent loss of a licence.

Quarterly reports are prepared summarising outcomes, and addressing pertinent issues. These are discussed with industry when attending Management Committee meetings.

PIRSA Fisheries observations (Carr et al, I10) are as follows:

 Functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and systematically understood  A comprehensive MCS system is in place  The industry itself works collectively, always in close proximity to one another on the same fishing grounds. This promotes a strong level of self-regulation with a strong degree of confidence that the fishers are compliant  Sanctions are laid down in the regulations and act as an effective deterrent, albeit are rarely applied  Local peer pressure against non-compliance is extremely high from within the SGWCPFA structure, and the local public  There is no evidence of systematic non-compliance. The number of offences committed is very low, identified by Fisheries Services as 2 in two years, related to the carriage of finfish onboard.

ii. The Committee at Sea

The primary function of the Committee at Sea is to implement real time fisheries management decisions. However, defined functions of the CAS (SGWCPFA, 2009) are to:  Support the Management Committee‟s harvest strategies, developed at Management Committee meetings.  Develop at-sea harvest strategies that ensures the fishery:  is compliant with legislative obligations  is compliant with its obligations under the Management Plan, including the four key management goals for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: o Maintain ecologically sustainable stock levels

FN 82052 v1 Page 58 o Ensure optimum utilisation and equitable distribution o Minimise impacts on the ecosystem o Enable effective management with greater industry involvement.  is compliant with any Management Committee directive  To monitor fishing at all times and take necessary action(s) when required, to ensure the fishery is managed in accordance with at-sea harvest strategies as per above.

It is evident from Management Committee Minutes that the Committee, and the Association members, actively engage in self-policing activities (SGWCPFA Minutes, 25 February and 31 March 2010). A potential threat, for example, is fishing over gazetted closure lines. No VMS system is in place, but the fleet operates in close proximity and can observe any active infringements and rectify these accordingly. Fishers have in many cases advanced the various restrictions applied in the form of real time closures, and apply these voluntarily. These closures are retrospectively gazetted by PIRSA in accordance with Section 79 of the Fisheries Act, 2007. The value of fisher participation is acknowledged by Fisheries Services.

Research Plans

There is no overarching SGF Research Plan. Research, in the form of data collection supporting stock assessment and ecosystem monitoring is identified as an important component of the Management Plan (PIRSA, 2007). A stock assessment research plan exists, submitted annually from SARDI to PIRSA (SARDI, 2010). The outputs of the plan contain the following:

Basic Fisheries Statistics and fishery logbook development  Manage a comprehensive fishing logbook program. Collate fishing logbook returns and provide an in confidence service  Validate returns (consultation with fishers to correct returns)  Entry of catch and effort data and storage.  Database administration, maintenance and development.  Provide end of fishing season status report incorporating catch and effort data.

Fishery-independent and fishery-dependent surveys  Fishery independent Stock Assessment Surveys (SAS) to be conducted before, mid and toward the end of the fishing season.  Provide interim survey reports after each SAS.  Collation and analysis of fishery-dependent survey data  Provide end of fishing season status report incorporating SAS data  Provide advice on the design of fishery-independent surveys

Harvest Strategies and Real Time Management (RTM)  Provide analysis, advice and assistance to PIRSA and SGWCPFA to determine appropriate harvest strategies  Provide analysis and advice as to the effectiveness of the RTM system (closure management based on biological performance indicators)  Continue development of the electronic data capture process for surveys

Outputs are disseminated in a timely manner to interested parties. These can be readily seen on the SARDI Fisheries website http://www.sardi.sa.gov.au/fisheries/publications/2010_publications, in the form of annual publications. Outputs are also regularly disseminated to the Association through the regular Management Committee meetings, attended by SARDI stock assessment specialists. It is questionable as to whether the SARDI approach can be described as Strategic. The Research Plan is annual delivering the same results from year to year, and does not appear to have evolved greatly, nor

FN 82052 v1 Page 59 does it identify gaps in the research. Of particular concern in the SARDI programme is the lack of regular commitment to by-catch monitoring. These issues represent very significant gaps to the research programme.

However, there is a SGWCPFA research sub-committee with a range of responsibilities related to research prioritisation, project evaluation and other matters, many of which could be interpreted effectively to constitute a research planning function.

The Association‟s Research Committee, with funds derived from industry, decides on research priorities. Details of the process and deliberations can be found on http://www.prawnassociation.com.au/prawns/Research.html .

The Committee‟s research priorities are defined in the Table below. The subjects listed below represent priority areas for attention, against a background of more than 30 listed subject areas.

Table 9: SGWCPFA Primary Research focus Environmental factors that influence growth 1 & 2 Profit maximisation – fleet dynamics 3 Optimal survey strategies – strategic review 4 Timing of capture and surveys 5 Impacts of desalination plant 6 Interactions with TEPS 7 Cost reduction strategies Movement patterns 8 & 9 Maximum / optimum economic yield Prawn health and disease 10 & 11 Co-management / delegated co-management 12 By-catch reduction methods 13 Capacity building 14 Effective effort influences Source: http://www.prawnassociation.com.au/prawns/Research.html

The research sub-committee does maintain and update the list of research priorities.

Research is undertaken on a wide range of issues that underpin implementation of the harvest strategy and other matters sufficient that management can achieve objectives consistent with Principles 1 and 2. Within this programme, there is explicit reference to a strategic approach to research prioritisation, procurement, funding, etc, guided by both economic, but also overall planning needs, which respect compliance with the Management Plan (Hollamby, I11). It is noted that within these research components, ETP interactions and By-catch reduction methods are identified as lower priority needs,. All research Sub Committee Research results are available and disseminated to interested parties. During the assessment visit it was evident that interested stakeholders had ready access to research materials.

Performance Review process

South Australia‟s Fisheries management system is subject to internal and external performance evaluation. PIRSA undertakes its own internal monitoring reviews on the basis of activities defined in the Management Plan. An external assessment report is publically available on the DEWHA website at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl/index.html. The process is such that PIRSA prepares a submission based on the results of work undertaken (PIRSA, 2009), DEWHA responds with recommendations and time lines. A formal report is prepared (DEWHA, 2009a) along

FN 82052 v1 Page 60 with a Minister‟s letter (DEWHA, 2009c) confirming export accreditation. The PIRSA submission is also publically available for comment on the DEWHA website. The Association is consulted on the PIRSA submission and its responses to DEWHA.

SEWPAC‟s sustainability assessments constitute only a partial review of the fishery‟s performance. In particular, those assessments make no attempt to monitor Goal 2 “Ensure optimal utilization and equitable distribution”. Nor do the SEWPAC assessments monitor performance against objectives such as “industry delegated greater responsibility in management” or “costs of management of the fishery are funded by the relevant stakeholders.

PIRSA may also commission independent reviews on specific management plans and strategies (Smallridge, I 2), but no such reviews have been made for the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery.

The Fisheries Council also draws from highly experienced individuals, which will pass judgement and conduct a strategic overview on the plans pre finalisation. The Fisheries Council has become more actively involved in the formulation of management plans, including review of activities to be undertaken (Smallridge I 2).

SARDI operates an internal peer reviews for research reports prior to publication, but no external review is taken of the reports, nor assessment of Research Plans.

There are no formal external review processes of the activities of the Committee at Sea within the co- management framework, nor the performance of the SGWCPFA.

9. OTHER FISHERIES AFFECTING TARGET STOCK

There are no other fisheries targeting prawns in the Spencer Gulf, or taking prawns as a significant by-catch.

10. STANDARD USED

The MSC Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fisheries form the standard against which the fishery is assessed and are organised in terms of three principles. Principle 1 addresses the need to maintain the target stock at a sustainable level; Principle 2 addresses the need to maintain the ecosystem in which the target stock exists, and Principle 3 addresses the need for an effective fishery management system to fulfil Principles 1 and 2 and ensure compliance with national and international regulations. The Principles and their supporting Criteria are presented below.

Principle 1 A fishery must be conducted in a manner that does not lead to over-fishing or depletion of the exploited populations and, for those populations that are depleted, the fishery must be conducted in a manner that demonstrably leads to their recovery. 13:

The intent of this principle is to ensure that the productive capacities of resources are maintained at high levels and are not sacrificed in favour of short term interests. Thus, exploited populations would be maintained at high levels of abundance designed to retain their productivity, provide margins of safety for error and uncertainty, and restore and retain their capacities for yields over the long term.

Criteria:

13 The sequence in which the Principles and Criteria appear does not represent a ranking of their significance, but is rather intended to provide a logical guide to certifiers when assessing a fishery. The criteria by which the MSC Principles will be implemented will be reviewed and revised as appropriate in light of relevant new information, technologies and additional consultations

FN 82052 v1 Page 61

1. The fishery shall be conducted at catch levels that continually maintain the high productivity of the target population(s) and associated ecological community relative to its potential productivity. 2. Where the exploited populations are depleted, the fishery will be executed such that recovery and rebuilding is allowed to occur to a specified level consistent with the precautionary approach and the ability of the populations to produce long-term potential yields within a specified time frame. 3. Fishing is conducted in a manner that does not alter the age or genetic structure or sex composition to a degree that impairs reproductive capacity.

Principle 2 Fishing operations should allow for the maintenance of the structure, productivity, function and diversity of the ecosystem (including habitat and associated dependent and ecologically related species) on which the fishery depends.

The intent of this principle is to encourage the management of fisheries from an ecosystem perspective under a system designed to assess and restrain the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem.

Criteria:

1. The fishery is conducted in a way that maintains natural functional relationships among species and should not lead to trophic cascades or ecosystem state changes.

2. The fishery is conducted in a manner that does not threaten biological diversity at the genetic, species or population levels and avoids or minimises mortality of, or injuries to endangered, threatened or protected species.

3. Where exploited populations are depleted, the fishery will be executed such that recovery and rebuilding is allowed to occur to a specified level within specified time frames, consistent with the precautionary approach and considering the ability of the population to produce long-term potential yields.

Principle 3 The fishery is subject to an effective management system that respects local, national and international laws and standards and incorporates institutional and operational frameworks that require use of the resource to be responsible and sustainable.

The intent of this principle is to ensure that there is an institutional and operational framework for implementing Principles 1 and 2, appropriate to the size and scale of the fishery.

A. Management System Criteria:

1. The fishery shall not be conducted under a controversial unilateral exemption to an international agreement.

The management system shall:

2. Demonstrate clear long-term objectives consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria and contain a consultative process that is transparent and involves all interested and affected parties so as to consider all relevant information, including local knowledge. The impact of fishery management decisions on all those who depend on the fishery for their livelihoods, including, but not confined to subsistence, artisanal, and fishing-dependent communities shall be addressed as part of this process.

FN 82052 v1 Page 62 3. Be appropriate to the cultural context, scale and intensity of the fishery – reflecting specific objectives, incorporating operational criteria, containing procedures for implementation and a process for monitoring and evaluating performance and acting on findings.

4. Observe the legal and customary rights and long-term interests of people dependent on fishing for food and livelihood, in a manner consistent with ecological sustainability.

5. Incorporates an appropriate mechanism for the resolution of disputes arising within the system14.

6. Provide economic and social incentives that contribute to sustainable fishing and shall not operate with subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing.

7. Act in a timely and adaptive fashion on the basis of the best available information using a precautionary approach particularly when dealing with scientific uncertainty.

8. Incorporate a research plan – appropriate to the scale and intensity of the fishery – that addresses the information needs of management and provides for the dissemination of research results to all interested parties in a timely fashion.

9. Require that assessments of the biological status of the resource and impacts of the fishery have been and are periodically conducted.

10. Specify measures and strategies that demonstrably control the degree of exploitation of the resource, including, but not limited to:

a) setting catch levels that will maintain the target population and ecological community‟s high productivity relative to its potential productivity, and account for the non-target species (or size, age, sex) captured and landed in association with, or as a consequence of, fishing for target species; b) identifying appropriate fishing methods that minimise adverse impacts on habitat, especially in critical or sensitive zones such as spawning and nursery areas; c) providing for the recovery and rebuilding of depleted fish populations to specified levels within specified time frames; d) mechanisms in place to limit or close fisheries when designated catch limits are reached; e) establishing no-take zones where appropriate. 11. Contains appropriate procedures for effective compliance, monitoring, control, surveillance and enforcement which ensure that established limits to exploitation are not exceeded and specifies corrective actions to be taken in the event that they are.

B. Operational Criteria

Fishing operation shall:

12. Make use of fishing gear and practices designed to avoid the capture of non-target species (and non-target size, age, and/or sex of the target species); minimise mortality of this catch where it cannot be avoided, and reduce discards of what cannot be released alive.

13. Implement appropriate fishing methods designed to minimise adverse impacts on habitat, especially in critical or sensitive zones such as spawning and nursery areas.

14. Not use destructive fishing practices such as fishing with poisons or explosives;

14 Outstanding disputes of substantial magnitude involving a significant number of interests will normally disqualify a fishery from certification.

FN 82052 v1 Page 63

15. Minimise operational waste such as lost fishing gear, oil spills, on-board spoilage of catch etc.

16. Be conducted in compliance with the fishery management system and all legal and administrative requirements.

17. Assist and co-operate with management authorities in the collection of catch, discard, and other information of importance to effective management of the resources and the fishery.

11. BACKGROUND TO THE EVALUATION

Evaluation Team

1. Mr. Richard Banks Lead assessor, Fisheries management and governance specialist under Principle 3

Richard Banks is a fisheries management specialist with international experience in many industrial and artisanal fisheries. An economist by training, he has 28 years experience in Government, industry and consultancy. He is an experienced policy and institutional specialist having worked for international organizations ADB, FAO and World Bank in a number of Asian Pacific, African and European countries. His technical expertise has included working with Fishery Departments to refine policy, design results-based activities and upgrade institutional structures to implement change. Richard has also undertaken a series of evaluations into the efficiencies of MCS systems including best practice in observer deployment, risk analysis and co-management.

Richard has undertaken a series of research studies into tropical and temperate shrimp fisheries including the Northern Prawn fishery, Australia, as well as fisheries in India, Mexico, Vietnam, Indonesia, Suriname, Madagascar and USA. More recently Richard was part of a two-person team developing best practice in tropical shrimp trawl management for WWF.

Mr Banks holds a degree in Economics (University of Portsmouth) and a Masters in Agricultural Economics (Imperial College, London). He is based in Queensland, Australia, and is a Director of Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management.

2. Geoff Dews Ecosystem specialist with particular responsibility for assessment under Principles 2

Geoff Dews is a marine environmental management specialist with both academic and practical application of the ecosystem-based management approach. He has formal fisheries technology training (Graduate Diploma Fisheries Technology; Australian Maritime College) and environmental management (Masters Degree in Environmental Management; University of Queensland) with direct experience in commercial prawn fishing. Geoff has worked both in Australia and overseas on projects that involved coastal and offshore resources, all of which involved resource allocation and impacts of fishing and protected area development. He has developed a training course for the University of Queensland in ecosystem-based management and has applied his theory and experience to long-term coastal and inshore projects in the Cook Islands, Maldives and PNG.

Geoff has been a team leader on international and Australian projects that focused on policy and application of off-shore fisheries management (East Timor) and shared catch agreements (Torres Strait).

Geoff has direct experience in the prawn trawl industry as both skipper and partner in a family trawl operation in NSW and Queensland in the 1970s and 1980s and was involved in research into effects of fishing while employed as an ecologist with CSIRO Marine in the 1980-90s.

FN 82052 v1 Page 64

Geoff is a Senior Lecturer (part-time) at the University of Queensland and University of Sunshine Coast and is a consultant to UNEP, NZAID, and World Bank on a number of marine ecosystem projects.

3. Dr. Kevin Stokes Fishery scientist / stock assessment specialist with particular responsibility for assessment under Principles 1

Kevin Stokes is a fisheries management science specialist with wide international experience across a range of fisheries regimes and fisheries types. Kevin has over 25 years experience in fisheries management and fisheries science, having worked for government and industry as well as providing consultancy services to a wide range of international clients. Kevin is experienced in strategic and operational policy, and in science process and governance design, but has specialised experience in the delivery, management and review of fisheries management science. He is experienced in stock assessment and harvest strategy design, evaluation and implementation for a wide range of fish and crustacean stocks.

Kevin participated in the development of the current MSC Fishery Assessment Methodology and has been involved in certification assessment and pre-assessment of a wide range of fisheries/stocks, covering all MSC Principle areas. He has wide experience in assessment and harvest strategy review and delivery of advice in Europe, the USA, New Zealand and Australia.

Kevin holds a degree in Biology and Psychology (University of Stirling) and a PhD in Applied Physics (Strathclyde University, Glasgow). He is based in Wellington, New Zealand, and is the Director of stokes.net.nz Ltd.

Previous certification evaluations

The fishery has not been previously assessed against the MSC standard.

Inspections of the Fishery

Inspection of the fishery focused on the practicalities of fishing operations, the mechanisms and effectiveness of management agencies and the scientific assessment of the fisheries.

Meetings were held as follows. Some of the key issues discussed have been identified for each meeting.

Name Affiliation Date Key Issues Martin Smallridge, PIRSA, SARDI and 6 September, 2010 Fisheries Management: Alice Fistr, Keith SGWCPA Implementation and Planning Rowling, C Dixon, T Ward, G Hooper. K. Hollamby Martin Smallridge PIRSA 7 September, 2010 Governance C Dixon, G SARDI 7 September, 2010 Stock Assessment and Risk Hooper, Mike Based Framework Workshop. Steer, Shane Roberts, Tony Fowler, Kate Rodda Peter Trott WWF 7 September, 2010 Stock assessment, ecosystem interactions and governance Kathryn Warhurst, Conservation Council, 8 September, 2010 Ecosystem interactions and

FN 82052 v1 Page 65 Name Affiliation Date Key Issues Chris Ball, James South Australia Risk Based Framework Brook Workshop Kathryn Warhurst CCSA 8 September, 2010 Governance Neil Carrick Independent scientist 8 September, 2010 Stock Assessment and ecosystem interactions Barry Evans, Tony Spencer Gulf & West 9 September, 2010 Fisheries Management and Lukin, Greg Coast Prawn Risk Based Framework Palmer, Nathan Fishermen‟s Workshop Hood, Karen Association Hollamby Andrew Carr, Mark Fisheries Services 9 September, 2010 Compliance Spencer Nathan Bicknell Ocean Watch Trust 10 September, 2010 By-catch mitigation Jenny Kranz, Greg SGWCPA 10 September, 2010 Observer Programme Palmer Karen Hollamby SGWCPA 10 September, 2010 Governance Kathryn Read SEWPAC 6 October, 2010 DEWHA assessment and syngnathid interactions.

12. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

Stakeholder Consultation

A total of 27 stakeholders were identified and consulted specifically by Moody Marine. Information was also made publicly available at the following stages of the assessment:

Date Purpose Media 15 June, 2010 Announcement of assessment Direct E-mail/letter Notification on MSC website Advertisement in press 15 June, 2010 Notification of Assessment Team Direct E-mail nominees Notification on MSC website 28 June, 2010 Notification of intent to use MSC Direct E-mail FAM Standard Assessment Tree and Notification on MSC website Risk Based Framework 27 July, 2010 Notification of assessment visit and Direct E-mail call for meeting requests Notification on MSC website 6-10 September, Assessment visit Meetings 2010 17 September, 2010 Notification of Proposed Peer Direct E-mail Reviewers Notification on MSC website Notification of Public Draft Report Direct E-mail Notification on MSC website Notification of Final Report Direct E-mail Notification on MSC website

Stakeholder Issues

Stakeholder comments are referred to in the main text above. For specific details see Interview records (Appendix E)

FN 82052 v1 Page 66 13. OBSERVATIONS AND SCORING

Introduction to scoring methodology

The MSC Principles and Criteria set out the requirements of certified fishery. These Principles and Criteria have been developed into a standard (Fishery Assessment Methodology) assessment tree - Performance Indicators and Scoring Guideposts - by the MSC, which is used in this assessment.

The Performance Indicators (PIs) have been released on the MSC website. In order to make the assessment process as clear and transparent as possible, each PI has three associated Scoring Guideposts (SGs) which identify the level of performance necessary to achieve 100, 80 (a pass score), and 60 scores for each Performance Indicator; 100 represents a theoretically ideal level of performance and 60 a measurable shortfall.

For each Performance Indicators, the performance of the fishery is assessed as a „score‟. In order for the fishery to achieve certification, an overall weighted average score of 80 is necessary for each of the three Principles and no Indicator should score less than 60. As it is not considered possible to allocate precise scores, a scoring interval of five is used in evaluations. As this represents a relatively crude level of scoring, average scores for each Principle are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Weights and scores for the Fishery are presented in the scoring table (Appendix A).

14. LIMIT OF IDENTIFICATION OF LANDINGS FROM THE FISHERY

Traceability of product from the sea to the consumer is vital to ensure that the MSC standard is maintained. There are several aspects to traceability that the MSC require to be evaluated: Traceability within the fishery; at-sea processing; at the point of landing; and subsequently the eligibility of product to enter the chain of custody. These requirements are assessed here.

Traceability within the fishery

The point of landing of fish from the certified fishery would be the commencement point for MSC Chain of Custody certification. Prawn sales are discharged in port and sold to a small number of wholesalers and distributors. Product mixing will not take place at sea as the species are from a distinct geographical area. The companies taking the largest volumes are Port Lincoln based: Australian Bight Seafood and Austar. Traceability audits will have to be implemented at all processing companies, who could derive king prawns from two adjacent fisheries, Gulf of St Vincent, and (South Australia) West Coast.

At-sea processing

The product is graded and packed at sea, then frozen.

Points of landing

The extent of the fishery in terms of any future certification will extend to the landing of fish at ports where recording, verification and sampling of landings takes place. This principally applies to the ports of Port Lincoln, Wallaroo, Port Adelaide and Port Pirie.

Eligibility to enter chains of custody

The scope of this certification ends at the points of landing identified above. Downstream

FN 82052 v1 Page 67 certification of the product would require appropriate certification of storage and handling facilities at these locations.

Actual Eligibility date

The Actual eligibility date is 31 March 2011.

15. ASSESSMENT RESULTS

The Performance of the Fishery in relation to MSC Principles 1, 2 and 3 is summarised below:

MSC Principle Fishery Performance Principle 1: Sustainability of Exploited Stock Overall: 83.8

Principle 2: Maintenance of Ecosystem Overall: 81.0

Principle 3: Effective Management System Overall: 87.9

Conditions

As a standard requirement of the MSC certification methodology, the fishery shall be subject to (as a minimum) annual surveillance audits. These audits shall be publicised and reports made publicly available.

The fishery attained a score of below 80 against 7 Performance Indicators. The assessment team has therefore set conditions for continuing certification that the client for certification is required to address. The conditions are applied to improve performance to at least the 80 level within a period set by the certification body but no longer than the term of the certification.

As a standard condition of certification, the client shall develop an 'Action Plan‟ for Meeting the Conditions for Continued Certification', to be approved by Moody Marine.

The conditions are associated with 7 key areas of performance of the fishery. The Conditions, associated timescales and relevant Scoring Indicator are set out below.

Table 10: Conditions for the Spencer Gulf Shrimp Trawl Fishery

Condition 1 Outcome 1.1.2 Limit and target reference points PI Limit and target reference points are appropriate for the stock. SG60  Generic limit and target reference points are based on justifiable and reasonable practice appropriate for the species category. SG80  Reference points are appropriate for the stock and can be estimated.  The limit reference point is set above the level at which there is an appreciable risk of impairing reproductive capacity.

FN 82052 v1 Page 68  The target reference point is such that the stock is maintained at a level consistent with BMSY or some measure or surrogate with similar intent or outcome.  For low trophic level species, the target reference point takes into account the ecological role of the stock. SG100  Reference points are appropriate for the stock and can be estimated  The limit reference point is set above the level at which there is an appreciable risk of impairing reproductive capacity following consideration of relevant precautionary  The target reference point is such that the stock is maintained at a level consistent with BMSY or some measure or surrogate with similar intent or outcome, or a higher level, and takes into account relevant precautionary issues such as the ecological role of the stock with a high degree of certainty. Scoring 75 Rationale Requires a clear explanation of the use of reference points and triggered actions, associated with the definitions required in the MSC FAM Condition 1 The Management Plan (PIRSA, 2007) is complex and the target and limit relevant to scoring P1.1.2 is implicit rather than explicit. The Management Plan is to be replaced by a new plan in 2013 and development of that new plan is already underway. As a Condition of certification, a clear explanation of the use of reference points and triggered actions clearly linked to the requirements for limits and targets in the FAM P1.1.2, should be prepared and agreed for inclusion in the new Management Plan. Limits and targets adopted in the new Management Plan should explicitly consider the role of prawns in the SG ecosystem. It is noted that this condition could be approached in a number of ways. For example, a clear articulation of the relationship between the management strategy and MSC PI 1.1.2 might suffice. Alternatively, either a stock assessment (to estimate Bmsy) or management strategy evaluation (to demonstrate expected output performance) could be carried out.

The client is required by the first surveillance to provide a plan for necessary work in support of this condition with a clear outline of the approach to be taken. The plan should be implemented by the second annual surveillance audit. Further, it is required that by 3 years after certification is granted, work will be completed sufficient to ensure clarity as to the targets and limits set and to provide confidence that they explicitly or implicitly meet PI 1.1.2 requirements at the 80 scoring level or better. Client action The Client Action Plan is shown in Section 15.5 plan Consultation PIRSA, on behalf of all Government stakeholders, including SARDI was consulted, and on condition confrirmation of this is shown in Section 15.5.

Condition 2 Outcome 2.3.3 PI Relevant information is collected to support the management of fishery impacts on ETP species, including: - information for the development of the management strategy; - information to assess the effectiveness of the management strategy; and - information to determine the outcome status of ETP species. SG60  Information is adequate to broadly understand the impact of the fishery on ETP species.  Information is adequate to support measures to manage the impacts on ETP species  Information is sufficient to qualitatively estimate the fishery related mortality of ETP species. SG80  Information is sufficient to determine whether the fishery may be a threat to protection and recovery of the ETP species, and if so, to measure trends and support a full strategy to manage impacts.  Sufficient data are available to allow fishery related mortality and the impact of fishing to be quantitatively estimated for ETP species. SG100  Information is sufficient to quantitatively estimate outcome status with a high degree of certainty.  Information is adequate to support a comprehensive strategy to manage impacts,

FN 82052 v1 Page 69 minimize mortality and injury of ETP species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving its objectives.  Accurate and verifiable information is available on the magnitude of all impacts, mortalities and injuries and the consequences for the status of ETP species Scoring 70 Rationale An increase in the quality of information presently available to allow quantitative assessment of the distribution, injuries and mortality of trawled syngnathids Condition 2 The Condition is to strengthen the monitoring and reporting processes for ETP interactions:  Logbooks must contain explicit reference to Syngnathid species and other ETP species, indicating the state (dead, damaged or released alive);  Independent trawl surveys conducted generally in November, February and April, to include data on the seasonal distribution and abundance of syngnathids, or any other ETP in trawled areas  The distribution and abundance of ETPs in areas outside the trawl areas should be determined through independent surveys to develop an understanding of the success or otherwise of mitigation measures that are in place.

The strategy to achieve this should be in place by the first annual surveillance audit. The results should be incorporated into an annual by-catch report, commencing from the second annual review onwards, which will be made available for public scrutiny, and used to assist the development of additional management mitigation measures, if deemed appropriate. Evidence that this condition has been implemented, will be required by the second annual review. Client action The Client Action Plan is shown in Section 15.5 plan Consultation PIRSA, on behalf of all Government stakeholders, including SARDI was consulted, and on condition confrirmation of this is shown in Section 15.5.

Outcome 2.4.3 PI Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to habitat types by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on habitat types. SG60  There is a basic understanding of the types and distribution of main habitats in the area of the fishery.  Information is adequate to broadly understand the nature of the main impacts of gear use on the main habitats, including spatial overlap of habitat with fishing gear SG80  The nature, distribution and vulnerability of all main habitat types in the fishery area are known at a level of detail relevant to the scale and intensity of the fishery.  Sufficient data are available to allow the nature of the impacts of the fishery on habitat types to be identified and there is reliable information on the spatial extent of interaction, and the timing and location of use of the fishing gear.  Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk to habitat (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the measures). SG100  The distribution of habitat types is known over their range, with particular attention to the occurrence of vulnerable habitat types.  Changes in habitat distributions over time are measured.  The physical impacts of the gear on the habitat types have been quantified fully. Scoring 75 Rationale An increase in the quality of information presently available to allow for continuous assessment of the spatial extent of benthic interactions, so to confirm the status of existing habitats, and to monitor change inside and outside trawled zones. Condition 3 The Condition is to strengthen the information available to allow any detection of an increase in risk to habitat as a result of fishing or other exogenous environmental variables, within the Gulf. The outputs will require the following levels of analysis:

FN 82052 v1 Page 70  Detailed presentation of existing habitat maps to allow for accurate assessment as to the spatial distribution of the types of habitats that are trawled and to assess the habitats that support key species in order to monitor changes in habits conditions and associated elements that may be creating cumulative impacts.  Continuous monitoring the information from logbooks and independent surveys will also verify the distribution and abundance of benthic species to assess the actions of spatial and temporal management decisions.

A detailed plan to achieve this should be in place at the first annual surveillance audit. The results of benthic interactions will be incorporated into an annual bycatch report, commencing from the second annual review onwards, which will be made available for public scrutiny, and used to assist the development of additional management mitigation measures, if deemed appropriate. Evidence that this condition has been implemented, will be required by the second annual review Client action The Client Action Plan is shown in Section 15.5 plan Consultation PIRSA, on behalf of all Government stakeholders, including SARDI was consulted, and on condition confrirmation of this is shown in Section 15.5.

Outcome 2.5.3 PI Information / monitoring: There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem. SG60  Information is adequate to identify the key elements of the ecosystem (e.g. trophic structure and function, community composition, productivity pattern and biodiversity).  Main impacts of the fishery on these key ecosystem elements can be inferred from existing information, but have not been investigated in detail. SG80  Information is adequate to broadly understand the key elements of the ecosystem.  Main impacts of the fishery on these key ecosystem elements can be inferred from existing information, but may not have been investigated in detail.  The main functions of the Components (i.e. target, Bycatch, Retained and ETP species and Habitats) in the ecosystem are known.  Sufficient information is available on the impacts of the fishery on these Components to allow some of the main consequences for the ecosystem to be inferred.  Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk level (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the measures). SG100  The impacts of the fishery on target, Bycatch, Retained and ETP species and Habitats are identified and the main functions of these Components in the ecosystem are understood.  Sufficient information is available on the impacts of the fishery on the Components and elements to allow the main consequences for the ecosystem to be inferred.  Information is sufficient to support the development of strategies to manage ecosystem impacts. Scoring 75 Rationale To allow assessment on ecosystem impacts resulting from the implementation of the measures contained within the management strategy Condition 4 Based on the outputs from Condition 2 and 3, and Recommendation 3, continuous information should be collected in order to detect the ecosystem outcomes management measures implemented under the management strategy, once in full operation. A detailed plan to achieve this should be in place at the first annual surveillance audit. The information should be presented in the annual by-catch report (from second surveillance onwards), identifying any possible risks to the trophic balance. Evidence that this condition has been implemented, will be required by the second annual review (expected 2013). Client action The Client Action Plan is shown in Section 15.5 plan

FN 82052 v1 Page 71 Consultation PIRSA, on behalf of all Government stakeholders, including SARDI was consulted, and on condition confrirmation of this is shown in Section 15.5.

Outcome 3.1.2: Consultation roles and responsibilities PI The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to interested and affected parties.

The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant parties. SG60  Organisations and individuals involved in the management process have been identified. Functions, roles and responsibilities are generally understood.  The management system includes consultation processes that obtain relevant information from the main affected parties, including local knowledge, to inform the management system used SG80  Organisations and individuals involved in the management process have been identified. Functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and well understood for key areas of responsibility and interaction.  The management system includes consultation processes that regularly seek and accept relevant information, including local knowledge. The management system demonstrates consideration of the information obtained.  The consultation process provides opportunity for all interested and affected parties to be involved. SG100  Organisations and individuals involved in the management process have been identified. Functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and well understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction  The management system includes consultation processes that regularly seek and accept relevant information, including local knowledge. The management system demonstrates consideration of the information and explains how it is used or not  The consultation process provides opportunity and encouragement for all interested and affected parties to be involved, and facilitates their effective engagement. Scoring 75 Rationale PIRSA to improve participation of external stakeholders (i.e. eNGOs) in the formulation of management decisions affecting ecosystem based management, consistent with the strategies outlined in the Hollamby report. Examples of improved participation must relate to eNGO participation in risk assessments and input into the formulation of bycatch mitigation strategies. The position of the CCSA on the SGWCPFA Research Committee should be formalised. Evidence that this process is taking place must be introduced by the first surveillance audit (2012). Condition 5 PIRSA to improve participation of external stakeholders (i.e. environmental NGOs) in the formulation of management decisions affecting ecosystem based management, consistent with the strategies outlined in the Hollamby report. Examples of improved participation must relate to eNGO participation in risk assessments and input into the formulation of bycatch mitigation strategies. The position of an environmental eNGO on the SGWCPFA Research Committee should be formalised. Evidence that this process is taking place must be introduced by the first surveillance audit (2012). Client action The Client Action Plan is shown in Section 15.5 plan Consultation PIRSA, on behalf of all Government stakeholders, including SARDI was consulted, and on condition confrirmation of this is shown in Section 15.5.

FN 82052 v1 Page 72

Outcome 3.2.4: Research plan

PI The fishery has a research plan that addresses the information needs of management. SG60  Research is undertaken, as required, to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2.  Research results are available to interested parties. SG80  A research plan provides the management system with a strategic approach to research and reliable and timely information sufficient to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2.  Research results are disseminated to all interested parties in a timely fashion. SG100  A comprehensive research plan provides the management system with a coherent and strategic approach to research across P1, P2 and P3, and reliable and timely information sufficient to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2.  Research plan and results are disseminated to all interested parties in a timely fashion and are widely and publicly available. Scoring 75

Rationale No strategic action plan in place Condition 6 A Research Plan is required to clearly outline the strategically important activities as appropriate to achieving fishery-specific and ecosystem-orientated research outputs consistent with the management plan. A strategic research plan should be formulated in agreement with all the important stakeholders to be implemented as from the start of the New Management Plan (2013), and reviewed biannually. Client action The Client Action Plan is shown in Section 15.5 plan Consultation PIRSA, on behalf of all Government stakeholders, including SARDI was consulted, and on condition confrirmation of this is shown in Section 15.5.

Outcome 3.2.5: Monitoring and management performance evaluation PI There is a system for monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives.

There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system. SG60  The fishery has in place mechanisms to evaluate some parts of the management system and is subject to occasional internal review. SG80  The fishery has in place mechanisms to evaluate key parts of the management system and is subject to regular internal and occasional external review. SG100  The fishery has in place mechanisms to evaluate all parts of the management system and is subject to regular internal and external review. Scoring 75

Rationale SARDI research and the SGWCPFA Research Committee activities are not subject to external review. This is a key part of the management system. Condition 7 SARDI and the SGWCPFA Research Plans and their outputs are subject to independent external review once formulated. In addition, the performance of the Management Plan should be subject to an annual internal review and occasional external review. The external review will have been completed by the fourth surveillance audit (2015). Client action The Client Action Plan is shown in Section 15.5 plan Consultation PIRSA, on behalf of all Government stakeholders, including SARDI was consulted, and

FN 82052 v1 Page 73 on condition confrirmation of this is shown in Section 15.5.

Recommendations

In addition to the above, a number of non-binding recommended actions are also made by the assessors.

Recommendation 1: The design of the Stock Assessment Surveys and consequent interpretability should be tested. SG 1.2.3: (80) A comprehensive range of information (on stock structure, stock productivity, fleet composition, stock abundance, fishery removals and other information such as environmental information), including some that may not be directly relevant to the current harvest strategy, is available (100). Suggested Actions: SARDI to have an independent evaluation of the design of Spencer Gulf Prawn Stock Assessment Surveys, and for recommended changes to be implemented and tested.

Recommendation 2: Undertake CPUE standardisation to better understand the utility or otherwise of CPUE in future Management Plans and also within possible future assessment processes (e.g. production modelling to estimate Bmsy). SG 1.2.3: (80) A comprehensive range of information (on stock structure, stock productivity, fleet composition, stock abundance, fishery removals and other information such as environmental information), including some that may not be directly relevant to the current harvest strategy, is available (100). Suggested Actions: SARDI to incorporate CPUE standardisation for the purpose of strengthening stock assessment modelling.

Recommendation 3: To increase the precision in monitoring the information on retained and by-catch species, utilising November, February and April surveys, and implement a comprehensive system of observer recording of the discard species and by-catch rates through these preseason surveys and during fishing operations. SG 2.1.3: (80). Information is adequate to support a comprehensive strategy to manage retained species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective (100) SG 2.2.3 (80) Information is adequate to support a comprehensive strategy to manage by-catch, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving its objective.(100) Suggested Actions: SARDI to improve in the reporting of information presently available on retained and by-catch species.

Recommendation 4:.To ensure that there are comprehensive bycatch and benthic habitat strategies are in place by 2012 SG 2.2.2: (85). There is a strategy in place for managing and minimising by-catch. (100) SG 2.4.2: (80). There is a strategy in place for managing the impact of the fishery on habitat types.(100) Suggested Actions: Completion of the Management Plan according to the timelines set

Recommendation 5: National guidelines set to determine levels of vulnerability status of ETP species SG 2.3.1: (80). There is a high degree of certainty that the effects of the fishery are within limits of national and international requirements for protection of ETP species. (100) Suggested Actions: SEWPAC to establish vulnerability levels for Syngnathids based on species groups and habitat dependencies and likely interaction and survival with benthic prawn trawls.

FN 82052 v1 Page 74

16. APPENDICES

Appendix A: Scoring

FN 82052 v1 Page 75 Scoring worksheet - MSC Fishery Assessment Methodology - Default Assessment Tree - Version 2 - 31 July 2009

Note: Scores are to be entered in the green-shaded cells in column K Columns G, H and L apply in fisheries where the stock rebuilding PI (1.1.3) is NOT triggered Columns I, J and M give the Principle 1 Outcome score contributions in fisheries where the stock rebuilding PI (1.1.3) is triggered

Prin- Wt Component Wt PI Performance Indicator (PI) Wt Weight ciple (L1) (L2) No. (L3) in Contribution to Principle Score Principle Score Either Or Either Or One 1 Outcome 0.5 1.1.1 Stock status 0.5 0.25 0.333 0.1667 100 25.00 16.67 1.1.2 Reference points 0.5 0.25 0.333 0.1667 75 18.75 12.50 1.1.3 Stock rebuilding 0.333 0.1667 0.00 Management 0.5 1.2.1 Harvest strategy 0.25 0.125 80 10.00 10.00 1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools 0.25 0.125 80 10.00 10.00 1.2.3 Information & monitoring 0.25 0.125 80 10.00 10.00 1.2.4 Assessment of stock status 0.25 0.125 80 10.00 10.00 Two 1 Retained species 0.2 2.1.1 Outcome 0.333 0.0667 85 5.67 5.67 2.1.2 Management 0.333 0.0667 85 5.67 5.67 2.1.3 Information 0.333 0.0667 80 5.33 5.33 Bycatch species 0.2 2.2.1 Outcome 0.333 0.0667 90 6.00 6.00 2.2.2 Management 0.333 0.0667 85 5.67 5.67 2.2.3 Information 0.333 0.0667 80 5.33 5.33 ETP species 0.2 2.3.1 Outcome 0.333 0.0667 90 6.00 6.00 2.3.2 Management 0.333 0.0667 80 5.33 5.33 2.3.3 Information 0.333 0.0667 70 4.67 4.67 Habitats 0.2 2.4.1 Outcome 0.333 0.0667 80 5.33 5.33 2.4.2 Management 0.333 0.0667 80 5.33 5.33 2.4.3 Information 0.333 0.0667 75 5.00 5.00 Ecosystem 0.2 2.5.1 Outcome 0.333 0.0667 80 5.33 5.33 2.5.2 Management 0.333 0.0667 80 5.33 5.33 2.5.3 Information 0.333 0.0667 75 5.00 5.00 Three 1 Governance and 0.5 3.1.1 Legal & customary framework 0.25 0.125 100 12.50 policy 3.1.2 Consultation, roles & responsibilities 0.25 0.125 75 9.38

FN 82052 v1 Page 76 3.1.3 Long term objectives 0.25 0.125 100 12.50 3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishing 0.25 0.125 100 12.50 Fishery specific 0.5 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives 0.2 0.1 100 10.00 management 3.2.2 Decision making processes 0.2 system 0.1 80 8.00 3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement 0.2 0.1 100 10.00 3.2.4 Research plan 0.2 0.1 70 7.00 Management performance 0.2 3.2.5 evaluation 0.1 60 6.00

Overall weighted Principle-level scores Either Or Principle 1 - Target species Stock rebuilding PI not scored 83.8 Principle 2 - Ecosystem 81.0 Principle 3 – Management 87.9

FN 82052 v1 Page 77

Appendix B: Scoring Table

Scoring Table

FN 82052 v1 Page 78

1.1 Management Outcomes:

1.1.1 Stock Status: The stock is It is likely that the stock is above the point It is highly likely that the stock is above the There is a high degree of certainty that the at a level which maintains where recruitment would be impaired. point where recruitment would be impaired. stock is above the point where recruitment high productivity and has a would be impaired. low probability of recruitment overfishing The stock is at or fluctuating around its target There is a high degree of certainty that the reference point. stock has been fluctuating around its target reference point, or has been above its target reference point, over recent years.

Scoring Comments Catches have remained stable for 40 years with only two notable reductions (1987/88 and 2002/03) following high early season (November/December) catches (Hooper and Roberts, 2009). There is a strong relationship between early season catches and recruitment of prawns to the later seasons and the following year (Cam Dixon pers. comm. to James et al, 2010), with later season reductions occurring only after early season catches well in excess of the limits set for conservative or standard harvest strategies (PIRSA, 2007). Generally, all indications (catch, survey catch rates in all seasons, consistent size class proportions, reducing nominal effort, etc) give a high degree of confidence that a) the stock has been fluctuating around a highly productive level for a number of years and b) is at a level well above that where recruitment might be impaired. Score: 100 All indicators (catch, survey catch rates in all seasons, consistent size class proportions, reducing nominal effort, etc) suggest with a high degree of certainty that in recent years the stock has fluctuated around a highly productive level consistent with Bmsy or better (see P1.1.2), and resulting from constrained early season catches and targeting of smaller prawns, and as evidenced by continuing good catch and catch rates, been maintained above a point where recruitment might be impaired, again with a high degree of certainty (100) Audit Trace References Workshops: SARDI (I3), SGWCPFA (I7)

Dixon, C.D. (2010). Presentation during site visit to SARDI, Tuesday 7th September 2010

Hooper, G.E. and S.D. Roberts (2009) Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Status Report 2009. SARDI Research Report Series No 403.

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

FN 82105 v3 Page 79 79

1.1.2 Reference Points: Limit Generic limit and target reference points are Reference points are appropriate for the stock and target reference points based on justifiable and reasonable practice and can be estimated. are appropriate for the appropriate for the species category. stock. The limit reference point is set above the level The limit reference point is set above the level at which there is an appreciable risk of at which there is an appreciable risk of impairing reproductive capacity. impairing reproductive capacity following consideration of relevant precautionary issues.

The target reference point is such that the stock The target reference point is such that the stock is maintained at a level consistent with BMSY or is maintained at a level consistent with BMSY or some measure or surrogate with similar intent some measure or surrogate with similar intent or outcome. or outcome, or a higher level, and takes into account relevant precautionary issues such as the ecological role of the stock with a high degree of certainty.

For low trophic level species, the target reference point takes into account the ecological role of the stock.

Scoring Comments A suite of reference points, outlined in the SG Prawn Management Plan (PIRSA, 2007), are used to guide management and performance measurement. However, directestimation of Bmsy has been problematic, with previous attempts leading to unrealistically high estimates of MSY (N Carrick and C Dixon pers. comm.). This is not surprising given likely problems with CPUE interpretation. Notwithstanding, the suite of reference points are interpreted to i) relate implicitly to maintaining the stock at a level consistent with Bmsy, and ii) providing limits and constraints sufficient to ensure that there is no appreciable risk of impaired reproductive capacity.

The suite of reference points is complex and the details are most properly considered at P1.2 where the empirical harvest strategy is considered. In order to interpret the Management Plan provisions and reference points in P1.1.2 terms it is, however, necessary to consider some of the specifics here. The full set of reference points include a wide range of in-season and annual measures which are used to guide annual harvest strategy setting and in-season, adaptive management. Some, not all, of these need to be considered in defining the implicit target biomass and limits, as well as evaluating the historical performance and structure of the fishery at P1.1.1.

The fishery has been exploited since the mid/late 1960s and annual catches have fluctuated around 2,000 t, without trend, since 1973/74. In the history of the fishery, catches have only fallen below 1,500 t when the pre-Christmas (i.e. November/December) catches in the previous season have exceeded 500 t (Dixon et al, 2009; Hooper and Roberts, 2009; also presentation by C Dixon, SARDI, during site visit). Generally, pre-Christmas catches have been much lower and in all years, even following those with low overall catch, subsequent recruitment and annual catches have been good (e.g. 1987/88, 2002/03). Pre-Christmas catches in recent years have concentrated on smaller prawns and have been focused away from spawning sized prawns, providing a high degree of protection for in-season spawning biomass. A November Stock Assessment Survey (SAS) has fluctuated without trend since 1993/94 with an average catch rate of 100 kg/h (C Dixon presentation). Surveys conducted in February and April also show non-trending patterns, and size structure of catches and in surveys also shows no trends or signals of concern. All indications, therefore, are that the stock has fluctuated around a highly productive level consistent with Bmsy or better.

FN 82105 v3 Page 80 80

As the three annual SAS average catch rates are considered to be consistent with Bmsy or better, it is reasonable to consider limits based on those levels. The Management Plan contains four limits of relevance to the limit required for MSC scoring at P1.1.2: 1) a lower catch rate of 10kg/h for 20+ grade prawns (effectively an index of annual recruitment) in the November SAS used to trigger a conservative pre-Christmas harvest strategy (limiting total catch to a level below that associated historically with recruitment impairment); 2) a lower total catch rate of 95 kg/h (compared to an average of 100 kg/h, conceptually indexing Bmsy) in the November SAS used to trigger a conservative harvest strategy even if the recruitment index does not; 3) lower catch rates for 20+ grade prawns and total catch in each of the February and April SAS set at high percentages of their respective averages and used to trigger in-season restrictions on catches; and 4) an annual recruitment index which individually or in combinations with other annual PIs would trigger review processes as set out in PIRSA (2007).

The set of indicators and measures variously provide indications of stock size and recruitment which determine management responses to ensure spawning potential is protected. The extensive set of reference points used to monitor the stock and fishery, and to judge annual performance, can be interpreted to provide an implicit target at or better than Bmsy. The range of specific indicators can similarly be interpreted to constitute, individually and jointly, a valid limit reference point. All measures and reference points can be and are measured on a regular basis. Although there is no explicit account taken of uncertainty in stock dynamics and reference point measurement, the use of a wide set of reference points provides a means of defending against annual uncertainty in estimation and application. Score: 75 The suite of reference points used is appropriate for the stock and all indicators are measured directly (80).

The implicit limit is well above the level at which reproductive capacity might be impaired. There is good empirical evidence that recruitment has been maintained when early season catches have been higher than the current maximum allowable pre-season catch (80).

The implicit target stock size, sufficient to maintain annual catches, high catch rates and a good size distribution of prawns, is highly likely to be at or above Bmsy. The measures used here are considered to have a similar intent and outcome as Bmsy, and will maintain the high productivity of the stock and is a level well above the point at which recruitment could be impaired (80).

There is no explicit consideration of the ecological role of prawns in the SG ecosystem (60).

A Condition (C 1) is set for this SG (Section 15.2) Audit Trace Reference Dixon, C.D. (2010). Presentation during site visit to SARDI, Tuesday 7th September 2010

Dixon, C.D., Hooper, G.E. and S.D. Roberts (2009). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery 2007/08: Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries. SARDI Research Report Series No 387.

Hooper, G.E. and S.D. Roberts (2009) Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Status Report 2009. SARDI Research Report Series No 403.

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

FN 82105 v3 Page 81 81

1.1.3 Stock Rebuilding: Where Where stocks are depleted rebuilding strategies Where stocks are depleted rebuilding strategies Where stocks are depleted, strategies are the stock is depleted, there which have a reasonable expectation of are in place. demonstrated to be rebuilding stocks is evidence of stock success are in place. continuously and there is strong evidence that rebuilding. rebuilding will be complete within the shortest practicable timeframe. Monitoring is in place to determine whether There is evidence that they are rebuilding they are effective in rebuilding the stock within stocks, or it is highly likely based on a specified timeframe. simulation modelling or previous performance that they will be able to rebuild the stock within a specified timeframe.

Scoring Comments N/A Score: < >

Audit Trace References

FN 82105 v3 Page 82 82

1.2 Harvest Strategy (management)

1.2.1 Harvest Strategy: There is The harvest strategy is expected to achieve The harvest strategy is responsive to the state The harvest strategy is responsive to the state a robust and precautionary stock management objectives reflected in the of the stock and the elements of the harvest of the stock and is designed to achieve stock harvest strategy in place target and limit reference points. strategy work together towards achieving management objectives reflected in the target management objectives reflected in the target and limit reference points. and limit reference points.

The harvest strategy is likely to work based on The harvest strategy may not have been fully The performance of the harvest strategy has prior experience or plausible argument. tested but monitoring is in place and evidence been fully evaluated and evidence exists to exists that it is achieving its objectives. show that it is achieving its objectives including being clearly able to maintain stocks at target levels.

Monitoring is in place that is expected to The harvest strategy is periodically reviewed determine whether the harvest strategy is and improved as necessary. working.

Scoring Comments The harvest strategy is laid out in the Management Plan (PIRSA, 2007). The strategy is the combination of the various rules and actions (considered under P1.2.2) and the information flows that enable implementation of those rules and actions (considered under P1.2.3). In addition, it includes „break out‟ provisions in the form of performance indicators and specified actions.

Generally, the harvest strategy appears to be robust, as evidenced by the continued health and productivity of the fishery, and it is precautionary in that a hierarchical approach is taken that always results in increasing constraints should indicators suggest the need to reduce exploitation rate. The harvest strategy is comprehensive and designed to ensure that in-season production can be well-utilsed as well as ensuring future recruitment to maintain the stock and fishery.

The Current strategy has only formally been in place since 2007. Score: 80 The harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the stock with start-of-season and in-season rules and actions triggered by a range of indicators (see P1.2.2). These indicators, relying on a wide range of information flows (see P1.2.3), together with annual performance indicators designed to trigger reviews if necessary, work together to achieve implicit target and limit points. In theabsence of explicit target and limit reference points (see P1.1.2) it is not possible to say that the harvest strategy is designed to achieve objectives reflected in reference points (80).

The strategy has not been fully evaluated (e.g. using MSE). It is, however, subject to intensive monitoring (with active feedback) and all evidence suggests it is effective (80).

The Current strategy has only formally been in place since 2007. There is no formal review procedure but it is currently planned that a new Management Plan will be put in place by late 2012 (80). Audit Trace References FN 82105 v3 Page 83 83

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

FN 82105 v3 Page 84 84

1.2.2 Harvest control rules and Generally understood harvest control rules are Well defined harvest control rules are in place tools: There are well in place that are consistent with the harvest that are consistent with the harvest strategy and defined and effective strategy and which act to reduce the ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as harvest control rules in exploitation rate as limit reference points are limit reference points are approached. place approached.

There is some evidence that tools used to The selection of the harvest control rules takes The design of the harvest control rules take implement harvest control rules are appropriate into account the main uncertainties. into account a wide range of uncertainties. and effective in controlling exploitation.

Available evidence indicates that the tools in Evidence clearly shows that the tools in use are use are appropriate and effective in achieving effective in achieving the exploitation levels the exploitation levels required under the required under the harvest control rules. harvest control rules

Scoring Comments The FAM Glossary defines Harvest Control Rules (HCR) as a set of well defined pre-agreed rules or actions used for determining a management action in response to changes in indicators of stock status with respect to reference points. The FAM Guidance makes clear that this PI should be applied as an assessment of the HCR and management tools to control exploitation of the stock (FAM 6.3.7) and that HCR and/or management tools need to be based on plausible hypotheses about resource dynamics and be reasonable and practical (FAM 6.38).

The SG Prawn Management Plan (PIRSA, 2007) provides a comprehensive set of indicators and reference points which guide early season (pre-Christmas) output controls (as conservative, standard or increasing strategies) and seasonal and within-season restrictions and specifications for adaptive management (primarily real- time closures and changes to permitted fishing areas). The set of indicators and reference points includes the use of three annual surveys, considering both total and pre-recruit indices, mean size of prawns in the catch, and nightly average vessel catches. The main strategy is to ensure sufficient recruitment to underpin through- season and future year catches of large prawns. The range of indicators and reference points, and triggered actions, are fully documented and are well defined. Jointly, they are well designed to control total exploitation and exploitation of young prawns. In addition to the indicators and reference points used to guide specified actions, there is also a set of annual performance indicators for the fishery which is used to monitor overall performance and to trigger a well specified review process which could lead to additional management measures.

The implementation of the seasonal and in-season actions is organised through the Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Inc Management Committee and its Committee at Sea sub-committee. The implemented real-time decisions and actions, following the Management Plan indicators and reference points, are given strength through ongoing gazettal (e.g. of changes to spatial restrictions) by the management authority, PIRSA. Score: 80 The indicators, reference points and triggered actions (seasonal and within season) are well defined in the Management Plan and are aimed at ensuring exploitation rate is managed to maintain in-season and future recruitment. Exploitation rate is reduced to ensure future recruitment using a combination of early season catch limits

FN 82105 v3 Page 85 85 combined with spatial exclusion and through-season restrictions on spatial and temporal extent of fishing, triggered by fishery independent and fishery dependent catch rates and size structure (80).

The effects of uncertainties in information are guarded against by the use of a very extensive set of indicators and reference points to guide actions, as well as additional rules to ensure actions are taken if reference points are breached sequentially. Overall, therefore, the control rules as a set effectively ensure main uncertainties are dealt with practically (80).

The tools and specified actions have been in use since implementation of the existing Management Plan in 2007. Previous indicators, reference points and actions were less extensive and less well defined (under the previous Management Plan that operated from 1998 to 2006). Nevertheless, fishery performance and stock status was good throughout those years. Since 2007, all indications are good. Overall, there appears to be sufficient evidence to indicate that the harvest control rules are appropriate and effective (80). Audit Trace References PIRSA (2007). The South Australian Fisheries Management Series Paper number 54: Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery.

SGWCPFA (1984). Constitution of the Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Inc.

SGWCPFA (2009). The Committee At Sea Charter.

SGWCPFA (2010a). Charter – Research Sub-Committee, Approved by the Research Sub-Committee 24 May 2010.

FN 82105 v3 Page 86 86

1.2.3 Information / Some relevant information related to stock Sufficient relevant information related to stock A comprehensive range of information (on monitoring: Relevant structure, stock productivity and fleet structure, stock productivity, fleet composition stock structure, stock productivity, fleet information is collected to composition is available to support the harvest and other data is available to support the composition, stock abundance, fishery support the harvest strategy. harvest strategy. removals and other information such as strategy environmental information), including some that may not be directly relevant to the current harvest strategy, is available.

Stock abundance and fishery removals are Stock abundance and fishery removals are All information required by the harvest control monitored and at least one indicator is regularly monitored at a level of accuracy and rule is monitored with high frequency and a available and monitored with sufficient coverage consistent with the harvest control high degree of certainty, and there is a good frequency to support the harvest control rule. rule, and one or more indicators are available understanding of the inherent uncertainties in and monitored with sufficient frequency to the information [data] and the robustness of support the harvest control rule. assessment and management to this uncertainty.

There is good information on all other fishery removals from the stock.

Scoring Comments A range of information is available on stock structure and productivity (growth, fecundity, etc). There is extensive information on fleet composition and fishing activities. Environmental and habitat information is sufficient though not extensive. The stock assessment reports (e.g. Dixon et al, 2009) and status reports (e.g. Hooper and Roberts, 2009) provide a good overview of the available information.

Fishery removals are well monitored using mandatory reporting forms (South Australian Western King Prawn Daily Fishing Logbook Form). The daily fishing logbook contains detailed information on each tow, including start and finish time, depth, latitude and longitude and catch of prawns. Details of the size grades are given daily, as are total daily catches of byproduct species. The level and accuracy of reporting is sufficient to provide a range of indicators to guide management decision making, seasonally and adaptively. The reporting provides information consistent with the harvest control rule requirements. There is a high degree of certainty as to the reported information as processing (cooking, size grading, freezing and packaging) all take place onboard, leading to detailed and accurate weight and size category recording which can also be verified against unloading information (South Australian Western King Prawn Fishing Unloading Form). There are no unaccounted removals.

In addition to directly captured data, the Management Plan also requires Stock Assessment Surveys (SAS) and CPUE inputs. Various key in-season reference points are derived from the SAS while CPUE is used as one of a set of annual performance indicators. The SAS are spatially extensive and are repeated at standardised time periods but they are not designed to ensure robust statistical interpretation. The extensive sampling, however, covering the full range of the prawn stock, should lead to unbiased annual indices so long as prawn distributions are reasonably stable between years. CPUE is not expected a priori to provide a good index of biomass within or across years and problems with CPUE interpretation are well considered by Dixon et al (2009). No CPUE standardisation has been attempted; if CPUE were used in-season to trigger management actions this would be an issue but as only mean annual CPUE (as kg/hr) is used within a wider set of annual performance indicators to trigger additional performance measure calculation and review (PIRSA, 2007), this is not considered problematic. FN 82105 v3 Page 87 87

Score: 80 Sufficient relevant information related to stock structure, stock productivity, fleet composition and other data are available to support the harvest strategy. However, information is not comprehensive (e.g. on stock structure) (80).

Stock abundance and fishery removals are regularly monitored at a level of accuracy and coverage consistent with the harvest control rule, and a wide range of indicators is available and monitored with sufficient frequency to support the harvest control rule. However, information on stock abundance (SAS) requires careful consideration to understand potential biases and errors, hence a score of only 80.

All information on removals, including location, total catches and size categories, is recorded by shot and reported daily or more frequently. The information reported is fully consistent with the needs of the harvest control rules. All removals are known. Because of full processing at sea, the information is highly accurate (80).

Two Recommendations (R 1 & R 2) for this SG is provided in Section 15.3 Audit Trace References Dixon, C.D. (2010). Presentation during site visit to SARDI, Tuesday 7th September 2010

Hooper, G.E. and S.D. Roberts (2009) Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Status Report 2009. SARDI Research Report Series No 403.

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

South Australian Western King Prawn Daily Fishing Logbook Form (sighted at SGWCPFA offices, Port Lincoln)

South Australian Western King Prawn Fishing Unloading Form (sighted at SGWCPFA offices, Port Lincoln)

FN 82105 v3 Page 88 88

1.2.4 Assessment of stock The assessment estimates stock status relative The assessment is appropriate for the stock and The assessment is appropriate for the stock and status: There is an to reference points. for the harvest control rule, and is evaluating for the harvest control rule and takes into adequate assessment of the stock status relative to reference points. account the major features relevant to the stock status biology of the species and the nature of the fishery. The assessment identifies major sources of The assessment takes uncertainty into account. The assessment takes into account uncertainty uncertainty. and is evaluating stock status relative to reference points in a probabilistic way.

The assessment has been tested and shown to be robust. Alternative hypotheses and assessment approaches have been rigorously explored.

The assessment of stock status is subject to The assessment has been internally and peer review. externally peer reviewed.

Scoring Comments The harvest strategy uses information on the target stock directly without any inferential or estimation steps. Generally, the scientific basis for fisheries management can be thought of as three steps: data-assessment-control. In the case of SG prawns, the control (harvest strategy) uses a wide set of indicators drawn directly from the data. There is thus no need for the intermediate step within the system as set up. Reporting for management purposes is provided in annual “stock assessment” and status reports (e.g. Dixon et al, 2009; Hooper et al, 2009).

Information provided through the “stock assessment” process, including SAS outputs, is internally reviewed within SARDI by 2 non-involved peers and senior level sign off but is not subject to any external review. Score: 80 There is no formal stock assessment. Given the way in which data are used directly to inform the harvest strategy this is appropriate for the stock and the control rules in place. The harvest strategy provisions are a complex set of rules based on direct comparisons of data and formalised reference points (80).

The wide set of reference points and data flow guards against uncertainty through in-built redundancy (80).

The “assessment” (i.e. the collation and reporting of all data) is subject to internal peer review within SARDI but has not been reviewed externally (80). Audit Trace References Dixon, C., Hooper, G..and Roberts S. (2009). Spencer Gulf Prawn Penaeus (Melicertus) latisulcatus Fishery 2007/08: Fishery Assessment Report to PIRSA Fisheries. SARDI Research Report Series No 387.

Hooper, G.E. and S.D. Roberts (2009) Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Status Report 2009. SARDI Research Report Series No 403.

FN 82105 v3 Page 89 89

2.1 Retained non-target species

2.1.1 Status: The fishery does Main retained species are likely to be within Main retained species are highly likely to be There is a high degree of certainty that retained not pose a risk of serious biologically based limits or if outside the limits within biologically based limits, or if outside species are within biologically based limits. or irreversible harm to the there are measures in place that are expected to the limits there is a partial strategy of retained species and does ensure that the fishery does not hinder demonstrably effective management measures not hinder recovery of recovery and rebuilding of the depleted in place such that the fishery does not hinder depleted retained species. species. recovery and rebuilding. If the status is poorly known there are Target reference points are defined and measures or practices in place that are retained species are at or fluctuating around expected to result in the fishery not causing the their target reference points. retained species to be outside biologically based limits or hindering recovery.

Scoring Comments It was determined that both the retained species (southern calamary (Speioteuthis australia) and Balmain bug (Ibacus peronii)) each constitutes less than 5% of the total catch by weight (Currie et al. 2009). However, specific management measures are in place for at least one of these species (Balmain bug), which is potentially at some risk. Due to the nature of the gear used in the demersal trawl there may be localized depletion of calamary and slipper lobsters. Localised effects will be reduced due to the fact that prawn trawling operates in limited areas for limited periods and fishing is only undertaken during the night. The use of hoppers to sort bycatch and target species on the deck increases the likelihood of retained survival post capture as individuals can be returned to the sea efficiently.

While retained species are highly likely to be within biological limits and there is a management strategy in place including closures and limits to any future expansion to the fishery, target reference points have not been defined, nor are they perceived to be realistic given the low volumes caught, (Currie et al 2009, Roberts and Steer 2010, Carrick 2007, Svane 2003, and Svane et al 2007). Due to the absence of information on the status of populations of these species, the Risk-Based Framework (RBF) was used to evaluate and score this Performance Indicator (PI). The PSA outcome score for the two species considered is 85 (appendic C) Score: 85 PSA Score (Appendix C) = 85 Audit Trace References Currie D., Dixon C., Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S. and Ward T. 2009. Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390

Roberts, S. and Steer, M. 2010. By-products assessment in Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery with an emphasis on developing management options for Balmain Bug. SARDI Report 439

Svane I., Rodda K. and Thomas P. 2007. Prawn fishery bycatch and discards: marine ecosystem analysis – population effects. FRDC Project 2003/023

FN 82105 v3 Page 90 90

Svane I.,2003. Prawn fishery bycatch and discard: Fates and consequences for a marine ecosystem. FRDC Report 1998/225, pp 1-130

FN 82105 v3 Page 91 91

2.1.2 Management strategy: There are measures in place, if necessary, that There is a partial strategy in place, if necessary There is a strategy in place for managing There is a strategy in place are expected to maintain the main retained that is expected to maintain the main retained retained species. for managing retained species at levels which are highly likely to be species at levels which are highly likely to be species that is designed to within biologically based limits, or to ensure within biologically based limits, or to ensure ensure the fishery does not the fishery does not hinder their recovery and the fishery does not hinder their recovery and pose a risk of serious or rebuilding. rebuilding. irreversible harm to retained species. The measures are considered likely to work, There is some objective basis for confidence The strategy is mainly based on information based on plausible argument (e.g., general that the partial strategy will work, based on directly about the fishery and/or species experience, theory or comparison with similar some information directly about the fishery involved, and testing supports high confidence fisheries/species). and/or species involved. that the strategy will work.

There is clear evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully, and intended changes are occurring.

There is some evidence that the partial strategy There is some evidence that the strategy is is being implemented successfully. achieving its overall objective.

Scoring Comments There are measures in place to support and to reduce the over-exploitation of retained species, in the form of closed areas, restrictions of trawling to water depths > 10m. The fishery is only operational for less than 55 days per year with continuous trawling only occurring for less than 14 days (mostly 10 days) at any one time. Berried females bugs are returned to the water and size limits for bugs are in place supporting the strategy for managing the species. Since 2002 there has been mandatory reporting of by-product through logbooks. However logbook information is not robust and following the formal ERA (Hollamby pers com. 2010) logbooks will be modified (Dixcon, pers com. September 2010) to report on the species that are of higher risk. There has been no expansion of the areas fished (Dixon pers com. 2010) and there has been a reduction in days fished over the last 5 years and this can be expected to reduce the amount of bycatch.

As a precautionary measure and in order to sustain Slipper lobster bug, the South Australian government legislated the protection egg-bearing females (Fisheries Management (General) Regulations 2007). Based on the information and in absence of yield per recruit of egg per recruit models for most slipper lobster species, setting MLS that ensures at least 50% of females breed at least once before recruitment into the fishery is a common alternative (Haddy et al. 2005). A minimal legal size (MLS) was about to be introduced during the assessment, and has since been introduced as a management tool (Doroudi, December, 2007). This measure was supported by the SGWCFA (SGWCFA Annual Report, 2010). This legal size in conjunction with the protection of berried female (berried female to be returned to the water) form some objective basis for confidence that the strategy will be successful.

Calamary stocks are shared with recreational and Marine Scale Fisheries. Long-term trends in catches have remained relatively stable despite the Marine Scale Fishery targeting mature calamary on the inshore spawning grounds. Calamary reproduce throughout the year so there is a continuous recruitment into the fisheries although the species does have a peak-spawning season. These species are regarded as low risk, The SGWCFA actions on closed areas based on real-time data that includes time of the year, target species catch rates and level of likelihood bycatch capture (SGWCFA Minutes 30 March 2010) provide a strategy for protection of this species, as well as fishing only in depth greater than 10m, adopting a pulse fishing strategy that allows for only a maximum of 14 consecutive days fishing per month and a restriction on the gear size and FN 82105 v3 Page 92 92 configuration of the trawls and a logbook system in place since 2002.

There is an objective basis for confidence that the strategy is working based on the present management plan, which minimises the impacts on bycatch and by-product species by gear control, permanent closed areas and the promotion and the development of environmentally friendly practices (On boat management systems). The limited levels of effort (maximum 60 days effort per year) and pulse fishing operations within all vessels of the fleet as well as trawling being concentrated in a small area (< 13% in areas of the Gulf) along with closed areas are sufficient to ensure that the species are a low risk.

The evidence that a strategy is being implemented through the maintenance of the self-imposed closures during 2009/10 fishing season through gazettal notices associated with harvest strategies for each trip. Closures include north of Point Lowly (since 1973), Port Broughton (since early 1907‟s with and extension of closure made in 1981), Shoalwater area (since 2000) and Wardang (since 2002) (SGWCPFA 2010). Score: 85 There is a strategy in place for managing retained species (100).

There is some objective basis for confidence that the strategy will work, based on some information directly about the fishery and/or species involved. (80).

There is some evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully (80). Audit Trace References Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc, (SGWCFA) (2010). Annual Report, 1 July to 30 June 2010. South Australia.

Doroudi, M., PIRSA (2010) Introduction of size limit on bugs, Letter from PIRSA, 3 December, 2010.

Australian Government (no date). On Boat Management System. FRDC and SPWCPFA.

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc. (2010.) Annual Report, 1 July to 30 June 2010. South Australia.

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc, (2010). Minutes of meeting Port Lincoln 201

Haddy J., Courtney A., and Roy D (2005). Aspects of the reproductive biology and growth of Balmain bugs (Ibacus spp.)(Scyllaridae). Journal of Crustacean Biology 25 (2): 263-27.

Hollamby (2010); Letter to PIRSA from SGWCPFA dated 28 October 2010.

Dixon C. (2010). Personal conversation 29 October 2010.

FN 82105 v3 Page 93 93

2.1.3 Information / monitoring: Qualitative information is available on the Qualitative information and some quantitative Accurate and verifiable information is Information on the nature amount of main retained species taken by the information are available on the amount of available on the catch of all retained species and extent of retained fishery. main retained species taken by the fishery. and the consequences for the status of affected species is adequate to populations. determine the risk posed Information is adequate to qualitatively assess Information is sufficient to estimate outcome Information is sufficient to quantitatively by the fishery and the outcome status with respect to biologically status with respect to biologically based limits. estimate outcome status with a high degree of effectiveness of the based limits. certainty. strategy to manage retained species. Information is adequate to support measures to Information is adequate to support a partial Information is adequate to support a manage main retained species. strategy to manage main retained species. comprehensive strategy to manage retained species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective.

Sufficient data continue to be collected to Monitoring of retained species is conducted in detect any increase in risk level (e.g. due to sufficient detail to assess ongoing mortalities changes in the outcome indicator scores or the to all retained species. operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the strategy).

Scoring Comments There is qualitative and some quantitative information from a number of sources. These are (i) ongoing monitoring of retained species catch, from vessel records, (ii) historical data from logbooks from 2002 -2004, (iii) bycatch surveys conducted during 2004/05 and (iv) prawn surveys since 1994 (Roberts and Steer 2010).

Information was also sufficient to support the understanding of productivity and susceptibility for the species, using RBF.

Studies by Currie et al. (2009) indicated that variations in community structure did not appear to be related to trawl intensity although the independent survey showed that there was significant lower biomass or poriferans, bryozoans and fish in heavily trawled areas however there is no quantitative data on the benthic communities prior to any trawling in Spencer Gulf.

The information is adequate to support a strategy with the data that is available on the distribution and abundance (catch rate) of common bycatch species, which is also useful in identifying potential indicator species (Dixon et al 2005). However the interpretation or prawn survey data is limited due to spatial and temporal replication and considerable uncertainty in reliability of some data.

Sufficient data is continually being collected on the by-product through the logbook data that included records of the retained species, trawl positions, length of trawl and time of trawling. Quantitative information can also be verified through sales dockets. Information is adequate to support a partial strategy through the establishment of logbook system and there are extensive studies on bycatch interactions (Carrick 1997) and data available on the distribution and abundance of common bycatch species (Dixon 2005). Score: 80 Qualitative information and some quantitative information are available on the amount of main retained species taken by the fishery. (80). FN 82105 v3 Page 94 94

Information is adequate to support a partial strategy to manage main retained species (80).

Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk level (80).

A Recommendation (R.3) is provided in Section 15.3 Audit Trace References Carrick, N. (1997). A preliminary assessment of bycatch from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australia Fisheries Assessment Series 97/02 .

Currie D., Dixon C., Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S. and Ward T. (2009). Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390.

Dixon C., Svane I. and Ward T. (2005). Monitoring and assessment of bycatch and by-product species of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery. SARDI Research Report Series No. 102.

Roberts, S. and Steer, M. (2010). By-products assessment in Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery with an emphasis on developing management options for Balmain Bug. SARDI Report 439.

FN 82105 v3 Page 95 95

2.2 Discarded species (also known as “bycatch” or “discards”)

2.2.1 Status The fishery does Main bycatch species are likely to be within Main bycatch species are highly likely to be There is a high degree of certainty that bycatch not pose a risk of serious biologically based limits, or if outside such within biologically based limits or if outside species are within biologically based limits. or irreversible harm to the limits there are mitigation measures in place such limits there is a partial strategy of bycatch species or species that are expected to ensure that the fishery demonstrably effective mitigation measures in groups and does not hinder does not hinder recovery and rebuilding. place such that the fishery does not hinder recovery of depleted recovery and rebuilding. bycatch species or species If the status is poorly known there are groups. measures or practices in place that are expected to result in the fishery not causing the bycatch species to be outside biologically based limits or hindering recovery.

Scoring Comments There is some certainty based on ratios, that the bycatch is within biological limits given the bycatch ratios for prawn trawling in the Spencer Gulf being among the lowest recorded for penaeid trawl fisheries Svane et al (2007) with the higher concentrations of fishing activity corresponding to the lowest bycatch levels by weight (2:1) Svane et al (2007) however there is uncertainty as the to vulnerability of the individual species in the bycatch.

The bycatch species identified included blue swimming crab, degens leatherjacket, snapper, skipjack trevellies, King George whiting, Port Jackson sharks and stingarees, cuttlefish. Although there is limited information to assess the accumulated impacts to the Port Jackson sharks evidence from Rodda (2007) suggests that some individuals are caught repeatedly. Port Jackson sharks show little physiological response to trawl capture and have a very high chance of post-capture survival (K Rodda pers comm.. Nov 2010). Coastal stingarees This species is rarely caught in trawls (Dixon et al. (2005)). However, they are known to have a high mortality when caught ((Thomas and Chick 2007). Nevertheless, because of the low levels of enconterability, these species are not perceived to be at risk. In support to this they have not been recognized as ETPs under the EPBC Act.

The main species (based on volumes and susceptibility; following stakeholder discussions) are blue swimming crab, degens leatherjacket, snapper and skipjack trevellies, these species are investigated using the Risk Based Framework (Appendix B).

The partial strategy is based on the limited amount of time (<55 days per year) and restricted areas the trawlers operate (<13% of total area of the Gulf and in waters > 10m). Along with the temporal and spatial strategies in place and the Decision-At-Sea process (using real time judgment based on target species size and abundance as well as interactions with habitats and bycatch (PSWCFA minutes of meetings (2010) the fishery demonstrates some mitigation measures are in place.

Despite there being no continuous bycatch data available, information suggests that over the last 10 years, the quality and quantity indicates bycatch has remained fairly constant Carrick (1997), Dixon et al.(2005). Although the bycatch varies depending on the area trawled, it has been suggested that there is a constant biomass over time representing a steady state of a fished ecosystem Carrick (1997), Dixon et al (2005). The Percentage Biomass indicators suggest low levels of vulnerability (Currie et al 2009).

FN 82105 v3 Page 96 96

The Risk-Based Framework (RBF) was used to evaluate and score specified outcome Performance Indicators (PI). Score: 90 PSA score for main retained species is detailed in Appendix B. Audit Trace References Dixon C., Svane I. and Ward T. (2005). Monitoring and assessment of bycatch and by-product species of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery. SARDI Research Report Series No. 102.

Currie D., Dixon C., Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S., and Ward T. 2009. Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series No. 390.

Dixon C., Svane I. and Ward T. (2005). Monitoring and assessment of bycatch and by-product species of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery. SARDI Research Report Series No. 102.

Carrick, N. (1997). A preliminary assessment of bycatch from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australia Fisheries Assessment Series 97/02 pp 57.

Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen’s Association (2010) March 2010, Minutes of Meeting.

Roberts, S. and Steer, M. (2010). By-products assessment in Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery with an emphasis on developing management options for Balmain Bug. SARDI Report 439.

Rodda K, and Svane I and Thomas,P.(eds) (2007). FRDC Prawn Fishery Bycatch and Discards: marine Ecosystems Analysis – Population effects. FRDC Report 2003/023 pp 263-332. Svane I., Rodda K. and Thomas P. (2007). Prawn fishery bycatch and discards: marine ecosystem analysis – population effects. FRDC Project 2003/023.

Svane I (2003). Prawn fishery bycatch and discard: Fates and consequences for a marine ecosystem. FRDC Report 1998/225, pp 1-130.

FN 82105 v3 Page 97 97

2.2.2 Management strategy: There are measures in place, if necessary, There is a partial strategy in place, if There is a strategy in place for managing and There is a strategy in place which are expected to maintain main bycatch necessary, for managing bycatch that is minimising bycatch. for managing bycatch that species at levels which are highly likely to be expected to maintain main bycatch species at is designed to ensure the within biologically based limits or to ensure levels which are highly likely to be within fishery does not pose a risk that the fishery does not hinder their recovery. biologically based limits or to ensure that the of serious or irreversible fishery does not hinder their recovery. harm to bycatch populations. The measures are considered likely to work, There is some objective basis for confidence The strategy is mainly based on information based on plausible argument (e.g general that the partial strategy will work, based on directly about the fishery and/or species experience, theory or comparison with similar some information directly about the fishery involved, and testing supports high confidence fisheries/species). and/or the species involved. that the strategy will work.

There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its objective.

There is some evidence that the partial strategy There is clear evidence that the strategy is is being implemented successfully. being implemented successfully, and intended changes are occurring.

Scoring Comments There is a bycatch mitigation strategy in place – Management Plan, Goals, Objectives (3) and Activities interpreted into Management Plan as Performance indicators along with the SGWCPA Code of Conduct Report (On boat management systems) are present (Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc Code of conduct (no date). However, whilst some potential risks have been identified through bycatch surveys (Currie et al 2009), no formal risk analysis or risk assessment has been undertaken. As yet a risk assessment process is to be completed by the beginning 2012 (Hallamby, pers com 2010) nor is there species specific bycatch mitigation measures implemented (bycatch mitigation measure will follow the risk assessment program (Dixon pers com 2010). The Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery (2007) sets out performance indicators related to specific goals and objectives for 5 –year assessment of ecosystem impacts which includes the undertaking of a bycatch risk assessment and to develop mitigation strategies for high-risk species.

A reduction of the number of nights fishing over the last four years with fishing restricted to between 8%-15% of the total area of Spencer Gulf supports a strategy. Fishing effort has declined from a peak of 45,786 hours in 1978/79 to 18,438 hours in 2008/08 also supports a trategy. It is recognised that a benthic habitat impact assessment has not been completed. Therefore its difficult to determine the extent of the prawn trawl footprint due to the fact there is no precise information as to the distribution of the types of habitats throughout the Spencer Gulf. The fishery operates for only 55 nights of the year, based on a maximum of 14 consecutive nights at any one time. There are controls on the size and configuration of the nets that can be used in the fishery. The PSA identified species that were at low risk (Appendix B). This will be further analysed using a semi- quantitative risk assessment allowing for a measure of confidence for the partial strategy.

Existing trawl gear selective devices such as e.g. crab bag are used on all the vessels, however these devices do not directly form part of the strategy but allow for some level of post-harvest survival particularly, elasmobranches and blue swimming crab. Species sorting devices such as hoppers allow for live sorting of bycatch and in most cases a rapid returned to the sea after being landed on the deck assisting in post-trawl survival. This has not been quantified as yet.

FN 82105 v3 Page 98 98

The Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery (PIRSA 2007) sets out objectives to minimise fishery impacts on bycatch and by-product species by maintaining a limit on the amount of gear used in the fishery, maintain permanent closed areas, promote the development of environmentally friendly practices. Prawn trawlers are not permitted to operate in depths < 10 m, which is in line with the management objective of not exploiting breeding stock to ensure population sustainability.

The role of the Committee A Sea (CAS) is a sub-Committee of the Management Committee (established under Section 17) of the Constitution of the Spencer Gulf and West Coast prawn Fishermen‟s Association Inc) is to develop at-sea harvest strategies that ensures the fishery (a) maintain ecologically sustainable stock level (b) ensure optimum utilization and equitable distribution, (c) minimise impacts on the ecosystem and (d) enable effective management with greater industry involvement. This is demonstrated in the Spencer Gulf Committee At Sea Report 2001-2002 in which it is noted that an area close the Wardang Island was closed due to the area having „delicate‟ benthic communities despite the area having high catches of prawns (Committee At Sea Report 2001-2002).

DEWHA Assessment of the South Australian Prawn Fishery under EPBC Act, October 2009, acknowledges that Spencer Gulf prawn fishery management is aiming to reduce impacts on non-target species (and the ecosystem) and acknowledge the implementation of revised management plans incorporating harvest strategies, and based on studies undertaken to determine effects for fishing on non-target species which PIRSA intends to apply to a semi-quantitative risk assessment for bycatch as mentioned previously. Current regulations included in the harvest strategy and management plan include: protection of egg-bearing female bugs, size limits and periodic squid stock assessment report (DEWHA 2009).

The Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery (PIRSA September 2007) set out performance indicators for 5-year assessment of ecosystem impacts which includes a bycatch risk assessment (Objective 3 (a) and 3 (b) and the development of strategies to measure success, reduce interaction with endangered threatened and protected species. There are actions to achieve ERA is through a series of steps commencing November 2010 and to be concluded February 2012 (Hollamby 2010). Score: 85 The is a strategy in place, if necessary, for managing bycatch that is expected to maintain main bycatch species at levels which are highly likely to be within biologically based limits or to ensure that the fishery does not hinder their recovery (100)

There is some objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy will work, based on some information directly about the fishery and or species involved (80)

There is some evidence that the partial strategy is being implemented successfully (80)

A Recommendation (R 4) is made for this SG (Section 15.3) Audit Trace References PIRSA 2007. Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Management Series Paper N0 54 pp 30.

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc, (2010). 2010 Annual Report, . South Australia.

Currie D., Dixon C., Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S., and Ward T. (2009). Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc, Committee At Sea Report (2001-2002)

FN 82105 v3 Page 99 99

DEWHA (2009). Assessment of the South Australian prawn trawl fishery. Australian Government, Department of the Environment, Water and Heritage and the Arts

Hollamby (2010); Co Management Service Project

Spencer Gulf Committee At Sea Report (2001-2002 )

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc Code of conduct (no date)

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

FN 82105 v3 Page 100 100

2.2.3 Information / monitoring Qualitative information is available on the Qualitative information and some quantitative Accurate and verifiable information is Information on the nature amount of main bycatch species affected by information are available on the amount of available on the amount of all bycatch and the and amount of bycatch is the fishery. main bycatch species affected by the fishery. consequences for the status of affected adequate to determine the populations. risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the Information is adequate to broadly understand Information is sufficient to estimate outcome Information is sufficient to quantitatively strategy to manage outcome status with respect to biologically status with respect to biologically based limits. estimate outcome status with respect to bycatch. based limits. biologically based limits with a high degree of certainty.

Information is adequate to support measures to Information is adequate to support a partial Information is adequate to support a manage bycatch. strategy to manage main bycatch species. comprehensive strategy to manage bycatch, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving its objective.

Sufficient data continue to be collected to Monitoring of bycatch data is conducted in detect any increase in risk to main bycatch sufficient detail to assess ongoing mortalities species (e.g. due to changes in the outcome to all bycatch species. indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the strategy).

Scoring Comments Some quantitative information exists as a result of the 2007 bycatch surveys contained in the voluntary and compulsory logbook, independent trawl surveys (and field experiments) to assess discard species composition, distribution patterns and densities, size of animals, bycatch ratios and survival of discards from trawls (PIRSA 2003). A bycatch database has been developed and has been enhanced to allow for data analysis and to address sustainability issues relating to the fishery. This information is sufficient to support a partial strategy to manage the main bycatch species.

Information was also sufficient to support the understanding of productivity and susceptibility for the species, using RBF.

Real time information is used, in part, to aid the decision-making process by the Committee-At-Sea reports as reported in the Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc, (SGWCPFA Annual Report, 1 July to 30 June 2010. South Australia 2010) which directs the temporal and spatial fishing effect of the fleet. . Actions of avoidance by voluntary closures as implemented by the Committee-At-Sea based on real time information such as the Wardang closure where the protected species and sensitive habitats is taken into account (SGWCPFA 2009)

In response to a weakness in the quality of information a risk is being undertaken as per the 2007 Management Plan (Hollamby 2010). Risk levels will be established for key species which will form the basis for a monitoring program that will support a framework for a long term strategy (pers. com Dixon 2010)

Information as to the temporal and spatial fishing patterns are available to determine the concentration of fishing effort through logbooks and records from the Committee-At- Sea decision and SGWCPFA Annual reports. PIRSA have measures in place and have improved accuracy of bycatch data and will be able to set mitigation measures at the

FN 82105 v3 Page 101 101 conclusion the proposed risk assessment project (Hollamby 2010). There has been research conducted in Spencer Gulf on the bycatch and by-product species captured by the prawn trawl fishery (Dixon). Additional bycatch surveys were undertaken 2009 (Currie et al. 2009, Roberts and Steer 2010). Data is available from three main sources, bycatch data collected during surveys conducted by the Spencer Gulf prawn fishers, bycatch data obtained during targeted fishery (Dixon). PIRSA Fisheries has established a process to improve understanding and management of non-target species interactions in the prawn fisheries that incorporates the (a) structured bycatch surveys (as above) (b) data analysis (Curries et al 2009) and (c) risk assessment has commenced and PIRSA intends to apply a semi-quantitative risk assessment for bycatch in Spencer Gulf. The risk assessment for bycatch species is being undertaken and due to be concluded 2012 (Hollamby 2010) which is required under the EPBC Act and the process is supported by the Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association (Minutes of meeting 2010). The risk assessment results will allow for more precise design of logbooks for onboard data collection. This will lead to bycatch to be managed at levels that are highly likely to be within biological limits and not hinder recovery. Score: 80 Qualitative and some quantitative information is available (SG80).

Information is adequate to support a partial strategy to manage main bycatch species (SG80).

Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk to main bycatch species based on the risk assessment now being undertaken (SG80).

A Recommendation (R 3) is made for this SG (Section 15.3). Audit Trace References Currie D., Dixon C,, Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S. and Ward T. (2009). Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390.

PIRSA (2003). Ecological assessment of the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Gulf St Vincent Prawn Fishery and West Coast Prawn Fishery. South Australian Fisheries Management Series.

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association (SGWCPFA) Inc. (2010). 2010 Annual Report, . South Australia.

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc. (2009). 2009 Annual Report, South Australia.

Hollamby (2010), Co-management Report to PIRSA, and Timeline, October 2010.

FN 82105 v3 Page 102 102

2.3 Endangered, Threatened and Protected (ETP) species

2.3.1 Status: The fishery meets Known effects of the fishery are likely to be The effects of the fishery are known and are There is a high degree of certainty that the national and international within limits of national and international highly likely to be within limits of national and effects of the fishery are within limits of requirements for protection requirements for protection of ETP species. international requirements for protection of national and international requirements for of ETP species. ETP species. protection of ETP species.

The fishery does not pose a Known direct effects are unlikely to create Direct effects are highly unlikely to create There is a high degree of confidence that there risk of serious or unacceptable impacts to ETP species. unacceptable impacts to ETP species. are no significant detrimental effects (direct irreversible harm to ETP and indirect) of the fishery on ETP species. species and does not hinder recovery of ETP Indirect effects have been considered and are species. thought to be unlikely to create unacceptable impacts.

Scoring Comments Syngnathids are a „listed as marine species‟ under the EPBC Act, which means that all reasonable steps should be put in place to reduce interactions and mortality of the species. The focus on managing listed species is by minimising interactions, although for the Spencer Gulf fishery has no specific limits for interaction that have been established for listed species, and most species are listed by FISHBASE as having low to moderate vulnerability. However, there are no national or international limits set on these species presently and limits/triggers have not as yet been set by DEWHA such that there is a specific concern posed from this, or any other national fishery. There is no data on the relative composition and distribution of Syngnathids in waters shallower than 10m and the vast majority of Syngnathids are found in non-fishing areas and trawlers operation in depths greater than 10 m. (Currie et al 2009). SARDI undertook an assessment of by-catch interactions (Currie et al (2009). One syngnathid was captured in an area of high trawl intensity, while seven individuals from six different sites were captured in areas of moderate trawl intensity. Most syngnathids were captured from areas of low trawl intensity (65 individuals from 18 sites). This survey only provided a snapshot of the study site and did not account for seasonal variations and historical information is only available at a scale of the fishing blocks and thus effort applied at specific sites is unknown Under the definition in the Commonwealth EPBC Act and based on available information it can be judged that due to the low intensity, short duration and small geographic extent of the action from prawn trawlers the impact are not likely to be significant. This will be quantified with a risk assessment due for finalisation in 2012 (Hallamby 2010).

DEWHA Assessment of the South Australian Prawn Fishery under EPBC Act, October 2009 that currently evidence exists that within the fishery there are minimal interactions with listed species and DEWHA considered the current operations are not likely to adversely affect the survival or recovery in nature of any listed threatened species. Score: 90 There is a high degree of certainty that the effects of the fishery are inline with the national and international requirements for protection of ETP species. (100)

Direct effects are highly unlikely to create unacceptable impacts to ETP species and indirect effects have been considered and are thought to be unlikely to create unacceptable impacts (80)

A Recommendation (R.5) is made for this SG (See Section 15.3)

FN 82105 v3 Page 103 103

Audit Trace References Currie D., Dixon C,, Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S. and Ward T. (2009). Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390

Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc, (2010). 2010 Annual Report, 1 July to 30 June 2010. South Australia.

DEWHA (2009). Assessment of the South Australian Prawn Fishery under EPBC Act, October 2009

Hollamby (2010); Co Management Service Project SGWCPFA.

Marine Parks Government of South Australia (2010.) Www.maineparks.sa.gov.au viewed 15 Oct 2010

Zhou, S. and Griffiths, S. (2008). Sustainability Assessment for Fishing Effects (SAFE): a new quantitative ecological risk assessment method and its application to elasmobranch bycatch in an Australian trawl fishery. Fisheries Research 91, 56-68.

Zhou, S., Griffiths, S., Miller, M. (2009). Sustainability assessment for fishing effects (SAFE) on highly diverse and data-limited fish bycatch in a tropical trawl fishery. Marine and Freshwater Research 60, 563-570

FISHBASE. www.fishbase.org

FN 82105 v3 Page 104 104

2.3.2 Management strategy There are measures in place that minimise There is a strategy in place for managing the There is a comprehensive strategy in place for The fishery has in place mortality, and are expected to be highly likely fishery‟s impact on ETP species, including managing the fishery‟s impact on ETP species, precautionary management to achieve national and international measures to minimise mortality, that is including measures to minimise mortality, that strategies designed to: requirements for the protection of ETP species. designed to be highly likely to achieve national is designed to achieve above national and - meet national and and international requirements for the international requirements for the protection of international requirements; protection of ETP species. ETP species. - ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious The measures are considered likely to work, There is an objective basis for confidence that The strategy is mainly based on information or irreversible harm to based on plausible argument (eg general the strategy will work, based on information directly about the fishery and/or species ETP species; experience, theory or comparison with similar directly about the fishery and/or the species involved, and a quantitative analysis supports - ensure the fishery does fisheries/species). involved. high confidence that the strategy will work. not hinder recovery of ETP species; and There is evidence that the strategy is being There is clear evidence that the strategy is - minimise mortality of implemented successfully. being implemented successfully, and intended ETP species. changes are occurring. There is evidence that the strategy is achieving its objective.

Scoring Comments Based on a series of gazetted and voluntary closures and decision at sea by the Committee-At-Sea there is a strategy in place to managing the impact on ETP. The Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association has voluntarily closed areas which are known to constitute likely habitat for ETP and have requested to PIRSA an increase in the size of the closure at Wardang to further protect seahorse, pipefish and seadragon (Letter to PIRSA dated September 2010). These closures are likely to reduce the level of impact to be below significant (failing to achieve this criteria requiring referral to the Minister under the EPBC Act).

The Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery maintained closures during 2009/10 fishing season through gazettal notices associated with harvest strategies for each trip. Closures include north of Point Lowly (since 1973) Port Broughton (since early 1970‟s with and extension of closure made in 1981), Shoalwater area (since 2000) and Wardang (since 2002). Closure at Shoalwater area extends to the shore adjacent to Cowell fishing area and was implemented to protect reef areas containing high biodiversity. Wardang closure was implemented to protect the delicate communities and marine species in the area (Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Association Inc, 2009. Annual Report), The Wardang and Broughton closures area are identified as hatchings and are closed to trawling under an industry code of practice. (Currie et al 2009).

Spencer Gulf has a system of protected areas that (Upper Spencer Gulf Marine Park 6% of South Australia‟s marine park network, Eastern Spencer Gulf Marine Park 3% or South Australia‟s marine parks network, Southern Spencer Gulf 11% of South Australia‟s marine parks network) that supports fauna, flora and habitats which contribute to maintaining biodiversity in Spencer Gulf and wider South Australians marine waters (www.marine parks.sa.gov.au).

The risk assessment now being undertaken will support the precautionary approach by allowing for ETP species to have explicit triggers in place for temporary and permanent closures and more precise logbooks to record interactions to assist in monitoring of key species. Score: 80 There is a strategy in place for managing the fishery‟s impact on ETP species, including measures to minimise mortality that is designed to be highly likely to achieve national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species. (80)

FN 82105 v3 Page 105 105

There is an objective basis for confidence that the strategy will work, based on information directly about the fishery and/or the species involved (80)

There is evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully (80)

A Recommendation (R 7) is made for this SG (Section 15.3) Audit Trace References Currie D., Dixon C,, Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S., and Ward T. (2009). Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390.

SGWCPFA (2010). Coordinator At Sea Report 2010.

SGWCPFA (2010). Letter to PIRSA dated September 2010.

SGWCPFA (2009). Annual Report 2009.

FN 82105 v3 Page 106 106

2.3.3 Information / monitoring Information is adequate to broadly understand Information is sufficient to determine whether Information is sufficient to quantitatively Relevant information is the impact of the fishery on ETP species. the fishery may be a threat to protection and estimate outcome status with a high degree of collected to support the recovery of the ETP species, and if so, to certainty. management of fishery measure trends and support a full strategy to impacts on ETP species, manage impacts. including: - information for the Information is adequate to support measures to Sufficient data are available to allow fishery Information is adequate to support a development of the manage the impacts on ETP species related mortality and the impact of fishing to comprehensive strategy to manage impacts, management strategy; be quantitatively estimated for ETP species. minimize mortality and injury of ETP species, - information to assess the and evaluate with a high degree of certainty effectiveness of the whether a strategy is achieving its objectives. management strategy; and - information to determine Information is sufficient to qualitatively Accurate and verifiable information is the outcome status of ETP estimate the fishery related mortality of ETP available on the magnitude of all impacts, species. species. mortalities and injuries and the consequences for the status of ETP species

Scoring Comments Information from commercial fisheries is available from Wildlife logbooks, which have been initiated to facilitate the recording of ETPs interactions. ID cards and pamphlets have been distributed to fishers and industries associations to increase the accuracy of the Wildlife logbook entries. However additional information is needed on the distribution and abundance of the species particularly in areas that are <10m in depth.

Information indicates there is a low level in the scale of interaction based on independent surveys in 2007, where one Syngnathid was captured in area of high intensity while seven individual from six different sites were captured in areas of moderate trawl intensity. Currie et al (2009) noted that from the study (i) it was hard to accurately characterise the distribution and abundance of each species throughout the Spencer Gulf (ii) historical trawling effort is only available at the scale of fishing blocks and thus effort applied at specific site locations is unknown (iii) depletion rates associated with commercial trawl effort are unknown and (iv) ecological consequences for these species remain unknown. However based on FISHBASE information, the seven species captured are either moderate to low in vulnerability.

Information on ETPs are available though independent surveys (Currie 2009; Svane 2007) however these surveys have been restricted to areas > 10m and did not determine distribution and abundance throughout the Spencer Gulf. Score: 70 Information is sufficient to determine whether the fishery may be a threat to protection and recovery of the ETP species, and if so, to measure trends and support a full strategy to manage impacts (SG80)

Information is adequate to support measures to manage the impacts on ETP species (SG60)

Information is sufficient to qualitatively estimate the fishery related mortality of ETP species (SG60)

A Condition (C 2) is set for this SG (Section 15.2) FN 82105 v3 Page 107 107

Audit Trace References Currie D., Dixon C,, Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S. and Ward T. 2009. Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390.

Svane I., Rodda K. and Thomas P. 2007. Prawn fishery bycatch and discards: marine ecosystem analysis – population effects. FRDC Project 2003/023.

FN 82105 v3 Page 108 108

2.4 Habitat

2.4.1 Status The fishery does The fishery is unlikely to reduce habitat The fishery is highly unlikely to reduce habitat There is evidence that the fishery is highly not cause serious or structure and function to a point where there structure and function to a point where there unlikely to reduce habitat structure and irreversible harm to habitat would be serious or irreversible harm. would be serious or irreversible harm. function to a point where there would be structure, considered on a serious or irreversible harm. regional or bioregional basis, and function.

Scoring Comments There are documented areas of high intensity and low intensity fishing, which account for 8% to 15% of the total area of the Gulf. These areas have been trawled since the commencement of the prawn fishery in the Spencer Gulf in 1968. The actions of demersal otter-trawls have modified the habitats in the trawled areas but it difficult to quantify the level of impacts due to the lack of pre trawling information and temperature and salinity variables.

Spencer Gulf is described by Svane (2007) to have a diverse group of fauna flora and Currie (2009) reported low biomass of poriferans and bryozoans in heavily trawled areas supported the generalization that these taxa are particularly susceptible to demersal trawling. It has been demonstrated by Burridge et al (2003) that benthos have resilience to impacts to benthic trawls especially in area of low intensity. It is noted that there are no complete habitat maps for entire Spencer Gulf although there are detailed habitat maps for the upper reaches of the Spencer Gulf. Stakeholder comments confirmed that trawling only takes place on substrates consisting mainly sand and or mud, which are classified as being low dynamic environment(s). SARDI collates and maps the area trawled each years based on the GPS points from the logbooks . The data confirms the gross area fished by the trawl fleet based on length of trawl and the averaged swept area of the trawl nets. These maps are used as a monitoring tool (Dixon email February 2011).

Given the length of time trawling has been carried out in Spencer Gulf it is highly unlikely that the bottom trawl operations will contribute to any further reduction in habitat structure to a point that would cause irreversible harm to the ecosystem or disrupt the role of habitats. There is no evidence of regime change that would impact on habitat status leading to irreversible decline. There are some dynamics within the trawl areas but its difficult to assign the cause to trawl operations due to external variable such as inter annual variation in oceanic conditions, land based activities including rainfall events and salinity variations. Score: 80 The fishery is highly unlikely to reduce habitat structure and function to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm. (80) Audit Trace References Currie D., Dixon C,, Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S., and Ward T. 2009. Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390.

Dixon, C.D. (2010). Presentation during site visit to SARDI, Tuesday 7th September 2010 and email 28 February 2011

Burridge, C., Pitcher, R., Wassenberg T., Poiner I. and Hill B. (2003). Measurement of the rate of depletion of benthic fauna by prawn (shrimp) otter trawls: an experiment in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Fisheries Research 60: 237 -253.

Svane I., Rodda K. and Thomas P. (2007). Prawn fishery bycatch and discards: marine ecosystem analysis – population effects. FRDC Project 2003/023.

FN 82105 v3 Page 109 109

2.4.2 Management strategy There are measures in place, if necessary, There is a partial strategy in place, if There is a strategy in place for managing There is a strategy in that are expected to achieve the Habitat necessary, that is expected to achieve the the impact of the fishery on habitat types. place that is designed to Outcome 80 level of performance. Habitat Outcome 80 level of performance ensure the fishery does or above. not pose a risk of serious The measures are considered likely to There is some objective basis for The strategy is mainly based on or irreversible harm to work, based on plausible argument (e.g confidence that the partial strategy will information directly about the fishery habitat types. general experience, theory or comparison work, based on information directly about and/or habitats involved, and testing with similar fisheries/habitats). the fishery and/or habitats involved. supports high confidence that the strategy will work.

There is some evidence that the partial There is clear evidence that the strategy is strategy is being implemented being implemented successfully, and successfully. intended changes are occurring. There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its objective.

Scoring Comments A key part of the management strategy is to limit trawl operations to existing trawl area and hence the fishery is not permitted any further expansion. The area of operations has been developed through historical fishing experience, Committee-At-Sea decision and limited to depths greater than 10m. There is also a possibility of using technology in gear design to reduce contacts with the proposed strategy to gear improvement. The management measures at present are to maintain the present gear configurations and not allow any additional increase in gear size or increase in towing power of the vessels. The Committee at Sea decisions are also based on volume of by-catch caught in particular areas SGWCPFA (2009) and Committee At Sea Charter (2009). This could be further qualified with attention given to accurately mapping trawl area habitats and accurately recording interaction with sessile organisms. It is recognised that without detailed habitat maps it is difficult to know what the potential for significant damage to different habitat types might be. Although without detailed habitat maps it is difficult to determine the potential for significant damage to different habitat types Score: 80 There is a partial strategy in place, if necessary, that is expected to achieve the Habitat Outcome 80 level of performance or above (80)

There is some objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy will work, based on information directly about the fishery and/or habitats involved. (80)

There is some evidence that the partial strategy is being implemented successfully (80).

A Recommendation (R 4) is made for this SG (Section 15.3) Audit Trace References SGWCPFA (2009). Annual report 2009

Committee At Sea Charter (2009). (Approved 13 October) .SGWCPFA

FN 82105 v3 Page 110 110

FN 82105 v3 Page 111 111

2.4.3 Information / monitoring There is a basic understanding of the types and The nature, distribution and vulnerability of all The distribution of habitat types is known over Information is adequate to distribution of main habitats in the area of the main habitat types in the fishery area are their range, with particular attention to the determine the risk posed to fishery. known at a level of detail relevant to the scale occurrence of vulnerable habitat types. habitat types by the fishery and intensity of the fishery. and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts Information is adequate to broadly understand Sufficient data are available to allow the nature Changes in habitat distributions over time are on habitat types. the nature of the main impacts of gear use on of the impacts of the fishery on habitat types to measured. the main habitats, including spatial overlap of be identified and there is reliable information habitat with fishing gear on the spatial extent of interaction, and the timing and location of use of the fishing gear.

Sufficient data continue to be collected to The physical impacts of the gear on the habitat detect any increase in risk to habitat (e.g. due types have been quantified fully. to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the measures).

Scoring Comments The Spencer Gulf has diverse marine fauna and flora and has a complex environmental system and variations in physical attributes (Svane et al 2007) There is sufficient data available to map the areas that are heavily trawled based on trawl logbooks data. There is data available to separate the benthic damage caused by fishing as opposes to natural variable of salinity and temperature (Dixon et al 2005).

There is a lack of species specific information and their associated habitats. There has been no manipulative studies to quantify the direct effects of trawling on habitat structure or the direct effects of habitat modification on the ecology of the Spencer Gulf (Currie et al. 2009). Trawling areas are mainly on sand and or muddy substrates, which are considered low energy environments.

Decisions by the Committee-At-Sea takes into account the types of habitat that are being trawled (pers comm. SGWCPA 2010) but this is not recorded except in minutes of SGWCPFA meetings as additional information.

Although there is extensive habitat mapping of the northern Gulf as a result of the EIA for the proposed desalination plant this information is limited to that study site. There is a need for extensive habitat mapping that covers present and historical trawl areas to aid in the decision making process for the Association and to support harvest strategies for ETPs. Score: 75 There is a basic understanding of the types and distribution of main habitats in the area of the fishery.(60)

Sufficient data are available to allow the nature of the impacts of the fishery on habitat types to be identified and there is reliable information on the spatial extent of interaction, and the timing and location of use of the fishing gear (80)

FN 82105 v3 Page 112 112

Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk to habitat (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the measures) (80)

A Condition (C 3) is set for this SG (Section 15.2) Audit Trace References Currie D., Dixon C,, Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S. and Ward T. (2009). Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390.

Dixon C., Svane I. and Ward T. (2005). Monitoring and assessment of bycatch and by-product species of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery. SARDI Research Report Series No. 102.

Svane I., Rodda K. and Thomas P. (2007). Prawn fishery bycatch and discards: marine ecosystem analysis – population effects. FRDC Project 2003/023.

FN 82105 v3 Page 113 113

2.5 Ecosystem

2.5.1 Status The fishery does The fishery is unlikely to disrupt the key The fishery is highly unlikely to disrupt the There is evidence that the fishery is highly not cause serious or elements underlying ecosystem structure and key elements underlying ecosystem structure unlikely to disrupt the key elements underlying irreversible harm to the function to a point where there would be a and function to a point where there would be a ecosystem structure and function to a point key elements of ecosystem serious or irreversible harm. serious or irreversible harm. where there would be a serious or irreversible structure and function. harm.

Scoring Comments The patterns of total abundance and biomasses in the Spencer Gulf may, in part reflect the differences in oceanographic conditions (Currie et al. 2009). An independent survey by Currie (2009) showed that abundance and biomass was substantially lower at high trawl intensity sites and the differences among trawl intensity areas were not statistically significant although it is highly unlikely there is no disruption to key elements of the ecosystem. An acceptable risk assessment being undertaken will improve the knowledge and structure of the ecosystem and provide more precise estimations as to the likelihood of impacts.

This fishery has an element of impact, but not considered significant due the fact the trawl operations have low spatial footprint (13% of Spencer Gulf trawled) only 55 days per year are utilised for trawling (low temporal element) and the fleet operates on the premise that they only trawl for a maximum of 14 nights at an one time (pulse fishing) (maximising moon phases) Score: 80 The fishery is highly unlikely to disrupt the ecosystems due to the small area of the Gulf that is trawled and the seasonal nature of the fleet operations that have in place voluntary closures and measures to react in real time to habitat impacts (80) Audit Trace References Currie D., Dixon C., Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S., and Ward T. 2009. Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research Report Series N0. 390.

FN 82105 v3 Page 114 114

2.5.2 Management strategy There are measures in place, if necessary, that There is a partial strategy in place, if There is a strategy that consists of a plan, There are measures in take into account potential impacts of the necessary, that takes into account available containing measures to address all main place to ensure the fishery fishery on key elements of the ecosystem. information and is expected to restrain impacts impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem, and at does not pose a risk of of the fishery on the ecosystem so as to least some of these measures are in place. The serious or irreversible achieve the Ecosystem Outcome 80 level of plan and measures are based on well- harm to ecosystem performance. understood functional relationships between structure and function. the fishery and the Components and elements of the ecosystem.

The measures are considered likely to work, The partial strategy is considered likely to This plan provides for development of a full based on plausible argument (eg, general work, based on plausible argument (eg, general strategy that restrains impacts on the experience, theory or comparison with similar experience, theory or comparison with similar ecosystem to ensure the fishery does not cause fisheries/ ecosystems). fisheries/ ecosystems). serious or irreversible harm.

There is some evidence that the measures comprising the partial strategy are being The measures are considered likely to work implemented successfully. based on prior experience, plausible argument or information directly from the fishery/ecosystems involved.

There is evidence that the measures are being implemented successfully.

Scoring Comments Historically the fishery has over 30 years of experience and has operated in limited areas and concentrated on areas that are not likely to damage nets such as reefs and hard substrates (Carrick 1997 ) and to depth > 10m and hence the fishery has a small spatial footprint area of the Spencer Gulf.

The Marine Park Act 2007 (Marine Parks Act) came into operation on 29 November 2007 and has been developed to protect and conserve the marine environment and provides for displaced commercial fishing effort compensation (Government of South Australia Marine Parks 2010). There are a series of voluntary closures in place that also support displaced fishing effort. Fishing effort is contained to specific areas and only occurs for < 60 nights per year and this has reduced to 55 nights per year over the last four years

Measures designed have been evaluated elsewhere in the framework and these measures address specific ecosystem impacts such as area of operation and pulse fishing operations. Score: 80 There is a partial strategy in place, if necessary, that takes into account available information and is expected to restrain impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem so as to achieve the Ecosystem Outcome 80 level of performance. (80)

The partial strategy is considered likely to work, based on plausible argument (eg, general experience, theory or comparison with similar fisheries/ ecosystems) (80) FN 82105 v3 Page 115 115

There is some evidence that the measures comprising the partial strategy are being implemented successfully (80). Audit Trace References

Carrick, N. (1997). A preliminary assessment of bycatch from the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. South Australia Fisheries Assessment Series 97/02 pp 57.

Government of South Australia Marine Parks (2010). Www.maineparks.sa.gov.au viewed October 2010.

SGWCPF) (2008). 2008 Annual Report.South Australia.

FN 82105 v3 Page 116 116

2.5.3 Information / monitoring Information is adequate to identify the key Information is adequate to broadly understand Information is adequate to broadly understand There is adequate elements of the ecosystem (e.g. trophic the key elements of the ecosystem. the key elements of the ecosystem. knowledge of the impacts structure and function, community of the fishery on the composition, productivity pattern and ecosystem. biodiversity).

Main impacts of the fishery on these key Main impacts of the fishery on these key Main interactions between the fishery and ecosystem elements can be inferred from ecosystem elements can be inferred from these ecosystem elements can be inferred from existing information, but have not been existing information, but may not have been existing information, and have been investigated in detail. investigated in detail. investigated.

The main functions of the Components (i.e. The impacts of the fishery on target, Bycatch, target, Bycatch, Retained and ETP species and Retained and ETP species and Habitats are Habitats) in the ecosystem are known. identified and the main functions of these Components in the ecosystem are understood.

Sufficient information is available on the Sufficient information is available on the impacts of the fishery on these Components to impacts of the fishery on the Components and allow some of the main consequences for the elements to allow the main consequences for ecosystem to be inferred. the ecosystem to be inferred.

Sufficient data continue to be collected to Information is sufficient to support the detect any increase in risk level (e.g. due to development of strategies to manage changes in the outcome indicator scores or the ecosystem impacts. operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the measures).

Scoring Comments Present information suggests that main ecosystem impacts are known and there is sufficient detail in the research to determine the impacts on the fishery. There is no evidence of trophic cascades in any of the associated species bycatches or associated species.

Research has been carried out by SARDI in conjunction with the Spencer Gulf Prawn fishery to develop understanding towards a marine trophic dynamic model through information of the bycatch mortality and recapture. There is good understanding of the ecological links between important bycatch species and their population facilitating a broader understanding of the current ecosystems and local environments where trawling operations occur (Currie et al 2009 and Dixon et al 2005).

However there is no indication as the likelihood and consequence of impacts arising from land based activities such as agriculture urbanizations on lands adjoining Spencer Gulf or the impacts to the marine ecosystem arising from the proposed development of desalination plant in the western part of Spencer Gulf. These impacts will by cumulative both temporal and spatial. Score: 75

FN 82105 v3 Page 117 117

Information is adequate to broadly understand the key elements of the ecosystem the key elements of the ecosystem (e.g. trophic structure and function, community composition, productivity pattern and biodiversity) (80).

Main impacts of the fishery on these key ecosystem elements can be inferred from existing information, but have not been investigated in detail (60) Sufficient information is available on the impacts of the fishery on these components to allow some of the main consequences for the ecosystem to be inferred (80)

Sufficient data continues to be collected to detect any increase in risk level (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the measures) (80).

A Condition (C 4) is set for this SG (Section 15.2) Audit Trace References Dixon C., Svane I. and Ward T. (2005.) Monitoring and assessment of bycatch and by-product species of the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery. SARDI Research Report Series No. 102.

Currie D., Dixon C,, Roberts S., Hooper E., Sorokin S. and Ward T. (2009). Fishery independent bycatch survey to inform risk assessment of the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery. SARDI Research report Series N0. 390.

FN 82105 v3 Page 118 118

3.1 Governance and Policy

3.1.1 Legal and/or customary The management system is generally The management system is generally framework consistent with local, national or international consistent with local, national or international The management system laws or standards that are aimed at achieving laws or standards that are aimed at achieving exists within an sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC appropriate and effective Principles 1 and 2. Principles 1 and 2. legal disputes and/or customary framework The management system incorporates or is The management system incorporates or is The management system incorporates or is which ensures that it: subject by law to a mechanism for the subject by law to a transparent mechanism for subject by law to a transparent mechanism for - Is capable of delivering resolution of legal disputes arising within the the resolution of legal disputes which is the resolution of legal disputes that is sustainable fisheries in system. considered to be effective in dealing with most appropriate to the context of the fishery and accordance with MSC issues and that is appropriate to the context of has been tested and proven to be effective. Principles 1 and 2; the fishery. - Observes the legal rights created explicitly or Although the management authority or fishery The management system or fishery is The management system or fishery acts established by custom of may be subject to continuing court challenges, attempting to comply in a timely fashion with proactively to avoid legal disputes or rapidly people dependent on it is not indicating a disrespect or defiance of binding judicial decisions arising from any implements binding judicial decisions arising fishing for food or the law by repeatedly violating the same law or legal challenges. from legal challenges. livelihood; and regulation necessary for the sustainability for - Incorporates an the fishery. appropriate dispute resolution framework. The management system has a mechanism to The management system has a mechanism to The management system has a mechanism to generally respect the legal rights created observe the legal rights created explicitly or formally commit to the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people established by custom of people dependent on explicitly or established by custom on people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood in fishing for food or livelihood in a manner dependent on fishing for food and livelihood in a manner consistent with the objectives of consistent with the objectives of MSC a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2. Principles 1 and 2. MSC Principles 1 and 2.

Scoring Comments The Fisheries Management Act 2007 provides a broad statutory framework to ensure the ecologically sustainable management of South Australia’s fisheries resources. The Fisheries Management Act 2007 Act embraces Commonwealth management principles as laid down in Commonwealth Legislation (The Fisheries Management Act (Commonwealth) 1991) and the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act, 1999), which acknowledge the precautionary approach, stakeholder participation and the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management.

All Legislation and actions may also be subject to scrutiny from the Ombudsman. PIRSA is required to respond to Freedom of information requests.

FN 82105 v3 Page 119 119

All Laws and Regulations are subject to Parliamentary scrutiny of regulations. Fishery Specific Management Plans are also submitted before Parliament. The Fisheries Act 1982, the predecessor to the 2007 Act, containing many of the components within the 2007 Act, is proven to have been effective and tested. Legal challenges to the 1982 Act were upheld, and Co-management processes have been, or are being extended, to avoid such challenges in future. Score: 100 The Management system is consistent with local, national and international laws, aimed at achieving sustainable fisheries and Act has explicitly adopted “ecologically sustainable development” including application of the precautionary approach (100).

The management system incorporates or is subject by law to a transparent mechanism for the resolution of legal and has been tested and proven to be effective (100).

The management system or fishery acts proactively to avoid legal disputes or rapidly implements binding judicial decisions arising from legal challenges (100).

The management system has a mechanism to formally commit to the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom on people dependent on fishing a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2 (100). Audit Trace References The Fisheries Management Act, 2007

Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993

Smallridge, (I2)

FN 82105 v3 Page 120 120

3.1.2 Consultation, roles and Organisations and individuals involved in the Organisations and individuals involved in the Organisations and individuals involved in the responsibilities management process have been identified. management process have been identified. management process have been identified. The management system Functions, roles and responsibilities are Functions, roles and responsibilities are Functions, roles and responsibilities are has effective consultation generally understood. explicitly defined and well understood for key explicitly defined and well understood for all processes that are open to areas of responsibility and interaction. areas of responsibility and interaction. interested and affected parties. The management system includes consultation The management system includes consultation The management system includes consultation processes that obtain relevant information from processes that regularly seek and accept processes that regularly seek and accept The roles and the main affected parties, including local relevant information, including local relevant information, including local responsibilities of knowledge, to inform the management system. knowledge. The management system knowledge. The management system organisations and demonstrates consideration of the information demonstrates consideration of the information individuals who are obtained. and explains how it is used or not used. involved in the management process are The consultation process provides opportunity The consultation process provides opportunity clear and understood by all for all interested and affected parties to be and encouragement for all interested and relevant parties. involved. affected parties to be involved, and facilitates their effective engagement.

Scoring Comments PIRSA and SGWCPFA association have defined management implementation tasks which are clearly defined. Specific tasks are assigned from the management plan (Table 7). A series of tasks and duties are clearly defined in MoUs and written agreements. These relate to delegated responsibility for Real time management through the Committee At Sea, Delegated co-management powers for the SGWCPFA and other functions (Section 8.3)

Consultation processes exist and contribute to the formulation of Fisheries Law and regulations, including provision for a public consultation process. The most explicit consultation processes involves the regular SGWCFPA Management Committee meetings held which allows for an exchange of views on the fishery between the principal management organisations. eNGOs have access to various public documents and drafts, but appear to be disadvantaged and marginalised from central management decision making processes, including the Fisheries Council of SA as well as interactions at management level, especially in the context of participation in Ecosystem related activities. FCSA and PIRSA are currently exploring more effective ways for eNGOs to participate in the decision making process (Hollamby, 2010), and they are represented on the SGWCPFA Research Committee.

The management system requires the provision of reports and actions to ensure compliance with the requirements of the fisheries specific management plans. However, higher level discussions and deliberations (e.g from the FCSA) do not appear to be readily available or review in a timely manner. Score: 75 Organisations and individuals involved in the management process have been identified. Functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and well understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction (100).

The consultation process that obtain relevant information from the main affected parties but does not regularly seek and accept relevant information, nor demonstrate consideration of information received. (60)

FN 82105 v3 Page 121 121

The consultation process provides opportunity for all interested and affected parties to be involved (80)

A Condition (5) is made for this SG (Section 15.2) Audit Trace References Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (2008), Agreement for Coordinator At Sea Real Time Management for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery Between Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (“Customer”) and Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association

SGWCPFA (1984). Constitution of the Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Inc

SGWCPFA (2009). The Committee At Sea Charter

Hollamby, K.L., McShane, P.E, Sloan, S., and Brook, J., (2010). Competition to collaboration: exploring co-management models for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Project No. 2007/025, Fisheries Research and Development Corporation

Smallridge (I2), Warhurst (I6), Hollamby (I11)

FN 82105 v3 Page 122 122

3.1.3 Long term objectives Long-term objectives to guide decision- Clear long-term objectives that guide decision- Clear long-term objectives that guide decision- The management policy making, consistent with MSC Principles and making, consistent with MSC Principles and making, consistent with MSC Principles and has clear long-term Criteria and the precautionary approach, are Criteria and the precautionary approach, are Criteria and the precautionary approach, are objectives to guide implicit within management policy. explicit within management policy. explicit within and required by management decision-making that are policy. consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria, and incorporates the precautionary approach.

Scoring Comments Clear Long Term Objectives are defined in the Fisheries Management Act, 2007 and contain direct reference to sustainable exploitation and conservation, protection of aquatic habitats and aquatic ecosystems. The current Management Plan reflects the objectives of the Act. The current Management Plan aims to achieve outcomes that are consistent with broader Government objectives for the management of the marine environment. These include: The National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development, the Precautionary Principle, as set out in the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment, The Australian Government „Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries‟, which relate to the requirements of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; and the National Policy on Fisheries By- catch. Score: 100 Clear long-term objectives that guide decision-making, consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria and the precautionary approach, are explicit within and required by management policy. (100) Audit Trace References The Fisheries Management Act, 2007

PIRSA, Management Plan (September 2007) for the South Australia Spencer Gulf Fishery, Paper No 54, South Australia Fishery Management Series, PIRSA,

FN 82105 v3 Page 123 123

3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable The management system provides for The management system provides for The management system provides for fishing incentives that are consistent with achieving incentives that are consistent with achieving incentives that are consistent with achieving The management system the outcomes expressed by MSC Principles 1 the outcomes expressed by MSC Principles 1 the outcomes expressed by MSC Principles 1 provides economic and and 2. and 2, and seeks to ensure that perverse and 2, and explicitly considers incentives in a social incentives for incentives do not arise. regular review of management policy or sustainable fishing and procedures to ensure that they do not does not operate with contribute to unsustainable fishing practices. subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing.

Scoring Comments The fishery operates in a market based environment and is vulnerable to market fluctuations. The cost of research, fisheries management, and compliance are fully cost recovered to Government through license fees (Hollamby, I11). There are no known adverse management incentives that could undermine sustainability. Input and output measures, supported by limited entry licensing, quota and effort limits, are regarded as sufficient mechanisms to regulate (Smallridge, I2).

There are regular review procedures on cost recovery by FCSA, which would identify distortions to sustainable fishing, were they there. PIRSA and SGWCPFA review service costs on an annual basis. Economic reports are also commissioned (Econsearch, 2010) which evaluate price and cost trends. Score: 100 There are no incentives to sustainable fishing which would lead to distortions. There are a number of cost review and economic assessments undertaken at regular intervals (100). Audit Trace References The Fisheries Management Act, 2007 (defining the functions of the FCSA).

Smallridge (I2), Hollamby (I11)

FN 82105 v3 Page 124 124

3.2 Fishery- specific management system

3.2.1 Fishery- specific Objectives, which are broadly consistent with Short and long term objectives, which are Well defined and measurable short and long objectives achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC‟s consistent with achieving the outcomes term objectives, which are demonstrably The fishery has clear, Principles 1 and 2, are implicit within the expressed by MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2, are consistent with achieving the outcomes specific objectives fishery‟s management system. explicit within the fishery‟s management expressed by MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2, are designed to achieve the system. explicit within the fishery‟s management outcomes expressed by system. MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2.

Scoring Comments The Management Plan sets out well-defined objectives, strategies and activities which are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC principles 1 and 2. Some of these have measurable OVIs. In some cases, performance indicators and reports are very explicit within the management process. These are defined in Tables 6 and 7. However, timelines do appear to have been historically extended (Smallridge I2) or are extensive (over 5 years) causing some delays in implementation of some activities, especially in the context of ecosystem management and bycatch mitigation. Score: 100 Well defined and measurable short and long term objectives, which are demonstrably consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2, are explicit within the fishery‟s management system (100) Audit Trace References Government of South Australia (2007). Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Paper No. 54 September 2007 South Australian, Fisheries Management Series.

DEWHA (2009a) Assessment of the South Australian Prawn Trawl Fishery, October 20009. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn- trawl/index.html

FN 82105 v3 Page 125 125

3.2.2 Decision-making There are informal decision-making processes There are established decision-making . processes that result in measures and strategies to processes that result in measures and strategies The fishery-specific achieve the fishery-specific objectives. to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. management system includes effective Decision-making processes respond to serious Decision-making processes respond to serious Decision-making processes respond to all decision-making processes issues identified in relevant research, and other important issues identified in issues identified in relevant research, that result in measures and monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a strategies to achieve the transparent, timely and adaptive manner and consultation, in a transparent, timely and transparent, timely and adaptive manner and objectives. take some account of the wider implications of adaptive manner and take account of the wider take account of the wider implications of decisions. implications of decisions. decisions.

Decision-making processes use the precautionary approach and are based on best available information.

Explanations are provided for any actions or Formal reporting to all interested stakeholders lack of action associated with findings and describes how the management system relevant recommendations emerging from responded to findings and relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and review recommendations emerging from research, activity. monitoring, evaluation and review activity.

Scoring Comments Management Plans are formulated by PIRSA, in consultation with the SGWCPFA. Decisions made are derived from the defined activities and take account of available research results, as well as monitoring decisions. These decisions are delegated to the management organisations, PIRSA and SGWCPFA. Explanations are provided for actions or lack of actions by the organisations tasked with implementation (as above). Failure to comply with objectively verifiable indicators results in a report submitted to the Minister detailing the reasons for non-compliance (SGWCPFA, 2010e). Formal reporting processes are therefore implicit.

However, It is difficult to see how strategic decisions on bycatch mitigation strategies can be formulated before the end of the current Management Plan timeline. The DEWHA assessment requires that these are implemented in the course of the next Management Plan, thereby extending the timeline. Nevertheless, decision making processes allied to real time decisions ensure that the precautionary approach is applied.

Real time decisions do take place but these are seldom minuted (Hollamby, I 11). Score: 80 There are established decision making processes, which that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery specific objectives (80).

The precautionary approach is applied in decision making processes (80)

Decision making and planning use the Precautionary approach based on best available information (80)

FN 82105 v3 Page 126 126

Audit Trace References Government of South Australia (2007). Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Paper No. 54 September 2007 South Australian, Fisheries Management Series.

DEWHA (2009a) Assessment of the South Australian Prawn Trawl Fishery, October 20009. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn- trawl/index.html

FN 82105 v3 Page 127 127

3.2.3 Compliance and Monitoring, control and surveillance A monitoring, control and surveillance system A comprehensive monitoring, control and enforcement mechanisms exist, are implemented in the has been implemented in the fishery under surveillance system has been implemented in Monitoring, control and fishery under assessment and there is a assessment and has demonstrated an ability to the fishery under assessment and has surveillance mechanisms reasonable expectation that they are effective. enforce relevant management measures, demonstrated a consistent ability to enforce ensure the fishery‟s strategies and/or rules. relevant management measures, strategies management measures are and/or rules. enforced and complied with. Sanctions to deal with non-compliance exist Sanctions to deal with non-compliance exist, Sanctions to deal with non-compliance exist, and there is some evidence that they are are consistently applied and thought to provide are consistently applied and demonstrably applied. effective deterrence. provide effective deterrence.

Fishers are generally thought to comply with Some evidence exists to demonstrate fishers There is a high degree of confidence that the management system for the fishery under comply with the management system under fishers comply with the management system assessment, including, when required, assessment, including, when required, under assessment, including, providing providing information of importance to the providing information of importance to the information of importance to the effective effective management of the fishery. effective management of the fishery. management of the fishery.

There is no evidence of systematic non- compliance.

Scoring Comments There is a comprehensive MCS process in place, which utilizes a combination of administrative control processes, as well as fisher co-management practices. The combination results in an effective enforcement system with a consistent ability to enforce management measures.

The sanction system comprises a penalty points system. This is rarely applied because of high levels of compliance in the fishery. Fishermen comply with management decisions, but also consistently advocate high standards of management and compliance.

Fishers actively participate in supporting information requirements that support the management system Score: 100 There is a comprehensive MCS system (100)

Sanctions are effective but rarely applied (100)

Fishers are highly compliant (100)

There is no evidence of systematic non compliance (100) Audit Trace References PIRSA Fisheries Services (2010). Annual Risk Assessment (Unpublished).

FN 82105 v3 Page 128 128

3.2.4 Research plan Research is undertaken, as required, to achieve A research plan provides the management A comprehensive research plan provides the The fishery has a research the objectives consistent with MSC‟s system with a strategic approach to research management system with a coherent and plan that addresses the Principles 1 and 2. and reliable and timely information sufficient strategic approach to research across P1, P2 information needs of to achieve the objectives consistent with and P3, and reliable and timely information management. MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2. sufficient to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2.

Research results are available to interested Research results are disseminated to all Research plan and results are disseminated to parties. interested parties in a timely fashion. all interested parties in a timely fashion and are widely and publicly available.

Scoring Comments There is a project description (SARDI) and research priorities in place (SGWCPFA), which conform to the requirements of Objective 1b in the Fisheries Management Plan. However, there is no overarching plan in place which sets out priority research activities. SARDI (20101) include provision for basic fisheries statistics and fishery logbook development, fishery-independent and fishery dependent surveys and harvest strategies and real time management, The SGWCPFA research sub-committee programme has a range of responsibilities related to research prioritisation, project evaluation and other matters, many of which could be interpreted effectively to constitute a research planning function. The research sub-committee does maintain and update a list of research priorities, and actions are known to result from these activities. There is a regular commitment to stock assessment work which has a substantial budget as compared to the other activities. There is concern that other priorities are undertaken as required, as opposed to an implicit strategic need.

Research results are disseminated on public websites and widely distributed amongst stakeholders. Score: 70 Research is undertaken as required to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC Principles 1 and 2 but there in no Research Plan which specifically addresses the required outcomes stated under P1 and P 2 (60)

All research results are available and disseminated to interested parties. During the assessment visit it was evident that interested stakeholders had ready access to research materials (80)

A Condition (C 6) is set for this SG (Section 15.2) Audit Trace References Government of South Australia (2007). Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Paper No. 54 September 2007 South Australian, Fisheries Management Series.

SARDI (2009), Research Project Scope and Costing: Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery: Core Stock Assessment.

SGWCPFA (2010b). Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisheries Research Sub-committee, Minutes of Meeting held 30 March 2010

FN 82105 v3 Page 129 129

Web references: http://www.sardi.sa.gov.au/fisheries/publications/2010_publications (SARDI); http://www.prawnassociation.com.au/prawns/Research-co-management.html (SGWCPFA).

FN 82105 v3 Page 130 130

3.2.5 Monitoring and The fishery has in place mechanisms to The fishery has in place mechanisms to The fishery has in place mechanisms to management evaluate some parts of the management system evaluate key parts of the management system evaluate all parts of the management system performance evaluation and is subject to occasional internal review. and is subject to regular internal and and is subject to regular internal and external There is a system for occasional external review. review. monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives.

There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system.

Scoring Comments South Australia‟s Fisheries management system is subject to internal and external performance evaluation. PIRSA undertakes its own internal monitoring reviews on the basis of activities defined in the Management Plan. An external assessment report is publically available on the DEWHA website at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl/index.html. The process is such that PIRSA prepares a submission based on the results of work undertaken (PIRSA, 2009), DEWHA responds with recommendations and time lines. A formal report is prepared (DEWHA, 2009b) along with a Minister‟s letter (DEWHA, 2009c) confirming export accreditation. The PIRSA submission is also publically available for comment on the DEWHA website. The Association is consulted on the PIRSA submission and its responses to DEWHA. DEWHA/SEWPAC assessment process does not review all aspects of the fishery‟s performance and, in particular, does not address all the objectives of this fishery.

The role of the fishery‟s council in considering management plans prior to their finalization can be regarded as a peer review of the management arrangements but cannot be regarded as a performance review of the effectiveness or implementation of the arrangements which is what is required under this indicator. PIRSA may also commission independent reviews on specific management plans and strategies (Smallridge, I 2).

The Fisheries Council also draws from highly experienced individuals, which will also pass judgement and conduct a strategic overview on the plans pre finalisation. The Fisheries Council has become more actively involved in the formulation of management plans, including review of activities to be undertaken.

SARDI operates and internal peer review process, but no external review.

There are no formal external review processes of the activities of the Committee at sea within the co management framework, nor the performance of the SGWCPFA. However the Fisheries Management process is reviewed as part of the DEWHA review process.

SARDI research and the SGWCPFA Research Committee activities are not subject to external review. This is a key part of the management system. Score: 60 The fishery has in place mechanisms to evaluate some parts of the management system and is subject to internal and external review. However, key parts of the management system (SARDI and SGWCPFA) are not subject to external review (60) FN 82105 v3 Page 131 131

A Condition (C 7) is set for the SG (Section 15.2) Audit Trace References DEWHA (2009a) Assessment of the South Australian Prawn Trawl Fishery, October 20009. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn- trawl/index.html

DEWHA (2009b) Ministerial Decision, October, 2009. Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/fisheries/sa/prawn-trawl/index.html

FN 82105 v3 Page 132 132

Appendix C: Risk-Based Assessment Framework

This appendix is structured as follows: A. Rationale for use of the Risk-based Framework B. Implementation process C. Results - Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis (SICA) D. Results - Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) A. Rationale for use of the Risk-based Framework The MSC methodology presumes that the conventional FAM should be used where sufficient data are available. A decision-tree was assessed to determine if there was sufficient data to determine whether this information is indeed sufficient or whether use of the RBF is justified: Decision point Response Action 1. Can the current status of the Retained and bycatch species are monitored The lack of a traditional stock species (e.g. stock biomass) through logbook returns and occasional bycatch assessment to date requires be estimated relative to surveys. No absolute stock biomass ratios (e.g. that the RBF should be used unfished? fished vs. unfished) are available since the pro tem (for PI 2.1.1, 2.2.1). volumes of individual species caught are low, or sometimes higher quantities are very localised.

2. Can the biologically-based At present no biologically-based limits for this Use of the RBF is therefore limits for sustainability (e.g. stock have been estimated. justified reference points) be estimated such that serious or irreversible harm could be identified?

Retained species, bycatch and benthic habitats are eligible to use the RBF for this and subsequent MSC assessments. The assessment uses the FAM assessment tree to evaluate the stock status for Balmain slipper lobster (Ibacus peronii), calamari (Sepioteuthis australia), and for bycatch species, blue swimming crab (Portunnus pelagicus), cuttle fish (Sepia apama), snapper (Parfrus auratus), Leatherjacket (Thamnaconus degeni), Port Jackson shark (Heterodonus portusjacksons), and Stingaree (Aetobatu narinari).

B. Implementation process and results of the RBF B.1 Background to the fishery The fishery catches around 2,000 t of king Prawns annually, within a limited area of the Gulf (13%) > 10m depth, at less than 55 days fishing per annum. Retained species each account for less than 5% of the total catch, but in the case of Balmain bugs, require some management actions in order to prevent recruitment overfishing. Squid are not regarded as a high risk and are caught in other fisheries operating in the Gulf. Resulting bycatch levels as a consequence of prawn trawling in the Spencer Gulf is difficult to quantify using a ratio to target species. This is due to the fact that as trawl intensity increases the amount of bycatch declines resulting in proportionally less bycatch in areas that are trawled with less intensity (C. Dixon pers. Comm.). Catch samples (based on 395 species collected from 120 sites with total weight of 4.2 tonnes) indicated that the bycatch-to-prawn ration wa 2:1 in areas subjected to high trawling and 3.2:1 in areas subjected to moderate intensity and 8.7:1 in area of low intensity trawling history (Currie et al. 2009).

B.2 Process The intention to utilise the RBF was announced to stakeholders in the communication of 28th June 2010. No comments were received as a result. Discussions during the site visit (6-10 September 2010) indicated that the RBF would be used for PI 2.1.1 and PI 2.2.1 (see rationale above). It was decided that sufficient information was available to score PI 1.1.1, and PI 2.4.1 and 2.5.1

FN 82105 v3 Page 133 133 using the conventional FAM approach. RBF workshops were held separately with three groups of stakeholders, SARDI scientists, ENGOs and fishermen. The results identified similar interpretations, but the most conservative decisions are used in the scoring sheet.

The meeting was facilitated by team members Dr. Kevin Stokes and Geoff Dews. The RBF process was over-seen by the Team Leader, Richard Banks. The attendance of the meetings was documented and signed off by each consultee.

The information gained from the meeting has been incorporated into the SICA and PSA analyses below.

FN 82105 v3 Page 134 134

C. Results - Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis (SICA) Spatial Temporal Intensity Performance Risk-causing Consequence MSC scale of scale of of Relevant subcomponents Indicator activities score Score activity activity activity Retained species Fishing activities outcome from all fisheries

Calamary (Southermn 1 3 1 1 >80 calamari: (Sepioteuthis australis)

Balmain sliiper 2 3 3 2 > 60 lobster (Ibacus peronii) Population size

80 80 >80

Cuttlefish (Sepia 2 3 1 1 > 80 apama)

Blue swimming 2 3 3 3 > 60 Crab: (Portunus pelagicus)

Sand (i.e. 2 3 3 1 > 60 “skipjack”) trevally (pseudocaranx wrighti):

FN 82105 v3 Page 135

Degens 2 3 3 1 > 60 leatherjacket: (Thmnaconus degeni)

Port Jackson shark 2 3 3 1 > 60 (Heterodonus portusjacksons) Coastal 2 3 2 1 >80 stingarees (Urolophus orarius Snapper (Parfrus 2 2 (3) 2 1 >80 auratus) Rationale: Risk-causing: For all species, capture during fishing is regarded as the main risk-causing activity. Spatial scale of activity: Calamary Spatial scale: 1 (<1) southern calamary is the most common squid species in southern Australian waters. The species is wide spread around Australia, ranging from Dampier in Western Australia to Moreton Bay in Queensland NZ (Roberts and Steer 2010 SARDI 439) Temporal Scale: 3 (1-100 days per year) caught throughout the prawn fishery seasons Intensity: 1 (SARDI 439) Consequence: 1 (Research by SARDI published in Roberts and Steer (2010) indicated that regional trawl intensity did not affect calamary abundance as there was no relationship between temporal differences in calamary catch rates as associated trawl effort and hence unlikelihood of detection of activity at any spatial or temporal scale against background variability.) Average = 6/4 = 1.5 corresponds to MSC equivalent score (retained species) of > 80. Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) widespread in Spencer Gulf, lives in bare sandy environments (SARDI 390 (Roberts and Steer 2010, Currie et al. 2009) Balmain slipper lobster Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) widespread in Spencer Gulf, lives in bare sandy environments (SARDI 390 (Roberts and Steer 2010, Currie et al. 2009) Temporal Scale: 3 (1-100 days per year) caught throughout the prawn fishery seasons Intensity: 3 (SARDI 439) There is evidence of change in local abundance in high intensity prawn fishing areas (Roberts and Steer 2010). It is anticipated that PIRSA will introduce restrictions on the retention of bugs under the 117 cm in size as a way of protecting 50% of female bug population while still maintaining restriction on retaining berried females. Consequence: 2, There is likely to be localised depletion although there may be effects of seasonality which leads to uncertainty in how representative survey data is of actual bug population throughout the season (Roberts and Steer 2010) Average = 10/4=2.5 corresponding to MSC equivalent score (target, bycatch, retained species) of > 60 Cuttlefish SICA: Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) based on SARDI 390 distribution maps Temporal Scale: 3 (1-100 days per year) caught at low levels throughout the prawn fishery seasons Intensity: 1 (pers comm. Steer Sept 2010 Stakeholder meeting Adelaide), (Steer and Hall 2005) Looking at the abundance and biomass through

FN 82105 v3 Page 136

time its highly variable so it is not possible to determine if fishing or environmental factors influence the variability. Cephalopod populations are typically unstable and highly governed by environmental processes (Steer and Hall 2005). Consequence: 1 as there is only remote likelihood of detection of activity at any spatial or temporal scale Average = 7/4 = 1.75 corresponds to MSC equivalent score (target, bycatch, retained species) of > 80 PSA: 1.87-2.13 Low Risk > 80 Blue swimming crab SICA: Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) widespread in Spencer Gulf (Roberts and Steer 2010, Currie et al. 2009)) Temporal Scale: 3 (1-100 days per year) caught throughout the prawn fishery seasons Intensity: 3 (conservative interpretation) In high intensity trawl grounds would expect local activity effects, but not often at broad scale; also, prawn trawl effects confounded with directed fishery effects from the trap fishery Consequence: 3 – high exploitation in southern fishery but crabs also exist in high abundance in lower intensity fishing areas, the population displays large-scale inter-annual variation, modification to the trawl nets and on-deck sorting practices and the use of hopper/conveyor systems will result in a reduction in post-trawl mortality ((SARDI 2003) Average = 11/4=2.75 corresponding to MSC equivalent score (target, bycatch, retained species) of >60 Sand (i.e. “skipjack”) Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size trevally (pseudocaranx Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) widespread in Spencer Gulf (SARDI 390) wrighti) Temporal Scale: 3 (1-100 days per year) caught throughout the prawn fishery seasons Intensity: 3 In high intensity trawl grounds would expect local activity effects Consequence: 1 Studies on the total bycatch of the Spencer Gulf suggests that it would be difficult to determine any changes in abundance of this species due to the capture by the prawn trawl operations (C Dixon pers. comm. 2010) Average = 9/4=2.25 = corresponding to MSC equivalent score (target, bycatch, retained species) of >60 Degens leatherjacket: Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size (Thmnaconus degerii) & Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) widespread in Spencer Gulf (Roberts and Steer 2010, Currie et al. 2009)) Snapper (Parfrus Temporal Scale: 3 (1-100 days per year) caught throughout the prawn fishery seasons auratus) Intensity: 3 In the areas of high intensity trawling it would be expected that there would be local effects Consequence: 1 Unlikely to be detectable against background variable for this population

Average = 19/4=2.25 corresponding to MSC equivalent score (target, bycatch, retained species) of > 60 Port Jackson shark Rick causing activity > fishing; relavant subcomponent > population size (Heterodonus Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) distribution is Western Pacific and southern Australia from Byron Bay (NSW) to Houtman Abrolhos (WA) ( wwwfishbase). A common shark distributed from the continental Shelf to close inshore at the intertidal zone (www.fishbase.org). portusjacksons) Temporal scale: 3 (1-100 days per year) caught throughout the prawn fishery season. Intensity: 3 Port Jackson shark were the most common species of elasmobranch in the studies on by-catch and discards reported in 2007 (Svane et al 2007 SARDI Report 199), Consequence: 1. They have a high resilience to mortality and highly successful scavengers. The evidence from Svane et al. 2007, suggests that they feed heavily on discarded by-catch. Port Jackson sharks lay their eggs capsules between August and November, therefore capsule carrying females are protected because their reproductive season is completed before fishing commences (Svane et a.l 2007) Average 8/4 = 2 corresponding to MSC equivalent score > 80

Coastal stingarees Risk causing activity > fishing: relevant subcomponent > population size (Urolophus orarius) Spatial scale: 2 Distribution of the species is restricted to and likely to be endemic within South Australia (Thomas and Chick 2007). Temporal scale: 2 (3) (1-100 days per year) caught throughout the prawn season Intensity: 2 The species is rarely caught in trawls (Dixon et al. 2005) Consequence: 1 Unlikely to be detectable against background variability for this population

FN 82105 v3 Page 137

Average: 8/4 = 2 >80

FN 82105 v3 Page 138

D. Results - Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA)

ory

capture

Total Total

Name

maturity Maturity strategy

mortality

(average)

Fecundity guidepost

(fishbase)

Selectivity

Availability

PSA Score PSA

MSCscore

Trophic Trophic level Post

MSCscoring

Reproductive

RiskCateg

(multiplicative)

Average Average age at

Average size Average at

Encounterability

Total Total Productivity Average max Average age SCIENTIFIC_NAME COMMON_NAME max Average size Ibacus peronei Balmain bug 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1.43 2 2 3 2 1.58 2.13 Low >80 93 Sepioteuthis Australia Calamary 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.00 2 3 3 3 2.33 2.53 Low >80 83 PI Score 85 Blue swimmng Portunnus pelagicus crabs 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.00 2 3 3 2 1.88 2.13 Low >80 93 Cuttlefish Sepia apama assessment 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1.43 2 2 3 3 1.68 2.36 Low >80 88 Pseudocaranx wright Sand Trevally 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1.38 1.7 Low >80 99 Thmnaconus degerii Degens leather jacket 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1.14 2 2 3 3 1.88 2.20 Low >80 91 Parfrus auratus Snapper 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1.14 2 2 3 3 1.88 2.20 Low >80 91 Heterodonus Port Jackson portusjacksons shark 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1.57 2 2 3 1 1.28 2.02 Low >80 95 Aetobatu narinari (Urolophus orarius) Stingaree 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1.57 2 1 3 2 1.28 2.02 Low >80 95 PI Score 90

The two retained species have MSC PSA score of 85 for the PI as a whole using the scoring guidance in Paragraph 4.2.2

All (SARDI) bycatch species have an MSC PSA score of 90 for the PI as a whole using the scoring guidance in Paragraph 4.2.2

FN 82052 v3 Page 139

FN 82052 v3 Page 140

Appendix D: Peer Review Reports

i. 1. Peer Reviewer Biographies

Peer Reviewers:

1. Mary Lack (Report A) Mary Lack has extensive experience in fisheries management, domestic and international fisheries governance and fisheries trade analysis. She has been the Director of Shellack Pty. Ltd, a consulting company, based in Canberra Australia for the past 10 years. In that role Mary specializes in providing independent advice on fisheries management, governance and trade to government, non-government and intergovernmental organizations. Previously, Mary worked in senior fisheries management roles in the Australian Government. In recent years her work has focused on sustainability and governance issues in Australian fisheries and in regional fisheries management organizations. She has also chaired a number of fisheries management and marine related government committees. Mary has qualifications in agricultural and resource economics, over 25 years experience in Australian and international fisheries management and a sound understanding of the MSC principles and criteria through her involvement in a number of pre-assessments and assessments.

2. David Brewer (Report B) David Brewer is the Research Program Leader, Marine Ecological Processes and Prediction Program (MEPP) which conducts research from CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research (CMAR) laboratories based at Hobart, Tasmania, Floreat, Western Australia and Cleveland, Queensland.

Scientists in the MEPP Program undertake extensive field programs, and laboratory and field-based experimental studies, to investigate the distribution, movements, status and connectivity of marine organisms, habitats and communities, as well as oceanographic and trophic processes that shape ecosystem resilience and the impacts of natural processes and human activities.

David‟s research career has included understanding ecology of coastal and offshore tropical fish communities in north Australian and Indo-west pacific tropical habitats, assessing natural mortality of prawn stocks through fish feeding biology and ecology, design, implementation and assessment of bycatch reduction devices, risk assessment for tropical trawl bycatch, bycatch monitoring and sustainability assessments.

David‟s current research activities include assessing sustainability of prawn trawl bycatch, understanding and minimising impacts of threatened, endangered and protected marine species, impacts of mine waste disposal on coastal marine communities, bioregionalisation of Australian oceans

FN 82052 v3 Page 141

ii. Peer Review Report A

Comments on this Assessment Report are structured as follows: 1. Comments on the text in Sections 1-15

2. Comments on the Scoring Table including comments on associated Conditions and Recommendations PART1 Sections 1-8 Sections 1-3 Comments on the Conditions and Recommendations in Section 1 are included here under Part 22. I have no specific comments on sections 2-3. Section 4 4.3 (p.18, para 1). Apart from the target species, only slipper lobster and southern calamary can be retained. This implies that all other catch must be discarded. It would be helpful to confirm this in the text. Section 5 5.1 (p.20, para 1). Does any discarding of the target species occur? If so, is it recorded?

MM: There is no report of any discarding and discussions in Adelaide and Port Lincoln did not suggest there was an issue. A small amendment to the report to say there is no discarding. This is confirmed in an email from C Dixon, February, 2011.

5.1 (p.21, para 2). The text describes the robustness (or lack of ) of the stock assessment surveys (SAS) but provides no indication of the status of the spot surveys. A description of the nature of these surveys would be helpful. Further, the text indicates that the SAS should result in unbiased relative indices so long as the annual spatial prawn distributions are reasonably stable. It would be helpful to confirm whether the distribution is in fact stable over time. MM: Spot surveys are small, industry-driven surveys that target particular areas of the gulf that the committee at sea consider as potential areas for inclusion in a new harvest strategy. The surveys record catch rates and size frequencies. Spot surveys are usually conducted during months when stock assessment surveys are not. On these occasions the original harvest strategy that was developed from stock assessment survey data is adjusted to include new areas identified as suitable for fishing from spot survey data. The distribution of prawns will vary in detail annually as it is linked both to bottom type and salinity (especially for juveniles). The purpose of recommendation 1, relating to the SAS, is to test the robustness off the SAS and suitability for informing management. It is envisaged that this issue (prawn distributional variation) would be part of that testing.

Section 6 6.1.1 (p. 25, para 2). “Whilst the primary objective of the harvest strategy management is economic efficiency, sustainability is also very important”. This statement is inconsistent with the following statement on P. 22 “The primary aim of the harvest strategy is for the fleet to target areas of high catch rate of appropriately sized prawns, ensuring biological sustainability (goal 1) and promoting economic efficiency (goal 2)”. The Management plan itself refers to the need to balance ecological sustainability and optimum utilisation, and states (P.6) that ecological sustainability is the primary goal.

MM: Yes. Changes made on p22 and on p25. On p22 the text has been modified slightly. On p25 a paragraph has been deleted. It was confusing and redundant.

FN 82052 v3 Page 142

6.1.1 (p. 25, para 3). Does the harvest strategy provide an incentive for discards of the target species e.g. small sized prawns? While it is acknowledged that the spot surveys and real time management enable the fishery to avoid the capture of small prawns, it is unlikely that this would completely successful.

MM: Small prawns are caught but the fishery actively avoids them by the use of real time reporting and area closures. There is no obvious incentive to discard/misreport and none was intimated at any point during site visit or other discussions.

6.1.2 (p. 28, para 1). What proportion of fishers complete the voluntary logbook on bycatch?

MM: The compulsory lobbook response on target and retained species, and describes as poor on bycatch / ETP recording. Recommendation 3 suggests observer recording of the discard species and bycatch rates through these preseason surveys and during fishing operations.

Section 7 7.2.1 (p. 30, para. 4). It is noteworthy that there is no requirement to report discards of the retained by-product species.

MM: A recommendation is incorporated to include recording of at risk species.

7.2.3 (p.32 para 1). “Accurate and verifiable information is available on catch of retained species of slipper lobster”. This does not seem consistent with paragraph 4 on p. 30 which suggests that there is considerable difference between reported catch and estimated catch. The same issue exists for calamary (p. 32 para 4).

MM: Accurate and verifiable‟ deleted from the text and p 32 para 4 also corrected

7.3.1 (p.34) Sharks and Rays: South Australia has signed on to Australia‟s national plan of action on sharks. The Plan identified a minimum data set (Appendix E of the Plan) for collection of shark catch, including bycatch. Failure to mandate logbook reporting of shark species taken as bycatch is inconsistent with that minimum data set.

MM: Reference is now made in the text setting out the minimum data set for collection of shark species is through logbooks

7.3.1 (p.35, para 2); last sentence “In the logbook …..” is unclear and requires rewriting.

MM: RE WORDED TO: Flounder and flatheads (the short tooth flounder and 3 species of flathead) and have a relatively long lifespan (>4 years).

The report 2005 Dixon et al. states: “Due to poor temporal and spatial replication, historical data on the abundance of by-catch species in Spencer Gulf could not be used for statistical assessment of abundance for commonly captured species. Therefore this report (Dixon eta l 2005) was limited to the selection of a list of potential indicator species” This is also part of the Condition 3.

7.3.2 (p. 36, para 6). Edit: also. It should be noted in the last sentence that the RBF was only applied to 4 of the bycatch species. It is not clear, for example, whether any of the other (apart from Port Jackson) shark and ray species taken, are of particularly high vulnerability. MM: The insertion is as follows: The SICA was applied to 9 species (through a workshop process (I.3) Only those species scoring 2 or more were subjected to the PSA analysis. These were identified the species interactions as „Low Risk‟

FN 82052 v3 Page 143

7.4 (p.37) A 2010 report (available at http://adl.brs.gov.au/data/warehouse/pe_brs90000004190/SeabirdAssessment2008_20100318_ap14.pdf ) recommended that “An assessment of seabird bycatch in Australian trawl fisheries is warranted to ensure Australian trawl fisheries are not impacting seabird populations.” There is no mention of any interactions with seabirds in this fishery. For completeness it would therefore be useful to point to information that confirmed that this was not an issue in this fishery. Presumably fishing at night minimizes the potential for such interactions.

MM: This is a night fishery and carried out some distance from the shoreline and the seabirds species are predominately day time feeders. Seabirds have not been observed to have interactions with the night time trawls

PARAGRAPH 2 7.4.1 (p.37, par 5). It would be helpful to expand on why the assessors see the lack of “specific criteria … to evaluate levels of vulnerability” and “national guidelines ...to determine levels of vulnerability status of ETP species” as a problem. There is a recommendation on this issue and as such it would be helpful if the rationale for this was clarified in the text.

MM: Additional comments now in the text

7.4.3 (p. 38, para 5). Is the ETP data collected on logbooks validated?

MM: There is a report on the logbooks to be released soon by SARDI – this was not be made available to the assessors

7.6.1 (p.39, para, 6). “The reduction in CPUE and in the number of nights trawled over the last 4 years..”. The most recent data presented is up 2008/09. Fig 5 shows a reduction in CPUE only between 07/08 and 08/09, so it is not clear that there has been a reduction in CPUE over the last 4 years. Further, it is not clear how a reduction in CPUE supports a conclusion that the fishery is unlikely to disrupt key elements of the ecosystem. Should sentence one read “activity is unlikely to” (agreed) rather than “is not unlikely to”?

MM: The reduction in effort of the years 07/08 and 08/09 and the limited number of nights trawled indicates there is unlikely to be dramatic alteration in the ecosystem functions as a direct result from trawling. There would be concern if the CPUE was increasing dramatically and the number of nights trawled was increasing - there may be concern for consequences to the ecosystem functions – however this is not the situation. The ecosystem variations are also due to climatic and land based activities not only trawling and its is difficult to determine the specific impacts from specific sectors

7.6.2 (p.39, para 8): number of days trawled and area of operation are usually regarded as input rather than output controls.

MM: Agreed that are of operation and number of days are input controls – corrected in the text Section 8 8.3 (p. 46, para 1). The last dot point refers to the observer program. It would be helpful to include a summary of the nature and extent of observer coverage. Some detail is provided in the records of interview however, the main text of the assessment report should clearly specify the purpose and extent of the observer programme in this fishery since it appears to have quite a specific function and is not what might be generally expected of an „observer program‟ This might best be done under section 7.

MM: The observer programme is restricted to the independent stock assessment surveys.

FN 82052 v3 Page 144

Reference is added in a footnote to 8.3.

8.6 Table 5. It seems noteworthy that there is no compliance OVI associated with ensuring that the catch limits set for each period are not exceeded

MM: The Committee at Sea monitors catch uptake by mean size limits according to the parameters set out in Table 2 (March and April, and May to June). Total period catch restrictions apply in November to December. Performance indicators for assessment are provided in Table 5 including catch and mean commercial CPUE. At sea decision rules (real time) are applied by fishers Table 11: At sea decision rules for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. Harvest period November & December March & April May & June Strategy nature Con Std Max Con Std Max Con Std Max Total catch (t) <350 <450 <600 N/A N/A Mean size (no./7 kg) <250 <200 <220 <240 <220 <240 <260 Minimum average 350 kg 400 kg 400 kg catch (kg) per boat per night Con=conservative, Std=standard, Max=maximum.

8.6 Table 7 Some specific commentary about the lack of opportunity (only in one process) for conservation sector input to the management process is warranted

MM: This is covered in Section 8.4 and 8.9. The scoring tables also draws specific conclusions on the whether the consultation process regularly seeks and accepts relevant information, and provides opportunity‟.

8.8.1 (P. 56 para 6). Last dot point. Some information on the number of offences would help to support the statement that non-compliance is very low.

MM: Identified by Fisheries Services as 2 in two years, related to the carriage of finfish onboard (I10).

8.9 (p. 58, Table 8). Some indication of the level of research activity against each of the research priority areas would be helpful. Are these in order of priority? How does the Research Committee go about ensuring that priority research areas are actioned?

MM: SGWCPFA state that there is a dynamic prioritisation list, that will be modified by the Sub-research committee as new information and requirements are tabled. This list is prioritised as of last financial year, which reflected the performance indicators highlighted in the management plan that had not been met. The diversity of stakeholders at the Research sub-committee, including Conservation sector members, PIRSA and SARDI, ensure there is a variety of drivers to action the research. The management plan and the associated performance indicators are also drivers in the actioning of research priorities. ETP and bycatch research work, whilst low down on the list, has been actively pursued, and the ranking appears to give the wrong impression. References to the current work is added to 8.9.

8.10 (P. 58, para 6). SEWPAC‟s sustainability assessments constitute only a partial review of the fishery‟s performance. In particular ,those assessments make no attempt to monitor Goal 2 “Ensure optimal utilization and equitable distribution”. Nor do the SEWPAC assessments monitor performance against objectives such as “industry delegated greater responsibility in management” or “costs of management of the fishery are funded by the relevant stakeholders”,

FN 82052 v3 Page 145

MM: Added to the text.

8.10 (P. 59, Para 3). Clarification of the nature of the internal review process operated by SARDI is required. Is this of stock assessments or of its overall performance?

MM: The reviews constitute internal reviews of the Research reports. Not of the research plan. Clarified in the text. p. 50, para 4). See comments above on DEWHA/SEWPAC performance review

Part 2 Scoring Table Principle 1 1.1.2 Condition: The rationale for the score suggests that the only scoring issue at the SG80 level that the fishery did not meet related to the ecological role of prawns. This is consistent with the score of 60 for this issue. All other scoring issues are scored at 80. It is unclear, therefore, why the condition requires “ a clear explanation of the use of reference points and triggered actions clearly linked to the requirements for limits and targets in the FAM” as well as requiring explicit consideration of the role of prawns in the ecosystem.

MM: Technically this is correct. However, although other scoring guideposts are met at the 80 level, a central difficulty of the P1 assessment relates to inference of implicit reference points. Considerable discussion took place on this issue during site visits and it was recognized that there was a need for greater clarity in the management plan, either (minimally) by clarifying in the new management plan how the reference points in use relate to MSC FAM requirements or perhaps by going further to justify reference points explicitly related to the FAM. With development of a new management plan it is also possible that implicit reference point swill be changed, potentially necessitating further investigation at audit or re-assessment; ideally this would be avoided. As written, the condition asks only that a clear explanation be provided as part of a planned process and that it include a consideration of the role of prawns in the ecosystem. This is not inconsistent with the scoring. It is also as discussed during the visit and should neither be a surprise not onerous. The rest of the condition is guidance as to what might be done; it is not prescriptive. At this stage, no change has been made to the condition.

Principle 2 Scoring Comments: Para 1. The validity of the following statement is questionable: “There is a high degree of certainty that the bycatch is within biological limits given the bycatch ratios for prawn trawling…” Whether the certainty can be based on the relatively low bycatch ratios depends on the vulnerability of the bycatch species as well as the level of interaction.

MM: Based on evidence suggested by Svane There is some certainty based on rations, that the bycatch is within biological limits given the bycatch ratios for prawn trawling in the Spencer Gulf being among the lowest recorded for penaeid trawl fisheries Svane et al (2007) with the higher concentrations of fishing activity corresponding to the lowest bycatch levels by weight (2:1) Svane et al( 2007) however there is uncertainty as the to vulnerability of the individual species in the bycatch.

Para 3 states that the fishery has demonstrated that the “mitigation measures are in place” however under Indicator 2.2.2 (para 1) it is stated that “nor is there specific bycatch mitigation measures implemented”. It seems that the last statement is accurate and the statement under 2.2.1 should be removed. 2.2.2 (para 1) is based on the concept that there is no species specific by mitigation measures implemented: the test now reflects this

FN 82052 v3 Page 146

MM: Noted and agree.

2.3.1 Scoring comments: Para 1. Suggest rewording of first sentence: Syngnathids are a „listed marine species‟ under the EPBC Act……”

MM: Agree and amended

Para 1 also states “However, there are no national or international limits set on these species presently and limits/triggers have not as yet been set by DEWHA such that there is a specific concern posed from this ,or any other national fishery”. Given that the fishery is scored at 100 against the scoring issue “There is a high degree of certainty that the effects of the fishery are within limit of national and international requirements for protection of ETP species” it is unclear what the intent of this statement is. On the one hand the report suggests that there are no limits and on the other it says that there is a high degree of certainty that the fishery is within those limits. It must be one or the other, not both.

MM: Noted and corrected

It would be helpful to provide some data on the reported level of interaction of the fishery with syngnathids.

MM: Entered in the text: SARDI undertook an assessment of by-catch interactions (Currie et al (2009). One syngnathid was captured in an area of high trawl intensity, while seven individuals from six different sites were captured in areas of moderate trawl intensity. Most syngnathids were captured from areas of low trawl intensity (65 individuals from 18 sites). This survey only provided a snapshot of the study site and did not account for seasonal variations and historical information is only available at a scale of the fishing blocks and thus effort applied at specific sites is unknown

2.3.2 Scoring comments: Para 1 second sentence: clarify: “… has voluntarily closed areas known to be abundant “ Corrected Score: I agree that there appears to be a “strategy” in place,. Is there evidence that closures have reduced interactions? What is the objective basis that the strategy will work? A partial strategy is in place- the ETP interaction is lower scoring than 2.1 and 2.2 – score of 75 is warranted.

MM: The system of protected areas and self maintained closures are a support to a precautionary management measures based on the protection of habitat that is known to support delicate communities and marine species. It is difficult to use the fishery-independent survey to quantify ETPSs because: 1. Survey only provide a snapshot and do not account for seasonal variations 2. Historical information is not available at a scale to determine specific site location variations and 3. Depletion rates associated with commercial prawn trawl effort are unknown.

MM has reviewed the balance of‟ strategy‟ against „partial strategy‟, and confirms the scoring to reflect a strategy. This is based on the fact that there are gazetted and voluntary closed areas, as well as a Committee at Sea move on policy were syngnathid encounters identified. It is also noteworth that the critical syngnathid habitats are inside the 10 m isobaths where trawling is prohibited. The Condition has been changed to a Recommendation.

Recommendation 6: Given the absence of mitigation measures for this ETP species, the

FN 82052 v3 Page 147

inclusion of the requirements of this recommendation as a second stage of Condition 2 (2.3.3) would seem warranted.

MM: Agreed Recommendation 6 is not required given Conditions 2.3.3 is more appropriate

2.3.3 Condition: The condition requires an annual bycatch report”. It is unclear whether this relates only to syngnathids or to all bycatch.

MM: Amended to include all ETPs

2.4.1 Scoring Comments: a finding of “highly unlikely” does not seem to be supported by the admission that there are no habitat maps, there is no system of recording precise trawling patterns and it is difficult to quantify the level of impact.

MM: There is no precision mapping based on VMS (VMS is not fitted to any of the vessels currently) but SARDI map the „footprint‟ using log book reference points from the vessel GPS. This is now reflected in the text

2.4.3 Score: In the absence of VMS what is the nature of the “reliable information on the spatial extent of the interaction” and what data are collected to enable “any increase in risk to habitat” to be detected” as required by SG80. The condition implies that the latter scoring issue has not been met at the SG80 level however the scoring comments suggest that it meets the SG80 level for this issue. If in fact the fishery does not meet this scoring issue, as is suggested by the condition, then the score should be reduced from 75.

MM: Clarification is included in the text. Precision is based on the fact that VMS only gives a more precise map of trawl areas in that it shows trawl that are not in a strait line where are log book data make the assumption that the trawl is in a strait line – the variations of the overall foot print because of this can be considered low. Logbooks are reliable information in regards to calculating a detailed „footprint „ relevant to the scale of trawl interaction to the overall area of the Spencer Gulf. The condition for 2.4.3 is therefore set to „strengthen‟ the information

Principle 3 3.1.1 The more important point is that the Act has explicitly adopted “ecologically sustainable development” including application of the precautionary approach.

MM: Added

3.1.2 Scoring Comments: Paragraph two, sentence two, refers to “the most implicit consultation processes”. On what basis are these processes regarded as “implicit consultation” and if this is the only form of consultation it is questionable as to whether it meets the requirements of SG80 which requires more than an implicit process.

MM: Changed to explicit

The inclusion of a recommendation relating to the need to formalize the participation of external stakeholders calls into question whether the current arrangements meet the “regularly seek and accept” requirements of SG80. Additional supporting information relating to existing opportunities for “interested and affected parties” to participate in the consultation

FN 82052 v3 Page 148

process is required to support a finding that SG80 is met.

MM: The text refers to some doubts in the transparency of the consultation process for eNGOs, and as such the score is downgraded to 75. This is potentially arguable, but to date, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate proactive participation by eNGOs in environmental management, for example participating in Risk Analysis, and dialogue on management mitigation measures. The earlier recommendation has been changed to a condition.

3.1.3 Scoring Comments: The „management policy‟ is probably best reflected by the Management Plan. It would be helpful to note that the current Management Plan reflects the objectives of the Act.

MM: Added

3.2.1 Score: SG 80 requires short and long term objectives to be explicit in the management system. The Assessment report identifies the objectives but does not distinguish between short and long term objectives. Are short and long-term objectives explicitly specified for the fishery? If not, can a score of 80 be justified?

MM: The fishery does not have a fishery specific objective, but then describes a set of goals (Objectives and activities). This is supported by further performance indicators (Table 7) for (Table 6) and outcomes for ecosystem actions. Thye assessors take the view that the terminology used in the tables in incorrect. Those described as Goals are actually Long Term Objectives, conforming to the basic PI, as well as others, whilst the „objectives‟ are really outcomes/results. These could be construed as short term objectives.No amendments are made to the terminology in the text.

This indicator has been scored at 80, rather than higher, apparently on the grounds that “achievement” of some of the objectives has only been partial. It is questionable as to whether “achievement” should be considered under this objective since, the effectiveness of the strategies that implement the objective are assessed under Principles 1 and 2 (see FAM para 8.32) and, in part, under 3.2.2.

MM: Agreed, the scoring is revised upwards.

3.2.3 Scoring Guideposts: See note under 1.2.2 re amendments to the PISG tables. For this indicator, the fourth scoring issue needs to be removed from SG100. Scoring Comments: A comprehensive MCS system, in a fishery that uses quite extensive spatial and temporal measures, might reasonably be thought to include a vessel monitoring system. Are there any data on compliance/non-compliance to support the contention that there is a high degree of confidence that fishers comply with the management system. Similarly, some commentary about whether fishers provide “information of importance to the effective management of the fishery” would be required in order to support the SG100 finding. For example, how many fishers complete the voluntary logbook on bycatch data?

MM: The use of real time management measures and acknowledged reference to peer pressure demonstrates a high level of industry self regulation. Fishing in closed areas is not listed as a risk in Fisheries Services risk analysis. Compliance levels are extremely high. Fishermen actively support information requirements which demonstrate a very high commitment to supporting and strengthening the management system.

FN 82052 v3 Page 149

3.2.4 Scoring comments: SG60 requires that “research is undertaken, as required to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC‟s Principles 1 and 2”. The information provided in the report suggests that this is the case for P1, but it is not clear that it is the case for P2 issues. The fact that conditions have been proposed in respect of information available on ETP species (2.3.3) and habitat type (2.4.3) suggests that adequate research has not been undertaken on at least some P2 issues.

MM: Bycatch research has been undertaken, but is not central to the current assessment processes, with concentrations in data collection (and research) into the target species. The main areas of weakness relate to assessment of habitat impacts and ETP interactions. The score is downgraded to reflect this The Condition is changed to reflect this point.

3.2.5 Scoring Comments: As noted in comments on the main body of the text of the report the DEWHA/SEWPAC assessment process does not review all aspects of the fishery‟s performance and, in particular, does not address all the objectives of this fishery. The role of the fishery‟s council in considering management plans prior to their finalization can be regarded as a peer review of the management arrangements but cannot be regarded as a performance review of the effectiveness or implementation of the arrangements which is what is required under this indicator.

Condition 7: “SARDI and SGWCPFA Research Plans are subject to independent external review once formulated”. It would seem necessary to require that not only the Research Plans are subject to external review but also that the outputs (of those plans research results) are subject to peer review.

MM: Agreed, and incorporated the additions into the text

iii. Peer Review Report B

This review focuses on two of the three MSC principles when assessing for sustainable fisheries – Principle 2, addressing the need to maintain the ecosystem and Principle 3, addressing the need for effective fishery management to fulfil Principle 2 and ensure compliance with national and international regulations.

Under Criteria 1 of Principle 2 (P2) it is very difficult to judge whether the trawling activity allows for the maintenance of natural functional relationships among species etc. This is because accurate knowledge of the complex interactions between species and functional groups is difficult to obtain and not known for this and many other fisheries. It is possible that ecosystems in the Spencer Gulf are in a relatively stable state given that trawling has occurred for several decades Although the original state of the ecosystems on the trawl grounds is unknown, national and international regulations do not require a reversion to original ecological states However, if species are currently in a state of decline there is stronger recognition that functional relationships may be impacted

MM: There is no evidence to suggest the fishery is not in a stable state given there is no recorded cascade or species decline that can be directly attributed to the prawn trawling operations.

This is linked to Criteria 2 of P2 where the risk of species loss to the ecosystem through fishing mortality (and hence loss of species diversity) is identified. This criteria also refers to

FN 82052 v3 Page 150

the requirement for avoidance or minimisation of mortality to ETP species.

MM: This is achieved by limiting the trawl areas to small proportion of SG.

However, this fishery is currently unable to assess the level of impact on bycatch species, including species that have vulnerable life history characteristics including syngnathids, sharks and stingrays. The assessment also states in section 7.4.1 that there are no established national guidelines in place to determine levels of vulnerability (yes). However, quantitative risk assessments for data poor species (noted elsewhere in the assessment), such as bycatch, have been established by Zhou et al 2008 & 2009 which are being improved and applied across a range of fisheries within Australia.

MM: Using a precautionary approach the trawl operations are for short periods of time (ie short trawl duration) in limited areas with limited number of vessels – hence the impacts are minimised and trawl grounds are not expanding. Risks to Port Jackson sharks, stingrays and blue swimming crabs are reduced through use of the hopper. The issue of lack of syngnathid national guidelines are raised as an issue, with a RECOMMENDATION.

The risk assessment process is defined and applied by the Risk Based Framework. However, the SG fishery will apply the Zhou et al methodology, or CSIRO equivalent, in the forthcoming year.

Perhaps of most concern is the fishery‟s impact on Coastal Stingarees, other stingrays and sharks. The population status and trends are not known for most of these species and no mitigation strategies appear to be in place. In other Australian prawn trawl fisheries Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) greatly reduce the catches of larger animals such as stingrays and sharks, without significantly impacting prawn catches, and are universally used across several fleets.

MM: It is accepted that there are mechanical devices that may reduce the length of time large species are in the net – NB the animals are still caught [or „may still catch‟] in the net opening – however the mitigation measure of time, areas trawled and short trawl times are in place that in mitigate impacts of interaction on large individual animals. The SARDI scientists believe that the hopper is effective in reducing the impact on elasmobranches, and the SICA identified low risk to these species. Nevertheless, SG will implement a risk assessment strategy, hence why the management system has scored only „partial strategy‟, as this has not been implemented to date, but according to the management plan, will be implemented by 2012. A CONDITION is added to ensure compliance.

Under Criteria 3 of P2 recovery of exploited and depleted populations is required. However, recognition of the status of impacted populations is the first step. Mitigation and recovery can then follow if necessary (e.g. through the use of TEDs or other devices, spatial habitat management etc)

MM: The SARDI scientists, NGO and fishermen, applying the RBF through the workshop process, identified low risk scenarios to all bycatch species. See above re mitigation relating to trawl time, trawl areas and number of continuous nights fished. However, the SGWCPFA is evaluating the use of trawl selection devices as a means to eliminate further catches. These include TEDs, square mesh panels etc.

Hence, it is apparent that P2 is not currently fulfilled for this fishery, mainly because of the lack of reliable and acceptable data and analyses to assess the status of a wide range of non- target species. Fulfilment of this principle requires a quantitative assessment of the status of all impacted species and, for species that may be at risk, an acceptable data collection and

FN 82052 v3 Page 151

data analyses program to demonstrate recovery or decline over time (e.g. fishery independent monitoring). Any such assessment should be able to demonstrate an ability to detect an acceptable level of change in population abundance over a known and acceptable time frame. Species with vulnerable life history characteristics such as low fecundity or long lived species should be treated with greater caution

MM: The scoring processes reveal that P2 is achieved, but with CONDITIONS applied to the improving information across the range of the P2 species, and strengthening the risk mitigation process.

Regarding the assessment results for P2, 2.3.3, my judgement is as follows:  Without Condition 2 in place the fishery is closer to SG60 than SG80;

MM: A CONDITION is raised.

 Condition 2 is inadequate in that it does not include other vulnerable species such as sharks and stingrays;

MM: We have added other at risk species. We don‟t know, without the CSIRO risk assessment, if elasmobranches and stingrays are at risk. However the RBF assessment suggests that this is unlikely.

 The annual bycatch report should explicitly include a sustainability assessment using acceptable analytical methods, including reference points and trigger actions MM: Trigger actions that result in appropriate management responses to ensure long term sustainability through increased knowledge of particular species and or fisheries management response are contained in Condition 2: comprehensive management strategy leading to subsequent mitigation measures; Conditions 3 development of additional appropriate management mitigation measures; Condition 4 strengthen information and monitoring from logbooks; Condition 5 detect ecosystem outcomes management measures and implementation under the management strategy and Condition 6 & 8 formalisation in research as well as Recommendation 3, 4 & 5

Logbook data collection can be useful for raising awareness in the fishery and potentially as an indicator or changes to catch rates (and hence population levels), but the latter only if they are validated and assessed against fishery independent data. The drivers for altering the way logbook data is collected are often strong and related to a range of issues including some not related to species sustainability.

MM: SG has an observer scheme which is applied during the surveys. Otherwise, the logbook system has been developed to focus on syngnathid and retained species interactions. If other species are identified as at risk, then the logbook system can be extended to record other interactions. This is covered in a CONDITION.

In summary, I would score P2, 2.3.3 at 65 unless Condition 2 is tightened.

MM: The CONDITION is amended

Regarding the assessment results for P2, 2.4.3, my judgement is as follows:  Without Condition 3 in place the fishery is closer to SG60 than SG80;

MM: MM has reviewed the balance of‟ strategy‟ against „partial strategy‟, and has revised the scoring to reflect a strategy.This is based on the fact that there are gazetted and voluntary closed areas, as well as a Committee at Sea move on policy were syngnathid encounters

FN 82052 v3 Page 152

identified. It is also noteworth that the critical syngnathid habitats are inside the 10 m isobaths where trawling is prohibited. The Condition has been changed to a Recommendation.

 Condition 3 does not specify how habitats will be adequately assessed and mapped. This will require some form of relatively non-destructive method such as under water video and subsequent analyses of habitat type

MM: It is not the assessors ot position to be prescriptive of the methods that should be used – only the end results, and to ensure that the processes take account of mapping per se..

I agreed with the score of 75 if Condition 3 can adequately specify how the habitat assessment and mapping will be conducted.

Regarding the assessment results for P2, 2.5.3, my judgement is as follows:  Without Condition 4 in place the fishery is closer to SG60 than SG80; I agreed with the score of 75 if Condition 4 can be implemented.

A CONDITION is in place.

Regarding the assessment results for P3, 3.2.2, my judgement is as follows:  Without Condition 5 in place the fishery is closer to SG60 than SG80;

I agreed with the score of 75 if Conditions 3, 4 & 5 can be implemented.

A CONDITION is in place

Regarding the assessment results for P3, 3.2.4, my judgement is as follows:  Without Condition 6 in place the fishery is closer to SG60 than SG80; I agreed with the score of 75 if Condition 6 can be implemented.

A CONDITION is in place.

Regarding the assessment results for P3, 3.2.5, my judgement is as follows:  Without Condition 7 in place the fishery is closer to SG60 than SG80; I agreed with the score of 75 if Condition 7 can be implemented.

A CONDITION is in place. The CONDITION now reads SARDI and the SGWCPFA Research Plans are subject to independent external review once formulated and are made available to all stakeholders.

Assessment of recommendations: Recommendation 1 – no comment Recommendation 2 – no comment Recommendation 3 – cost effective, fishery independent monitoring should be part of this recommendation Species targeted for monitoring should include those identified from quantitative risk assessments and those considered Threatened, Endangered or Vulnerable, including elasmobranchs and any other species with vulnerable life history characteristics

MM: The risk assessment process, to be implemented, will identify specific species as indicators. These may or may not include elasmobranches, and will be determined by the fishery managers during the risk assessment process.

FN 82052 v3 Page 153

Recommendation 4 – agreed Recommendation 5 – agreed Recommendation 6 include elasmobranchs

MM: Elasmobranches caught are not ETPs. We have included reference to other ETPs. Elasmobranches are covered under bycatch and dealt with in Recommendation 3.

Recommendation 7 – agreed Recommendation 8 – agreed, but add reasonable performance indicators – e.g. within 2 years and using peer review.

MM: Have added „external mid-term and ex post external review‟ to CONDITION 8.

FN 82052 v3 Page 154

Appendix E: Client Action Plan

The Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fisherman‟s Association is committed to taking these actions to address the seven conditions arising from the MSC assessment of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Trawl Fishery (SGWCPFA).

It is noted that this condition could be approached in a number of ways. For example, a clear articulation of the relationship between the management strategy and MSC PI 1.1.2 might suffice. Alternatively, either a stock assessment (to estimate Bmsy) or management strategy evaluation (to demonstrate expected output performance) could be carried out.

The client is required by the first surveillance (2012) to provide a plan for necessary work in support of this condition with a clear outline of the approach to be taken. Further, it is required that by 3 years after certification is granted, work will be completed sufficiently to ensure clarity as to the targets and limits set and to provide confidence that they explicitly or implicitly meet PI 1.1.2 requirements at the 80 scoring level or better.

Action On behalf of the Fisheries Council of SA, PIRSA will prepare a new management plan for the Spencer Gulf Prawn fishery by 30 June 2013 (Recommendation 4). PIRSA will prepare a project statement in 2011 for preparing the Management Plan. The project statement will provide a work plan and timelines for completing components of the Management Plan, including the harvest strategy for the Fishery.

As part of the new management plan, PIRSA are currently developing a harvest strategy framework to objectively assess current stock status based on Performance Indicators (PIs). The new suite of PIs for the fishery will be written to address the requirements of MSC PI 1.1.2. The primary PIs will involve measures of relative biomass determined from standardised measures of CPUE from fishery-independent surveys. Standardisation will examine key environmental factors as well as differences among survey vessels (addresses Recommendation 1). PIs will have relevant limit reference points and triggers that evoke a management response specified in the Management Plan.

SARDI will also undertake standardisation of commercial fishing CPUE to determine whether it is a useful Performance Indicator for the Management Plan (Recommendation 2).

Condition 2 (SG 2.3.3): The Condition is to strengthen the monitoring and reporting processes for ETP interactions:  Logbooks must contain explicit reference to Syngnathid species and other ETP species, indicating the state (dead, damaged or released alive);  Independent trawl surveys conducted in November, February and April to include data on the seasonal distribution and abundance of syngnathids, or any other ETP in trawled areas  The distribution and abundance of ETPs in areas outside the trawl areas should be determined through independent surveys to develop an understanding of the success or otherwise of mitigation measures that are in place.

FN 82052 v3 Page 155

Action The commercial daily logbook, used by the fishery to record catch, has been recently (2011) modified to also identify interactions with Threatened Endangered and Protected Species (TEPS) (including syngnathids) on a shot by shot basis. Additional details on each interaction are then provided in a separate logbook that is specific to TEPS. The TEPS log books record the status of the animal when returned to the marine environment i.e. dead, alive etc. The Association will educate the license holders and skippers on the importance and legal obligation for reporting TEPS interactions.

SARDI Aquatic Sciences will collate and analyse data collected through the TEPS log books (cross referenced to the catch log books) and produce a regular TEPS by-catch report for PIRSA, which will be made available to the public on its website. This first annual by-catch report will be implemented commencing from the second annual review.

Fisheries Independent Surveys (FIS) will collect data on TEPS interactions. The FIS covers areas inside and outside fishing grounds at three different times per year (generally November, February and April). This will be used to report the spatial and temporal distribution and abundance of syngnathids (and other TEPS species) inside and outside trawl areas by the second annual surveillance.

PIRSA will lead an Ecological Sustainable Development risk assessment for the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery (2011-12). Following this, PIRSA will also lead a by-catch risk assessment for the fishery, where all available data on by-catch is considered for all species of by-catch captured by the fishery. Syngnathids (and other TEPS species if identified through the assessment) will be critically examined during these processes. Mitigation measures will be developed based on the available data and the success of these mitigation measures will be evaluated against 1) data from the long-term by-catch studies, 2) data from fishery- independent surveys and 3) data from TEPs logbook interactions. This will also contribute towards satisfying recommendation 6.

 Detailed presentation of existing habitat maps to allow for accurate assessment as to the spatial distribution of the types of habitats that are trawled and to assess the habitats that support key species in order to monitor changes in habitat conditions and associated elements that may be creating cumulative impacts.  Continuous monitoring the information from logbooks and independent surveys will also verify the distribution and abundance of benthic species to assess the actions of spatial and temporal management decisions.

A detailed plan to achieve this should be in place at the first annual surveillance audit. The results regarding benthic interactions will be incorporated into an annual by-catch report, commencing from the second annual review onwards, which will be made available for public

FN 82052 v3 Page 156

scrutiny, and used to assist the development of additional management mitigation measures, if deemed appropriate. Evidence that this condition has been implemented, will be required by the second annual review.

Action As per condition 2, PIRSA will lead an Ecological Sustainable Development risk assessment, as a step in developing the new management plan, which will identify the components, including habitats and species, at risk from interactions from prawn trawling.

The ESD risk assessment will be used to develop a Environmental Evaluation Plan by the first annual audit. The “Environmental Evaluation” plan will include: 1) Assessments of the available data on environmental impacts of the prawn fishery in Spencer Gulf; 2) Recommendations for appropriate on-going measures and timescales for environmental assessment; 3) Recommendations for potential performance indicators for environmental assessment.

This plan will assess the on-going measures and time scales for environmental assessment. Data from the FIS and fishing log books will also be incorporated in the model. This plan will provide a basis for on-going reporting of by-catch on a short term and long term scale. It will inform the annual by-catch report, commencing from the second annual review, which will subsequently be made publicly available. The report will be used to assist the development of additional management mitigation measures, if needed.

Action The Environmental Evaluation Plan described under Condition 3 will examine available data to inform potential risks to trophic level impacts of the fishery, and will recommend data requirements to report on these risks annually, to be completed by the second annual audit. Data considered will include: long-term data from independent by-catch surveys conducted every 7 years; fishery-independent survey data collected 3 times every year.

A joint research proposal has recently been developed between SARDI, Adelaide University and Flinders University. This project aims to develop an ecosystem model for Spencer Gulf. Collaboration on this project (if the grant application is successful) could enable further examination of the ecosystem effects of prawn trawling in Spencer Gulf.

Condition 5 (SG 3.1.2): PIRSA to improve participation of external stakeholders (i.e. an environmental eNGOs) in the formulation of management decisions affecting ecosystem based management, consistent with the strategies outlined in the Hollamby report. Examples of improved participation must relate to eNGO participation in risk assessments and input into the formulation of by-catch mitigation strategies. The position of an environmental eNGO on the SGWCPFA Research Committee should be formalised. Evidence that this process is taking place must be introduced by the first surveillance audit (2012).

Action PIRSA will continue to seek to improve participation of eNGOs in formulation of management plans by following the recommendations in the Hollamby report. This proposes the

FN 82052 v3 Page 157

participation of environmental eNGOs (CCSA and WWF) in fishery risk assessments, which will lead to the development of management mitigation measures for at-risk species. These measures will be place by the first surveillance audit.

SGWCPFA will amend its charter for the Research Sub-committee to include membership of an environmental eNGO by 2012.

Action SARDI will draft a “plan” as mentioned in condition 3 to take into consideration trophodynamics; benthic habitats; by-catch and by-product, and TEPS, collating existing data. This will inform the research plan.

A research plan will be developed with the new Management Plan. The Research Sub- committee will develop a strategy to implement and prioritise research projects, which will support ecosystem-orientated research outputs and fisheries specific programs which will be reviewed biannually from the implementation of the new Management Plan (2013).

Action The research plan will be subject to an independent review once formulated, and subsequently internally reviewed annually. The harvest strategy, committee processes, research plan and compliance risk assessment in the management plan will be subject to an external evaluation by the fourth annual audit.

Simon Clark, Executive Officer. Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association, Port Lincoln, South Australia. Email: [email protected]

FN 82052 v3 Page 158

FN 82052 v3 Page 159

Appendix E: Stakeholder Comments

FN 82052 v3 Page 160

Appendix F: Interview reports

I1 Fishery Managers: PIRSA, SGWCPFA, SARDI I2 Martin Smallridge, Director of Fisheries I3 SARDI interview and RBF Workshop I4 Neil Carrick, Independent consultant I5 Conservation Council, South Australia: Interview and RBF Workshop I6 Conservation Council, South Australia I7 Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association (SGWCPFA) I8 Ocean Watch I9 SGWCPFA Observer Scheme I10 PIRSA Fisheries Services I11 Executive Officer, SGWCPFA I12 Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

FN 82052 v3 Page 161

I1 Fishery Managers: PIRSA, SGWCPFA, SARDI

MSC Interview Record

MML Attendees Lead Auditor/Coordinator: Richard Banks Team Members: Kevin Stokes (P3) and Geoff Dews (P1)

Stakeholders: Affiliation Representatives 1. Martin Smallridge, Acting Director, Fisheries, Primary Industries and Resources, South Australia (PIRSA) 2. Alice Fistr, Manager Fisheries Policy, PIRSA 3. Keith Rowling, Fisheries Officer, PIRSA 4. Tim Ward, SARDI 5. Cam Dixon, SARDI 6. Graeme Hooper, SARDI 7. Karen Hollamby, EO, SGWCPFA

Observers 1. Peter Trott, WWF 2. Mihaela Zaharia, Poseidon ARM Ltd

Location: SARDI offices and continued in PIRSA Offices, Adelaide

Date: 6 September, 2010

1. Introduction. MML Lead Auditor to introduce MSC assessment to Stakeholders, including  Fishery Unit of Certification (and client)  Assessment Team  Moody Marine as independent CB accredited to carry out MSC assessments  Purpose of meeting – information collection and identification of issues relevant to fishery assessment  MSC Principles & Criteria and Assessment Process being followed  That stakeholder comments may be non-attributable if required

Fisheries Management Stakeholder

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

PIRSA: Australian State Fisheries Government Department SARDI: Aquatic Research Organisation SGWCPFA: Fishermen‟s Representative Organisation

3. MML Questions Assessment team questions for stakeholder response

FN 82052 v3 Page 162

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

Review of Objectives

The Annex to this report identifies the activities relating to set objectives as laid down the SG Fisheries Management Plan (2007-2011)

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v3 Page 163

Box 2: The Management goals, objectives and strategies for the management of the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery during 2007-2011. Goal Objectives Activities Current position and status of work activity. 1. Maintain an 1a. Spencer Gulf  Maintain a restriction on the number of licenses and the total  Restrictive licensing policy since 1976. Kw restriction has ecologically prawn stocks amount of gear in the fishery; been adapted to take account of additional post harvest sustainable harvested at  Develop spatially and temporally explicit harvest strategies for requirements. Association to engage Marine Engineers as prawn ecologically each fishing period in line with established target and limit means for validation. biomass sustainable levels reference levels and decision rules;  Voluntary sites implemented and set as Management  If the stock is determined to be operating below the established Measures through daily gazettes. Closed areas are always limits, the fishery will be managed to promote recovery to extended, never contracted ecologically viable stock levels, within agreed timeframes.  Separate indicators set on quota (pre Christmas) plus Fisher Committee catch triggers (size and catch rate) implemented in real time, following a „decision‟ tree 1b. Sufficient  Collect fishery-dependent information through commercial  Commercial log book collected, collated and disseminated biological and logbooks;  Fishery independent surveys conducted in November, ecological  Maintain the fishery-independent prawn survey program; February and April (as defined in the management plan). information exits to  Assess the status of the stock through quantitative stock Industry Spot surveys conducted in all other non-SAS inform management assessment; months. Results incorporated into Annual „Fishery Status decisions  Collect appropriate environmental data to aid assessment; reports‟  Review and update the strategic research and monitoring plan  Fishery Status Reports based on quantitative status report methodology  Bycatch assessment work, underpinning risk assessments.  Active and ad hoc research activities. Stock Status reports comment on performance and determine additional actions. A Research Plan is an Annex to the Management Plan, supported by a Research Committee run by the Association. Research priorities include: Environmental factors that influence growth, Profit maximisation – fleet dynamics, Optimal survey strategies – strategic review, Timing of capture and surveys, Impacts of desalination plant, Interactions with TEPS, Cost reduction strategies, Movement patterns, Maximum / optimum economic yield, Prawn health and disease, Co-management / delegated co-management, By-catch reduction methods, Capacity building, Effective effort influences

FN 82052 v3 Page 164

Ads hoc and strategically important additional research work undertaken, for example „Evaluation of spawn and recruit pathways‟, funded by FRDC, integrating oceanographic components 2. Ensure 2a. A fishery  Within a framework of sustainable exploitation, develop harvest  Harvest strategy specifies the target size of prawns, and optimal exploited for strategies that match target size with market requirements; requirement to target smaller prawns pre Christmas. utilization and maximum economic  When targets are reached, allow for higher exploitation levels to  Agreement with Industry to maximise economic potential equitable value capture economic benefits from the fishery (subject to the within overarching framework of sustainable exploitation, distribution constraints outlined under goal 1) and explicit performance indicators eg not too many small prawns captured 2b. An  Develop management arrangements that allow commercial  Annual Reports prepared by „Econsearch‟. economically operators to maximise operational flexibility and economic efficient fleet efficiency;  Undertake economic surveys of the commercial fishery to assess economic performance against a set of economic indicators. 2c. Equitable public  Review appropriateness of access arrangements between Specific requirements about commercial, recreational, aboriginal access sectors once within the life of the Management Plan access rights as required from the Act to be formalised in 2010.  Develop a mechanism for altering access arrangements should Draft allocation policy pin preparation. Arrangements are in a change be required place for > 10 m depth. No current provision made for recreational access.

3. Minimise 3a. Minimise  Maintain a limit on the amount of gear used in the fishery;  Gear restrictions defined under Management controls impacts on the fishery impacts on  Maintain permanent closed areas. (headline length, minimum mesh size, otter trawl with ecosytem by-catch and by-  Undertake a risk assessment to determine the vulnerability of provision for twin rig product species by-catch and by-product species to overfishing from prawn  DEWHA requirement for risk assessment by 2012. 5 year trawling; provision (from 2007). Delayed because of other fishery  Develop mitigation strategies for by-catch and by- product RAs, prior to commencement of theor Management Plans. species deemed at high risk of overfishing from prawn trawling.  Mitigation strategies which restrict access to grounds. Highly sensitized to syngnathid interactions with new extended  Promote the development of environmentally friendly fishing closures. Proposal to be submitted to FRDC for further practices. research on impact assessment.  Current Research work and initiatives - Oceanwatch in Gulf of St Vincent using square mesh

FN 82052 v3 Page 165

panels, with a review for extension to SG. Focus again on syngnathids and finfish - Precautionary size limit for bugs set to protect 50% of the biomass - Crab bags, also supporting time stingarees are ondeck 3b. Avoid the  Undertake a risk assessment to determine the vulnerability of  Risk assessment as above incidental mortality endangered, threatened and protected species to fishing of endangered, operations threatened and  Improve data recording systems to capture fishing interactions protected species with endangered, threatened and protected species  Develop management measures to avoid interactions with endangered, threatened and protected species. 3c. Minimise  Maintain a limit on the amount of gear used in the fishery  Gear limits maintained rigidly enforced by Fishwatch fishery impacts on  Maintain permanent closed areas  Spatial closed areas established and gazetted benthic habitats and  Promote the development of environmentally friendly fishing  Self-regulated hoppers, reducing handling and interaction associated species gear and fishing practices with bycatch species communities  Develop strategies for assessment of impacts on habitat and  Set spatial closures and temporal access limit the extent of associated species communities. area covered by trawling 4. Enable 4a. Industry  Industry manage the spot survey process and develop harvest  Industries determine trawl areas based on spot surveys ad effective and delegated greater strategies (with reference to PIRSA Fisheries and SARDI); trials, with boundaries set by the Committee at Sea and participative responsibility in  Industry manage all at-sea operations of the fleet; agreed with PIRSA management management  Develop an improved industry decision-making structure to  Committee at sea decisions recorded and implemented of the fishery satisfy governance requirements; through  Develop explicit allocation of prawn resources between sectors;  Develop a process for the industry association to review the necessary ecological assessment report to the CDEH for export accreditation. 4b. Management  Promote stakeholder input to the management of the fishery,  Fisheries Council presently looking to strengthen the arrangements reflect through established co-management processes; consultative arrangements, and are funding NGO attendance concerns and  Ensure that social and cultural issues are given appropriate  Socio cultural issues dealt with at Strategic level but also interests of the consideration when new management strategies are being through delegated sub committees wider community developed;  Management arrangements (the Plan), and major changes to  Communicate management arrangements to the wider rules subject to a 3 month consultative process. Workshops Community. support the process.

FN 82052 v3 Page 166

4c. Management  Undertake annual compliance risk assessment;  Annual risk assessments undertaken. Now more inclusive to arrangements are  Implement a cost-effective compliance and monitoring program the fishery sector. SG fishery (and others) run on cost complied with to address identified risks; recover basis. SG extremely good in terms of value for  Promote high levels of stakeholder stewardship through money. 4 offences recorded. established management processes and Fishwatch activities.  Very high levels of self- regulation through the co- management system  Fiswatch actively functioning (http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries/fishwatch)

4d. Costs of  Ensure stakeholders are involved in development of  Cost recovery process. Cost schedule, Quarterly (to management of the management arrangements for achieving management PIRSA),compliance reports (verbal); SARDI Research fishery funded by objectives; Project scoping report the relevant  Determine the annual real costs of management, research and stakeholders compliance for the fishery;  Recover an economic return from commercial licence holders, sufficient to cover the attributed costs of fisheries management, research and compliance in line with established cost recovery principles. Source: Extracted from the Management Plan, 2007

FN 82052 v3 Page 167

I2 Martin Smallridge, Director of Fisheries, PIRSA

MSC Interview Record

MML Attendees Lead Auditor/Coordinator: Richard Banks

Stakeholders: Affiliation Representatives 1. Martin Smallridge, Acting Director, Fisheries, Primary Industries and Resources, South Australia (PIRSA)

Location: SARD offices and continued in PIRSA Offices, Adelaide

Date: 7 September, 2010

1. Introduction. MML Lead Auditor to introduce MSC assessment to Stakeholders, including Fishery Unit of Certification (and client) Assessment Team Moody Marine as independent CB accredited to carry out MSC assessments Purpose of meeting – information collection and identification of issues relevant to fishery assessment MSC Principles & Criteria and Assessment Process being followed That stakeholder comments may be non-attributable if required

Stakeholder comments attributable to PIRSA

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

Australian State Fisheries Government Department

3. MML Questions Assessment team questions for stakeholder response

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

Legal and Customary Framework (3.1.1)

The Fisheries Management Act 2007 Act embraces Commonwealth management principles as laid down in Commonwealth Legislation, which acknowledge the precautionary approach, stakeholder participation and the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management.

The Act and its predecessors, the Fisheries Act 1982, are proven to have been effective. All Laws and Regulations are subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. Fishery Specific Management Plans are also submitted before Parliament. There are provisions for legal challenges to the Act, as highlighted by previous challenges to the 1982 Act. Co-management processes have been implemented to avoid such challenges.

All Legislation and actions may be subject to scrutiny from the Ombudsman. PIRSA is required to respond to Freedom of information requests.

The Act acknowledges native title rights. The Government has a commitment to negotiate indigenous land use agreements. The Act identifies native rights and these are enshrined under the Act..

Consultation, roles and responsibilities (3.1.2) FN 82052 v1 Page 168 168

Management Plans inform individuals of their rights and opportunities.

Organisations and individuals are involved on the management process have been identified. Interactions take the form of a number of organisations:

The Fisheries Council of South Australia draws from experienced and recognised experts. The Council has replaced Fisheries Management Committees, which operated under the 1982 Act. The Council focuses on the strategically important issues covering 13 fisheries:

Abalone - 3 zones, usually dealt with in one Management Plan Blue Crab Prawns - 3 zones, usually dealt with in two Management Plans Marine Scalefish (including several key fisheries) Recreational Rock Lobster - 2 zones, dealt with in two Management Plans Sardines Lakes and Coorong (including the pipi fishery)

The Fisheries Council will nominate fishery specific sub committees to evaluate issues, drawn from interested parties: industry, PIRSA, SARD and NGOs.

All changes to primary legislation are subject to public announcements and a 3 month consultative process. This may also include provisions for workshops and public meetings, covering for example, Environmental Risk Assessment.

Reports are circulated via the Fisheries Council. Lower level (secondary) decisions such as gazettes involve consultation with affected parties, notably the fishers. These explain the rationale for decisions taken and how they will be applied.

NGOs are claiming some level of marginalisation with the advent of Fisheries Councils, and demise of the FMCs. PIRSA is presently funding the development of NGO capacity, and exploring how to improve participation from the NGOs. NGOs are however included on fishery specific Research Committees, including SGWCPFA.

FN 82052 v1 Page 169 169

Long Term Objectives (3.1.3)

Long Term Objectives are defined within the Act. These include principles that include resource sharing with other stakeholders involved, as well as reference to protect resources from over exploitation, protection of aquatic habitats, fostering both recreational and commercial fishing interests and fisher and community participation.

Incentives for sustainable fishing (3.1.4)

There are no adverse incentives that compromise sustainability. South Australia operates its management systems based on a cost recovery process. These are charges at the commercial rate and are fully accountable to industry, and ensure discipline in management decision-making, provision of cost effective support activities and a strong partnership process.

Fishery specific objectives (3.2.1)

The Management Plan sets out well-defined objectives, strategies and activities. Some of these have measurable OVIs as well as reporting arrangements.

Management plans are set for 10 years with a review process every 5 years. In the past there has been a tendency to role the reviews forward, albeit that activities are set and monitored accordingly. The Management Review process is now more formalised to every 5 years. The Act requires as a policy requirement, through the Fisheries Council. SG fishery review is now in the next round for review, due in 2012.

Decision making processes (3.2.2)

The setting of Management Plans allow for a strong decision making process. Measures are defined through Harvest Control Rules. Strategies are set within the plan and confirmed by the Fisheries Council, following sub committee consideration, with provision of appropriate technical advice. The role of Associations in the context of decision- making processes and communication protocols are outlined by an MoU with the Association. SG participation and interaction is the strongest such interaction.

Decision making processes respond to all issues identified. These are consolidated through the Research Committee. Decision-making processes use the Precautionary approach and based on best available information.

PIRSA supports and initiates actions, SARDI develops and implements the research process, and industry funds it. Some Research funding may also be available from FRDC.

Information systems are very strong from PIRSA and SARDI. ERAs are provided as a public document. Reports on risk assessments are widely available and published on the web, and compliance activities are also reported.

M&E (3.2.5)

There is a monitoring requirement under EPB Act to report on status of the fishery and ecosystems. PIRSA prepares a submission based on the results of work undertaken, which may have been directed from previous directions (DEWHA, 2003). DEWHA responds with critical points, and these actions are agreed through mutual agreement. The SG Association is consulted on the submission and responses. This constitutes an effective external review process.

PIRSA undertakes its own internal monitoring reviews on the basis of activities define in the management plan, which will integrate agreed recommendations from the DEWHA assessment. PIRSA may also commission independent reviews on specific management plans and strategies.

SARDI operates and internal peer review process.

6. Closing FN 82052 v1 Page 170 170

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v1 Page 171 171

FN 82052 v1 Page 172 172

1.3 MSC Interview Record/RBF Workhsop

Attendees Richard Banks (P3), Kevin Stokes (P1) and Geoff Dews (P2)

Stakeholders:

Dixon Dixon Mike Steer Graham Hooper Tony Fowler Kate Rodda Shane Roberts

In attendance Peter Trott: WWF Observer Mihaela Banks (Poseidon)

Affiliation Representatives SARDI

Location: Port Lincoln Date: 7 th September 2010

1. Introduction: Kevin Stokes and Geoff Dews (P2) introduced the MSC assessment to Stakeholders, including  Fishery Unit of Certification (and client)  Assessment Team roles and responsibilities  Moody Marine as independent CB accredited to carry out MSC assessments  Purpose of meeting – information collection and identification of issues relevant to fishery assessment  MSC Principles & Criteria and Assessment Process being followed  That stakeholder comments may be non-attributable if required

Stakeholder comments attributable to Southern Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI).

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

The status of the group was deemed to be science and research focused

3. MML Questions

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

1. Introduction: The meeting was then briefed on the MSC process. The Lead Assessor, Richard Banks, (P3) introduced the assessment team, Kevin Stokes (P1), Geoff Dews (P2) and Mihalea (Moody International). Each of the assessment team outlined their roles and responsibilities. General discussion was then directed to the Preliminary Assessment report. A brief description of the fishery unit, Spencer Gulf prawn Fishery was outlined by Dixon Dixon. PSA and converted to MSC (Section 4.4.2 FAM).

2. Stakeholder Key Issues

Species to be assessed was based on Section 5. FAM. A large number of individual species (as is the case with benthic prawn trawling) are taken in the fishery. It was therefore agreed that it was impractical and inefficient to attempt to address status and impact of each species individually. In this case the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery has a large number of bycatch species and it was discussed and accepted by the group that the assessment would be on the species with FN 82052 v1 Page 173 173 similar biological characteristics and evaluate outcomes status and fisheries impact for the species group. The was general discussion as to the bycatch information being based on prawn surveys by the Spencer Gulf prawn fishers, bycatch data obtained during targeted fishery-independent bycatch surveys and commercial log book data. There was discussion as to the limitations logbook data and observer program as part of the stock assessment studies.

3. Byproduct Species

Retained Species Outcome Performance Indicator (P2) The group determined that both the retained species (southern calamary and Balmain bug) each constitutes less than 5% of the total catch (Currie et al. 2009) by weight therefore the guidelines allow these species to be considered under section 2.2 Performance Indicators (PI) (section 7.2.2 FAM).

Byproduct Species Outcome Performance Indicators 2.2.1 Outcome Status Fish, benthos, blue crabs, sharks and rays dominated bycatch although relative abundance of each groups varies among region. In general fish are most abundant in the Main Gutter region, benthos (sponges) are more dominate in the North region and blue crab catches are most abundant in the North region during surveys.

Under the EPBC Act syngnathids have been listed and will be reviewed in 2014. The distribution of Syngnathids was stated as being broad across the Gulf with more information required from observers to increase the understanding of this distribution.

The species to be nominated for assessment by the MSC process were agreed as listed:

Species Common name Status Sepioteuthis australis Southern calamari Retained Ibacus peronii Balmain bug / slipper lobster Retained Sepia apama giant Australian cuttlefish Could be nominated under the EPBC Act Sponges Pseudo caranx wrighti skip jack trevally, sand trevally Thamnaconus degerii Leatherjackets Heterodontus protusjackson Port Jackson shark Squantina australis angel shark Aetobatus nariniari spotted stringray Pagrus auratus silver seabream snapper Sillaginodes punctatum King George whiting Pseudorhombus jenynsii Small toothed flounder Urolophus orarius Coastal stinagaree Sygnathids spp. Seahorses, seadragons, Nominated under the Marine pipefish Species EPBC Act

Dixon Dixon gave a brief description on the bycatch issues, stating that the marine retained species (calamary and Balmain bugs) are likely to be within biological based limits. This assessment is based on independent by-catch surveys, log book and observe information. Due to the nature of the gear used in the demersal trawl there are likely to be to localized depletion of calamary and slipper lobsters. Localised effects will be reduced due to the fact that prawn trawling operates in limited areas for confined times and not in day hours. The calamary species is ubiquitous throughout the Spencer Gulf trawl grounds and there appear to have some overlap of calamary distribution and the prawn trawl areas. Calamary have a peak spawning season but reproduce throughout the year resulting in continuous recruits migrating onto the offshore nursery grounds. This possibly masks any evidence of localized depletion on the trawl grounds. Due to the fact that species are short lived and exhibit rapid growth the populations are capable of increasing rapidly in response to favorable environments The trawling fleet catches (~90t) over the season and does not appear to compromise the sustainable harvest of the species.

Calamary Assessment under SICA and PSA Species Consequence score PSA MSC equivalent score

FN 82052 v1 Page 174 174

Southern calamari 1.5 90 Risk causing activity > fishing: relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 1 (<1). Southern calamari species are widespread throughout Australia and NZ (Roberts and Steer 2010 SARDI 439) Temporal scale: 3 (1- 100 days per year). Caught at low levels throughout the prawn seasons Intensity: 1 (Roberts and Steer 2010 SARDI 439) Consequence: 1 (Roberts and Steer 2010 SARDI 439) Average = 6/4 resultant = 1.5 MSC Score 90

Slipper lobster Slipper lobster is relatively sedentary and localized depletion is likely however it is not clear how seasonal effects influence status of the stock. The species have low fecundity and display localized reproduction and recruitment (Roberts and Steer 2009). The retained commercial catch for 2008, 2009 was 7.3t although there is a discrepancy between retained and estimated total catches.

Slipper lobster assessment under SICA and PSA Species Consequence score PSA MSC equivalent score Balmain bugs 2.5 80 Risk causing activity > fishing; subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%). Species wide spread in Spencer Gulf associated with soft sediments (Roberts S and Steer M. 2010 and Currie et al.) Intensity: 3 (Roberts S and Steer M. 2010). There is some evidence of changes in local abundance in high intensity trawled areas and as noted in discussions within the group. There are new management measures in place for the species. Consequence: 2 (as an intensity reference) Average: 10/4 = 2.5 It was noted that this did not reach the threshold that required assessment at PSA. However a PSA was undertaken as a judgement prior to additional consultation with other stakeholders. Discussion resulted in expert opinion on each species under SICA as listed above and PSA was undertaken as an expert advice exercise.

2.2.2 Management strategy Discussion focused on the level of management strategy in place. A partial strategy is in place for managing and minimising bycatch based on known strategies that include trawling in depths greater than 10m, permanent closure areas, limit of nights trawled and trawls only conducted during night phases.

Calamary Calamary species are widespread throughout Australia and New Zealand (Roberts and Steer 2010). The Management Plan for the South Australian Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery (paper N0. 54 September 2007) set out objectives to minimise fishery impacts on bycatch and by-product species by maintaining a limit on the amount of gear used in the fishery, maintain permanent closed areas, promote the development of environmentally friendly practices.

Slipper lobster In 2007 the South Australian Government legislated the protection of egg-bearing female slipper lobsters. A minimal size limit will be introduced as is done in other Australia states with the same species for capture in prawn trawls.

2.2.2 Information and Monitoring The stakeholders outlined the fact that there has been some historical research conducted in Spencer Gulf on the bycatch and by-product species captured by the prawn trawl fishers. Additional bycatch survey was undertaken 2009 (Currie et al. 2010) and 2010 (Roberts and Steer 2010). Data is available from three main sources, bycatch data collected during surveys conducted by the Spencer Gulf prawn fishers, bycatch data obtained during targeted fishery- independent bycatch survey and commercial logbooks.

2.3.1 Bycatch species outcome status Cuttlefish Note: At this meeting cuttlefish were discussed under ETPs Giant cuttlefish have been nominated as threatened species (2 years prior to this assessment). However it is unlikely that cuttlefish will be listed within the next twelve months. There are no specific research objectives into the cuttlefish species by SARDI. Previously it was the target of a bait fishery but this has now is under permanent closure rule. FN 82052 v1 Page 175 175

There is an annual spawning in False Bay and this is the only known spawning aggregation of this kind in the world. As yet there is no know reason for this spawning however it is believed to be associated with a particular habitat type that promotes protection. Discussion revolved around the fact that the giant cuttlefish has a unique mass spawning which is likely to be habitat related. It was noted that there is separation between the areas trawled and the northern distribution area of the giant cuttlefish. The outcomes was that this was to be treated using SICA and PSA SICA Risk causing activity – fishing Relevant subcomponent – population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) which is based on the SARDI distribution map Temporal scale: 3 (1 – 100 days per year) caught at low levels throughout the prawn fishery seasons Intensity: 1 (based on per comm. Steer and Steer and Hall 2005) that looked at abundance and biomass variation through time and concluded that it is difficult to determine if prawn fishing influence these variations Consequence: 1 (as an intensity reference it was also noted this could been 2) Average = 7/4 = 1.75 Syngathidae The family Sygnathidae are distributed throughout South Australia. There are approximately 34 species of seahourse, sea dragon and pipefishes in southern Australia (Kuiter 1999). This group of fish is assigned total protection status in South Australia however much remains unknown about their biology and distribution. All Syganthidae are listed species under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC ACT). The family Syngnathidae is fully protected under the Fisheries Management Act 2007 and this protection it due to „The uncertainty regarding the conservation status of many Syngathids‟

2.3.2 Bycatch Management strategies Cuttelfish In 1989 a fishing closure that encompassed approximately 50% of the spawning area was implemented to ensure that a proportion of spawning animals were protected from fishing. From 1999 to 2003 the main spawning grounds were closed to fishing for the duration of the entire spawning season (March to September)

Syngathidea Under the Goal 3(b) of the Management Plan for the South Australia Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery (2007) the stated strategies are to undertake a risk assessment to determine the vulnerability of endangered species, threatened and protected species to fishing operation (no yet undertaken), improve the data recording systems to capture fishing interactions with endangered, threatened and protected species.

2.3.3 ETP Species information PIRSA Fisheries has established a process to improve understanding and management of non-target species interactions in the prawn fisheries that incorporates; bycatch surveys, data analysis and risk assessment (Eoclogical risk assessment is a formal requirement in section 43(2) of the Fisheries Management Act 2007 but is yet to be completed).

4. Information The species nominally assessed under SICA were Species Consequence score PSA MSC equivalent score Southern calamari 1.5 90 Balmain bugs 2.5 Cuttlefish 1.75 80 Leatherjacket 2.25 80 Blue swimmer crab 2.75 60 (+) Snapper 2 80 Flounder 1.75 80 King George whiting 2 80 Port Jackson shark 1.75 80 Stingaree 1.75 80 Trevally 2.25 80

Blue swimmer crab Assessment using SICA Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size FN 82052 v1 Page 176 176

Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) the species is widespread throughout Spence Gulf (390 428) Temporal scale: 3 (1- 100 days per year), species caught throughout the prawn trawl season Intensity; 3 It is expected that in areas of high intensity trawled areas there is likely to be local effects to the abundance but this is unlikely to be at a broad scale. This is also compounding effects on the population from target fishing effects from traps. Consequence: 3; it was noted that there is a high exploitation in the southern prawn fishery however there also exists a high abundance in the lower intensity areas Average 11/4 Resultant SICA score 2.75 PSA = 2.13 = MSC 80

Snapper These are listed as a bycatch species. There is a migration component to the snapper species but there is an even distribution of the population within the region. The prawn trawl usually capture juvenile is „large amounts‟ usually in the northern end of the trawl areas. The bycatch of snapper is highly variable. Snapper may be a potential indicator species. SICA assessment Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) the species is widespread throughout Spence Gulf (390 428) Temporal scale: 3 (1- 100 days per year), species caught throughout the prawn trawl season. Intensity: 2 (this is a conservative interpretation). It was noted that there is negligible or minor capture of this species, not every trawl has snapper present, this is a result of the gear configuration (low headline height, low trawl speed) Consequence: 1 Average 8/4 Resultant SICA assessment = 2 Consequence: 1 Average 8/4 Resultant SICA assessment = 2

Flounder (smooth tooth spp.) This species mostly caught in the upper reaches of the Spencer Gulf SICA Assessment Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) the species is widespread throughout Spence Gulf (390 428) Temporal scale: 3 (1- 100 days per year), species caught throughout the prawn trawl season Intensity: 1 (this is a conservative interpretation). It was noted that there is negligible or minor capture of this species, not every trawl has this species present, this is a result of the gear configuration (low headline height, low trawl speed) and (pers comm. Fowler) Consequence: 1 Average 7/4 Resultant SICA assessment = 1.75

Port Jackson Shark There is no evidence to suggest that the population has been impacted. The reproductive period of the species is outside the time trawlers are operating Port Jackson shark has been captured in all regions but there is a higher abundance in the section of the trawl grounds known as the Main Gutter. SICA Assessment Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) the species is widespread throughout Spence Gulf Temporal scale: 3 (1- 100 days per year), species caught throughout the prawn trawl season Intensity: 1 (this is a conservative interpretation). It was noted that there is negligible as confirmed via telephone discussion between Dixon and Kate Rodda during the meeting Consequence: 1 (per comm. Dixon and Rodda) Average 7/4 Resultant SICA assessment = 1.75

Angel Sharks FN 82052 v1 Page 177 177

The species is mostly found in Victoria and their distribution extends to Western Australia. The overall comment was that it is considered rare to be caught in South Australia although it is more common bycatch in Victoria (most likely due to the use of fish trawls in Victoria). SICA Assessment The species is not likely to be caught in prawn trawls in South Australia. Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) the species has a habitat preference of sandy sediments and have the characteristic of bury to avoid predation Temporal scale: 3 (1- 100 days per year), species caught throughout the prawn trawl season Intensity: 1 (this is a conservative interpretation). It was noted that there is negligible due to the trawl gear configuration of low headline heights and slow trawl speeds Consequence: 1 (per comm. Dixon and Rodda) Average 7/4 Resultant SICA assessment = 1.75

Sparsely spotted stingaree (Urolophus paucimaculatus) Commonly found throughout Victoria through to Western Australia Trawl data indicated that this species is a negligible component of bycatch. The species may be potentially listed under the EPBC Act. Juvenile are most likely to be caught. Reproductive times are January, February and March and are live bearing. SICA Assessment Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size (it is noted that this species is live bearing) Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) the species has a habitat preference of sandy sediments and have the characteristic of bury to avoid predation Temporal scale: 3 (1- 100 days per year), species caught throughout the prawn trawl season Intensity: 1 (this is a conservative interpretation). It was noted that this is negligible due to the trawl gear configuration of low headline heights and slow trawl speeds Consequence: 2 (per comm. Dixon and Rodda) Average 8/4 Resultant SICA assessment = 1.75

Sand Trevally There is speculation that the population of sand trevally in the region is enhanced by the presence of tuna farms. It is thought that the food used to feed the tuna also attracts and supports the trevally population but this is not confirmed. The distribution of sand trevally is through the trawl areas. Studies on total bycatch of the Spencer Gulf suggest that it would be difficult to determine any changes in abundance of the sand trevally due to capture in the prawn trawls. This is related to distribution of the species over the regions and the fact that only 12-13% of the Spenser Gulf area is trawled. SICA Assessment Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-1.5%) widespread in Spencer Gulf Temporal scale: 3 (1-100 days day fishing per year), species caught throughout the prawn fishery season Intensity: 3 (this is a conservative interpretation). In high intensity trawl grounds it would be expected that there is local effects (per comm. SARDI) Consequence: 1 Average = 9/4 = 2.25

Degens leatherjacket It was noted that there are some percentage of leatherjackets that pass through the net due to the cod end configuration. Leatherjackets may be used as an indicator species for future changes in trends in the marine ecosystems due to their high abundance SICA assessment Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1 – 15%) the species is widespread throughout the Spencer Gulf Temporal Scale: 3 91-100 days per year), species caught throughout the prawn seasons Intensity: 3 (this is a conservative estimate). It is expected that in areas of high intensity there would be local effect Consequence: 1 FN 82052 v1 Page 178 178

Average = 9/4 Resultant SICA score 2.25

King George Whiting This species is geographically extensive and is targeted by both recreational and commercial fishers. In South Australia the fishery (whiting) has been the most valuable marine scale fishery. In 2000/01 the total value dropped to second behind sardines. It is recognised that there is some cross-over between the prawn trawl areas and migration patterns of the species. Migration of this species is in a southerly direction from the sheltered waters of the Gulfs into oceanic waters. A known spawning site (for whiting) is at Wardang and this is a permanent closed area. Present management is based on minimum length, daily recreational bag limits and licence amalgamation SICA Assessment Risk causing activity > fishing; relevant subcomponent > population size Spatial scale: 2 (1-15%) the species is widespread throughout Spence Gulf (390 428) Temporal scale: 3 (1- 100 days per year), species caught throughout the prawn trawl season Intensity: 2 > 1 (this is a conservative interpretation). It was noted that there is negligible or minor capture of this species, Resultant SICA score 2.25

5. Other issues

6. Closing

The meeting closed with additional information (references) to be forwarded to the team.

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v1 Page 179 179

FN 82052 v1 Page 180 180

FN 82052 v1 Page 181 181

FN 82052 v1 Page 182 182

FN 82052 v1 Page 183 183

NOTES FROM MEETING ON Wednesday 8th SEPTEMBER, Best Western Ensenada Motel, Glenelg, 9.30‐10.30 pm PRESENT: C Dixon, K Stokes A brief meeting was held to explain and discuss P1, especially P1.2, scoring and the need for clear statements and references against each of the scoring elements. C Dixon agreed to provide brief comments and relevant references on each of the P1.2 scoring elements, especially P1.2.2. It was agreed that this would be done at Port Lincoln on Friday 10th September. NB Due to illness, the planned meeting did not take place on Friday 10th September. C Dixon offered to provide notes as discussed by e‐mail during the following week. 7. Supplementary Email exchange with Dixon Dixon, 17/9/2010

Hi Kevin, Hopefully these notes will help your submission. It will take some filtering though! Ref 387 refers to the Spencer Gulf Prawn Stock Assessment Report 2007/08, SARDI Report no 387. All of 1.1 refers to this document. Ref Management Plan refers to the Management Plan for the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery, Dixon and Sloan 2007.

1.1.1. I would argue SG80. The data is provided in ref 387 and pertinent figures follow. Catch history shows stability (Fig 2.1 page 33). Figure 2.4 page 37 shows that even when total catches were relatively low (mid 1980's) following large increases in the capture of spawning animals (early 1980's), catches of approximately 400 t before Christmas were still sufficient to ensure rapid recovery of the stock (as seen in the subsequent sustained increase in total catch). Figure 2.9 page 42 shows that the size structure of the catch has been stable since at least 1998/99. Figures 3.2 to 3.5 (page 52-55) show stable survey catch rates over time. Figures 3.6 and 3.7 (pages 57-58) show stable mean size of the surveyed population over time (there are no meaningful trends in size structure evident so the mean size is a dirty surrogate to reduce an already lengthy report!). Figure 3.8 page 59 shows stable recruitment history from surveys.

1.1.2 I think you have covered the reference point issues in the notes. The extra comments I would make regard the use (or lack thereof) of commercial CPUE data as a reference point. It is our opinion that the current approach of the suite of performnace indicators (and harvest strategy rules) which are set at highly conservative levels (close to a point approximating BMSY) are more appropriate indicators of stock status than standardised CPUE would be. That said, obviously standardisation of the data would be an interesting and useful task and such a measure would make the reference point for CPUE more meaningful than the current nominal measure (which is set quite low compared to other measures reflecting the uncertainty in its interpretation). If standardised CPUE was calculated it could be used to augment but not replace current assessment. Some things we know about commercial CPUE: It has increased dramatically in the last 20 odd years. Vessels have become larger to enable on-board processing; engine power has subsequently increased to accomodate; there have been lots of improvements in nets, chains, boards, props, engine capacity, horsepower, torque etc; GPS; targeting larger prawns in the population; seasonality; spatial differences in CPUE (fig 2.6 page 39); reduction in the hours fished per night to promote efficient capture (figure 2.8 page 40); short nights to accomodate large catches without damaging product quality. And this is off the top of my head without deep consideration of all issues. It is important to understand that increases in efficiency have always been promoted in this fishery. Why this fishery differs from other prawn and other trawl fisheries is that they have managed increases in effective effort by reducing days and maintaining harvest strategies based around sustainable catches. What is most relevant to CPUE is the effect of changes in power on survey CPUE (relative biomass) interpretation. In the current stock assessment report I am looking closely at the long time series of survey data and trying to tease out the gentle increases in the survey trends over time (they are there). Although the skippers aim to keep the same speeds and gear configurations over time for surveys, there will be obvious increases that cannot be accounted for. In the current plan we have attempted to minimise the impacts of this by setting reference points for only a five year period, after which they must be reviewed. It may be more specific in the future (read if I can get my way!) by increasing the reference FN 82052 v1 Page 184 184 points by a small fixed percentage each year. Again, standardisation would help to inform this process.

Lastly for this section, I would argue that as a low trophic species, reference points do account for their important ecological role. Again this is a mute point by definition of the reference points. But in future management plans there could be explicit definitions that indicate that the goal is to maintain prawn populations at high, stable biomass levels to 1) support a viable commercial fishery and 2) support their important role in the ecosystem of Spencer Gulf. The concept is there in the current plan, but the definitions and explicit goal stating is not.

1.1.3 As you have previously stated (from memory) this is not relevant to this fishery. I would also argue that based on previous experience in the early 1980's the current harvest strategy should be definitiely adequate to ensure stock rebuilding if a sudden collapse were to occur (based primarily on the conservation of spawning stock size).

1.2.1 When I read 1.2.1 i believe that the harvest strategy is achieving most of the first 2 statements of SG100. The problem is the last part of the first statement that states that management objectives are reflected in the target and limit reference points. Clearly the reference points were not established to fit into this criteria (but they can and should be for the next version of the management plan). As for the second statement, next years stock assessment report (which will present data on the season just gone) will show that the fishery acted in a conservative manner (effort and catch) when trigger points were reached, and that the stock responded within a very short period to ensure that stock abundance and fishery performance were maintained over the entire season. I will ensure that this is documented in an appropriate manner. By then the plan will have been in place for five years, but I'm not sure if that would qualify for a "fully evaluated" status. Of course it also depends on how the evaluation is analysed, presented and discussed (but it is useful to know this now).

I believe you have covered most of these points in the "suite of performance indicators" concept in your notes.

1.2.2 Again the reference points are not "well defined". Neither do they explicitly account for the main uncertainties. This should be addressed as the next plan is rewritten. That said the available evidence does indicate that the harvest strategy is appropriate to to achieve sustainable exploitation. A brief explanation of the control rules follows. The references all relate to the Management Plan (Dixon and Sloan 2007). Level of appropriate exploitation is termed conservative, standard or increasing (called the nature of the strategy) and is determined from the results of a stock assessment survey held each November, February and April. The level of exploitation is maintained until the next survey is completed. Regular surveys help to ensure that overfishing does not occur. When survey results are obtained firstly the levels of recruitment are determined (Table 5 Fig 6 page 33). Recruitment must be above threshold levels (close to the average) or a conservative strategy is invoked. If recruitment is above the reference level, then total catch rate is considered. The total catch rate then determines whether a conservative, standard or increasing strategy is employed (Table 5 Fig 6 page 33). Between November and February surveys the nature of the strategy leads to an olympic quota being determined, which is managed by industry and government as an approximate targetted total catch (Table 6 page 34). For fishing periods after the February and April surveys the level of exploitation is controlled by the target size of prawns (Table 6 page 34). Lower exploitation is achieved by having a larger target size which effectively limits the amount of area that can be fished and thus reduces catch. The stable size structure of the population historically has ensured that this tool is effective. Conversely, above average survey results (increasing strategy) can allow for a relaxing of size criteria (capture smaller prawns as well) increasing the area able to be fished and therefore the total catch. Governemnt control over the final harvest strategy decisions plus economic concerns regarding the price of small prawns help to ensure that this will not result in severe overexploitation. The at sea decision rules (Table 7 page 34) help to ensure that these rules are adhered to on a daily basis by fishers, through real time management conducted by the committee at sea. Importantly, the minimum FN 82052 v1 Page 185 185 catch per night rule also helps to prevent overexploitation because the fleet needs to average relatively high levels of catch rate (>350 kg per boat per night) to remain at sea (Table 7 page 34).

1.2.3 All data relevant to fishery assessment is in report 387. The retained by-product catch is reported in logbooks. This is an underestimated of the total mortality of by-product species which we estimated from survey data in the by-product report. By-catch data has been collected haphazardly until the mid 2000's. Ib Svane conducted two FRDC projects on by-catch and then in 2007 we conducted our gulf- wide survey.

1.2.4 Again, better defined reference points should fix these issues. Also explicit accounting/defining of the uncertainty can be incorporated. Stock assessment reports are inernally reviewed at SARDI. They are occasionally externally reviewed.

I hope all this is helpful. Please don't hesitate to get back to me with any further queries, but note I will only be in the office today for another 3 hours or so.

Cheers, Cam

From: Kevin Stokes [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 14 September 2010 10:33 AM To: Dixon, Dixon (PIRSA-SARDI) Subject: RE: MSC Hi Cam

On Saturday, we reached the point of deciding to use the RBF. It is a safer route and has effectively the same consequences for conditions. Technically, therefore, I donít need to write up the detailed default scoring for P1.1.2. However, I think it is still worth doing as it will help frame the condition(s). I would, therefore, still appreciate your input against the scoring elements and guidelines if you have time.The relevant guidelines for P1.1.2 start on page 27, paragraph 6.2.16. The relevant scoring table is on page 36.

P1.2, including P1.2.2 (the most difficult PI) are covered in section 6.3, starting on page 32. The scoring tables are on pages 38-40.

I am attaching the whole MSC FAM document as it is easier than cutting out sections using a pdf editor. For scoring, I need to make comments that relate directly to each of the scoring ìelementsî in the table at each of the scoring ìlevelsî. The elements are the individual statements and the levels are the SG60, SG80 or SG100.

I am also attaching a very brief note of our meeting on Wednesday evening with a NB to say the planned Friday work was postponed and you would be making input by e-mail. Can you check, print, sign, scan, send etc this brief note as well. Sorry for the inconvenience but we have to have a complete audit trail.

On the signed notes, you can scan and e-mail to me at this e-mail address or, if you prefer, post to me at: 59 Jubilee Rd, Khandallah, Wellington 6035, New Zealand.

Many thanks for the input last week and for offering more.

Kevin

Dr Kevin Stokes stokes.net.nz Ltd FN 82052 v1 Page 186 186

Tel: +64 (04) 973 7305 Mob: +64 (021) 222 0926 E-mail: [email protected] Skype: kevinstokesnz

FN 82052 v1 Page 187 187

I4 Neil Carrick, Independent consultant

Attendees Kevin Stokes (P1) Geoff Dews (P2)

Stakeholders: Dr. Neil Carrick

Affiliation Representatives Independent Expert

Location: SARDI Date: 8th September 2010

1. Introduction: Kevin Stokes (P21) and Geoff Dews (P2) introduced the MSC assessment to Stakeholder, including  Fishery Unit of Certification (and client)  Assessment Team roles and responsibilities  Moody Marine as independent CB accredited to carry out MSC assessments  Purpose of meeting – information collection and identification of issues relevant to fishery assessment  MSC Principles & Criteria and Assessment Process being followed  That stakeholder comments may be non-attributable if required

Stakeholder comments attributable to bycatch

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

Independent Science and management

3. MML Questions Assessment team questions for stakeholder response

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

Retained species outcomes status (2.1.1)

Retained species management strategy (2.2.2)

Retained species information monitoring (2.1.3)

Bycatch species outcome status (2.2.1)

Calamary: There is no influence (from trawls) on the abundance on calamary as mainly juveniles are caught in the trawl nets. Monitoring indicates that there were no impact to the stock of calamary although there may be local effects due to concentrated trawling in some areas.

King George Whiting: Legislation for the closed areas (2003 Corny Point near Wardang closure) was a response to the levels of bycatch, mainly whiting. Although there appears to be no detectable effect on the whiting stock by the prawn trawling fleet there is however a suggestion that there are local effects on the stock of King George whiting and some local impacts to flounder and flathead. Although it is not referenced, there appears to be no effects on sharks and skates.

Cuttlefish: Some data has been collected from the trawls however this has not been published. The conclusion is that FN 82052 v1 Page 188 188 there may be evidence of possible local impacts to the stock in the northern areas

Baycatch species management strategy (2.2.2)

As a result of bycatch and sorting devices being fitted to the majority of the trawlers, there has been an improvement in the amount and the handling of bycatch. The introduction of „hopper‟ sorting systems has been important to the fishery in terms of improving the speed by which bycatch are sorted and returned to the water. The introduction of „crab bags‟ is voluntary (not in the regulations) both crab bags and hoppers are providing benefits to the fishery. Combined with length of trawls („short shots‟) (reduced shot lengths can result less damage to individuals) the bycatch is being partly managed. The hoppers and crab bags have the advantage of also improving the product quality and also reducing the stress on some bycatch species. Thsee are benefits to the spatial closure to prawn trawling that are now in place. Closures are especially important in the north of Spencer Gulf. This along with the reduced trawl shot time of the vessels is an operational practice leading to a combination of benefits.

Baycatch species information / monitoring (2.2.3)

Carrick noted that there were large catches of juvenile snapper in the initial years as the development of the fishery was increasing and new trawl areas were being opened up which is supported by the 1997 / 96 report to FRDC. Although unpublished there has been some research into the rate of survival of snapper after capture.

ETP species outcome status (2.3.1) Syngnathids: although there is some collection of data it has not been analysed as yet but based on opinion only, the leafy sea-dragon are found at higher densities in areas outside the fished areas It was noted that Neil suggested that the preferred habitat of the species is in areas that are closed (by the fishermen agreement) as „rough country‟ such as „Shoal Water Point‟. It was also noted that „big belly seahorses‟ are associated with sponges as per block 39 on the trawl grid classification.

ETP species management strategy (2.3.2)

ETP species information monitoring (2.3.3)

Habitat outcome status (2.4.1)

There have been some local effects to the habitats through sponge depletion: (as per the reference March 2001 Carrick Williams Fishery Assessment report to PIRSA for prawn Fishery Man Committee 01/08 1999 -2000). This report was based on 81 trawls in the Wallaroo trawl exclusion areas, which, resulted in large amounts of sponges and associated prawns being caught. There have been some local effects on sponge and there has not been any significant recovery of sponges although it was noted that the closure of the areas to trawling will assist recovery. In summary the area was trawled down in 1988 – this area was then closed {not permanently closed, but under and agreed to by the fishermen}.

Habitat management strategy (2.4.2)

Habitat information/monitoring (2.4.3) There is a lack of data on sponge being removed from the fishery at present– although there is some clarification as per reference PIRSA 2004 Environment Report (EPBC Submission).

There may have been a stabilisation of habitat over time (expert opinion only as it is not referenced) and there is no published information that supports these conclusions because there are no records as the type and distribution of the habitats prior to trawling commencing.

Ecosystem outcomes status (2.5.1)

6. Other issues FN 82052 v1 Page 189 189

7. Closing

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

8. Suplementary e-mail

From: Neil Carrick [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 24 September 2010 7:43 p.m. To: [email protected] Cc: Richard Banks; Geoff Dews Subject: Spencer-MSY abd Bsmy

Importance: High

Hi, Sorry for delay in getting back to you on MSY Have found some output files from production models which used standardised effort and cpue. Most model predictions (e.g. MSY) based on fox and Schaefer and Pella-Tomlinson are high. Best is admb Schaefer Pella-Tomlinson using 2 timesteps (2 & 25) is best. Note: 1) MSY for 2 and 25 timesteps were 4,658 and 3,993 t, respectively 2) Bsmy for 2 and 25 timesteps were 8,623 and 6,436 t 3) MSY/Bsmy ratios- 0.54 and 0.62

If want can send summary of model output. Based on the admb (assumed best results)- results indicate the fishery is being fished 'sustainably', dont say 'underfished'. Fishing not for biomass but but $ i.e. economic return (value-costs).

However, within year (fishing period) the relationship between cpue and biomass is not constant (see frdc report 1999/142, section 8.14).

Regards. Neil Carrick

FN 82052 v1 Page 190 190

I5 Conservation Council, South Australia: Interview and RBF Workshop MSC Interview Record

Assessors Kevin Stokes (P1) and Geoff Dews (P2)

Stakeholders: Peter Trott: WWF client Kathryn Warhust: Conservation Council Chris Bell: Conservation Council James Brook; Conservation Council

In attendance Mihaela Zaharia (Poseido)

Affiliation

Conservation Council South Australia

Location: Port Lincoln Date: 8 th September 2010

Stakeholder comments attributable to observer activities and cooperative management

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

Environmental NGO

3. MML Questions

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

Retained Species Outcomes Status (2.1.1)

The amount of retained species in the bycatch was such that it would be considered under the bycatch section as per the MSC methodology

Retained species management strategy (2.1.2)

The Stakeholders accepted the status of the retained species status as not being vulnerable

Retained species information/ monitoring (2.1.3)

Bycatch species outcomes status (2.2.1) FN 82052 v1 Page 191 191

The list of main bycatch species was agreed to by all present

There is no suggestion that dolphins are captured in the trawls although there may be some collisions between dolphins and fishing vessel in high seas (see section below for comments)

The stock status of giant cuttlefish seems to suggest that the stock associated with the breeding aggregations is in decline

There has been no direct correlation the decline in cuttlefish and fishing practices

Bycatch species management strategy (2.2.2)

There appears to be no interaction with the prawn trawl and giant cuttlefish species at any of the trawl grounds

Bycatch species information /monitoring (2.2.3)

Suggestion were that there is a need for specic identification guidelines to be produced for Spencer Gulf to be allow for more robust recording of species interaction and incidents. At present that is no guidelines that can be used that improves the precision of recording.

In regards to cuttlefish it was noted there is a lack of records of the bycatch of giant cuttlefish from the prawn fishery.

The stakeholders accepted that there are no issues related to prawn trawling and giant cuttlefish based on available information and discussion with fisheries management agencies due to the fact that the migration of the giant cuttlefish is outside the time of the year that trawling takes place

ETP species outcomes and status (2.3.1)

In regards to a specific NGOs focusing on Syngnathis; it was a suggestion that there has been or there is still an NGO operating that in Spencer Gulf with a focus on sea-dragons although it could not be verified. Nobody representing the NGOs are able to confirm the „Dragon Search‟ program was still in operation in South Australia

ETP species management strategy (2.3.2)

Coastal stingaree (Urolophus orarius) is classified as endangered (EN) on the IUCN Red list and is considered to be important in setting conditions for the fishery data collection.

The coastal stingaree occurs in the Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GAB), within which exists a Benthic Protection Zone (BPZ) that affords some degree of protection to this bottom-dwelling species and can be considered as a management actions for the broader regions other than just Spencer Gulf.

ETP species information / monitoring (2.3.3)

The Commonwealth log books and identification book for species interaction is not applicable to the South Australia and as such can is not well regarded within NGO community or by the fishing operators as a source of reliable information or guidance to reporting of non-target species.

Habitats outcomes status (2.4.1)

Sponges and benthos impacted by bottom trawls may be as much as 15% of the total area of Spencer Gulf, which is consistent with the known are of operation of the trawl fleet.

Some historical areas may not have been trawled in recent years. There is some concern that these areas may have some sponge re-growth.

Habitat management strategy (2.4.2)

FN 82052 v1 Page 192 192

Historical trawl areas (that have not received any significant effort in recent years) may be targeted in the future by the trawl fleet (see section 2.4.3)

Habitat information monitoring (2.4.3)

There is reason to believe that trawlers will in the future and in the past have trawled over old historical fishing grounds on an irregular or opportunistic basis. And there is no certainty of compliance by the trawler operators to report this through logbooks or to the Committee-At-Sea

Ecosystem outcome status (2.5.1)

Ecosystem management strategy (2.5.2)

Ecosystem information monitoring (2.5.3)

Other

There may be some issues of non-reporting of dolphin interactions due to collisions with fishing vessels

The of collision between dolphins and fishing vessels relate to information (not in logbooks) that suggests is that in heavy seas dolphin mortalities are/may be related to vessel pitching on top of swimming dolphin causing fatalities and these are not being recorded

5. Other issues Seals are likely major scavengers species for the bycatch. However there is no information available to confirm the level of consumption of the seals and there reliance on the bycatch

6. Closing

On scoring of the cuttlefish the NGOS agreed that intensity was to be scored at 3 and this was to be taken into account with further discussion with other stakeholders

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v1 Page 193 193

I6 Conservation Council, South Australia

MSC Interview Record

FN 82052 v1 Page 194 194

FN 82052 v1 Page 195 195

I7 Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association MSC Interview Record

Attendees (Lead Auditor/Coordinator: Richard Banks) Team Members: Richard Banks (P3) Kevin Stokes (P1) and Geoff Dews (P2)

Stakeholders: Tony Lukin Barry Evans Greg Palmer Nathan Hood Karen Hollamby

Affiliation Representatives

SGWCPFA

Location: Port Lincoln Date: 9 September 2010

1. Introduction: Lead Auditor introduced MSC assessment to Stakeholders, including  Fishery Unit of Certification (and client)  Assessment Team  Moody Marine as independent CB accredited to carry out MSC assessments  Purpose of meeting – information collection and identification of issues relevant to fishery assessment  MSC Principles & Criteria and Assessment Process being followed  That stakeholder comments may be non-attributable if required

Stakeholder comments attributable to SPC personnel

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

Industry

3. MML Questions Assessment team questions for stakeholder response

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

Introductions

Richard Banks outlined the process and defined the terms used in the assessment relating to stock assessment and environmental interaction and harvest control measures that are being used throughout the assessment process

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

The stakeholders suggested that historically the target species stock levels have remained stable over time and that the management measures that are in place support the maintenance of a stable stock. The management measures are the closures, and the limited amount of time the prawn trawl fleet operates.

Retained species outcomes status (2.1.1)

Discussion focused on the lack of precise biological information relating to some of the bycatch species and the need FN 82052 v1 Page 196 196 to continue with the collection of information.

Retained species management strategy (2.1.2)

It was also recognised that the majority of the fleet used some form of modification to the nets to separate some of the bycatch, mostly „crab bags‟. The development of the crab bags was in response to decreasing the sorting time of the catch, reducing damage to the target species in the net and to maintain a better quality product (reduce crushing).

Retained species information monitoring (2.1.2)

It was stated that due to lack of information in the logbooks and limited surveys it is not clear how successful the management measures that are in place (spatial and temporal) are functioning.

Bycatch species outcome status (2.2.1)

In regards to the SICA the meeting did not disagree with the results obtained with SARDI stakeholders (see meeting notes SARDI).

The group outlined the fishing practices of the fleet which avoided interaction with cuttlefish and suggested the movement of cuttlefish was highly dependant on salinity levels in Spencer Gulf. The group also stated it was highly unlikely that giant cuttlefish would be captured during prawn trawling operations.

Bycatch species outcome management strategy (2.2.2)

The meeting also noted that the fleet operated under a code of conduct that refers to onboard management. The Code of Conduct has been in place for 15 years and is constantly reviewed to incorporate current best practices.

Bycatch species information monitoring (2.2.3)

The Coordinator-At-Sea submits a summary of each trip to the SGWCPFA, PIRSA and SARDI based on Committee At Sea decisions – these are summarised into the SGWCPFA Annual Reports and the Annual Reports are lodged with the State Library but are not available for public viewing.

The meeting discussed options for increasing the precision of monitoring the bycatch through log books but also expressed the difficulties in applying general guidelines to monitoring that did not suit the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery – mainly the bycatch species guide developed by the Commonwealth was not applicable to the Spencer Gulf.

ETP species outcome status (2.3.1)

Discussion focused on the requirements under the EPBC Act to increase the awareness of interactions with Marine Listed species

ETP species management strategy (2.3.2)

The meeting was given an outline of the „move-on‟ policy that is managed by the Committee-At-Sea on a nightly basis. The meeting was given an explanation as to how the Committee-At-Sea operates using a number of elements to decide areas that are to be fished. The elements included the avoidance of habitats that supported Syngnathids in some cases.

ETP species information monitoring (2.3.3)

It was recognised by the stakeholders the Committee-At-Sea decision making process would be strengthened by monitoring of habitat interactions that may support ETPs.

Habitat outcome status (2.4.1)

Habitat management strategy (2.4.2)

FN 82052 v1 Page 197 197

Habitat information monitoring (2.4.3)

Ecosystem outcomes status (2.5.1)

Ecosystem management strategy (2.5.2)

Ecosystem information monitoring (2.5.3)

5. Other issues

It was stated that gear configuration used in the fleet varied between boats with minor changes to the net settings. Nets were often adjusted to suit the particular areas the fleet was fishing in but on average the fleet had similar gear set up. The alteration to net configuration was not significant but there is a need to have a strategic approach to developing bycatch reduction through gear design.

There was agreement that any bycatch program that was set in place to monitor changes in bycatch would have to be cost effective and realistic in time constraints within the normal operation of a vessel.

The average age of the fleet is 10-12 years with only few vessels changing ownership. The increase in fishing efficiency over the last decade has been due to improved electronics on the vessels allowing more precision with fishing and improved on-board handling of the product.

It was also noted that the retained species was normally the responsibility of the crew who had the option to sell the product and distribute the profit amongst themselves.

6. Closing

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v1 Page 198 198

I8 Ocean Watch MSC Interview Record

Attendees Geoff Dews (P2)

Stakeholders: Nathan Bicknell

Affiliation Representatives Oceanwatch Australia SeaNet Extension Officer South Australia

Location: Port Lincoln Date: 10th September 2010

1. Introduction: Geoff Dews (P2) introduced the MSC assessment to Stakeholders, including  Fishery Unit of Certification (and client)  Assessment Team roles and responsibilities  Moody Marine as independent CB accredited to carry out MSC assessments  Purpose of meeting – information collection and identification of issues relevant to fishery assessment  MSC Principles & Criteria and Assessment Process being followed  That stakeholder comments may be non-attributable if required

Stakeholder comments attributable to bycatch reduction through gear design

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

NGO – Fishing gear extension service

3. MML Questions Assessment team questions for stakeholder response

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

Oceanwatch Australia; SeaNet South Australia is focused on improving the trawl gear used in South Australia to reduce bycatch through net and board design, net configuration, and the optimize the use of bycatch excluder devises.

Bycatch species outcome status (2.2.1)

It was stated that the management of Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery has emphasised harvest control through temporal and spatial measures hence the strategy is avoidance of bycatch rather than managing through gear design

Baycatch species management strategy (2.2.2)

There have been a number of trials with a „fixed grid‟ system that were inconclusive but it has been suggested that it worked for individual fish species within the South Australian prawn fisheries

The application of „crab bags‟ is wide spread in the Spencer Gulf prawn trawl fishery, however the „crab bags‟ only separates species based on size but does not reduce the total bycatch.

FN 82052 v1 Page 199 199

Baycatch species information / monitoring (2.2.3)

The voluntary adoption of the „crab bags‟ is seen as a measure of reducing (i) damage to the target species (ii) facilitates easier and quicker return to the sea from the trawl nets and (iii) increases hauls and shooting away efficiency by reducing time to clear the nets after a trawl.

The information of the survival of the TED species is not well understood although some work has been carried out in Spencer and St Vincent Gulfs

Management measures (1.2.2):

Nathan suggested the examples of gear modification that have been successful in the Northern Prawn Fishery could be useful in the Spencer Gulf prawn fishery

ETP species outcome status (2.3.1)

It was stated that because of the methods of handling the catch on deck after each trawl it‟s difficult to identify and or record the presence or absence of syngnathids. This is due to the fact that the hopper system allows for a rapid return to the sea after the catch is emptied out of the cod ends and crab bags.

ETP species management strategy (2.3.2)

ETP species information monitoring (2.3.3)

To improve the understanding of the survival of the return species (sea dragons) it may be beneficial for the fishery to undertake trials at sea horse farms rather than on board trawlers which would be costly and require longer time frames

5. Other issues

To improve the reduction in bycatch through gear modification, Nathan suggested there be a strategic approach adopted by the management authority and by the fishing fleet

This may involve the use of live trawl mounted video cameras to allow the skipper to monitor bycatch in real time as they pass over particular trawl grounds. This technology is now available and future work is being assessed in terms of cost and affordability

It was noted that bycatch reduction devices as used in other fisheries may not have any influence on the reduction of bycatch in the Spencer Gulf fishery due to a number of external factors such as length of trawl and the species composition of the bycatch.

The adoption of T90 and square mesh may be more beneficial to reducing bycatch in the Spencer Gulf fishery if further trials can be undertaken

6. Closing

It is the intension of SeaNet to continue with the extension work in all the prawn trawls fisheries in South Australia focusing on gear modification and the use of underwater cameras along with the adoption of strategic approach to reducing bycatch.

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v1 Page 200 200

I9 SGWCPFA Observer Scheme

MSC Interview Record

Attendees Geoff Dews (P2)

Stakeholders: Jenny Kranz: Office Administrator Spencer Gulf and Western Prawn Fishermen‟s Assoc Inc. Greg Palmer: Coordinator at Sea Spencer Gulf and Western Prawn Fishermen‟s Assoc Inc

Affiliation Representatives

Observer Program

Location: Port Lincoln Date: 10th September 2010

Stakeholder comments attributable to observer activities and cooperative management

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / NGO etc)

Client; Spencer Gulf & West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Assoc. Inc.; Management of Observer Program

3. MML Questions Assessment team questions for stakeholder response

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

The observer program uses 15 people made up from crews other than the vessels they are employed during a survey. The data is collected from two or three nights of trawling for three surveys per year. The survey is normally carried out using normal trawl methods but these are not standardised between vessels.

Retained species outcomes status (2.1.1)

Spot survey is done using observer made up from crew from other trawlers who are recognised by PIRSA and SARDI as having appropriate training from SARDI. This allows for some expertise to be retained between surveys and requires less training prior to the surveys. The spot survey is based on number of prawns per 7kg of total prawn weight with the catch rates is related to the catch/ minute of trawl time. There is no length frequency data recorded nor are retained species data collected.

Retained species management strategy (2.1.2)

FN 82052 v1 Page 201 201

The observer program does not have a binding agreement that includes validation of code of operation.

Retained species information monitoring (2.1.3)

The stock assessment surveys are carried out for approx two nights over three surveys per year using nine boats (Feb 2010 used seven boats) for each year with the surveys scheduled from November and February prior to fishing operation by the entire fleet, with the information being made available to the SGWCPFA. For each vessel used an observer is required.

The spot surveys in March, June and May are also reported back to SARDI for assessment and focuses on target species distribution and abundance.

Bycatch species outcome status (2.2.1)

The observer program contributes to the harvest strategy by recording data that set out (i) abundance (ii) site/location (iii) spawning (in November and February only).

Baycatch species management strategy (2.2.2)

The observer program does not have any binding links between the management plan and the validation of data through the observer collected information.

Baycatch species information / monitoring (2.2.3)

Although the program has been operating for a length of time there has not been any long-term by-catch recording by the observers.

The present program does not include any specific or formal training for the observers in identifying bycatch species

ETP species outcome status (2.3.1)

ETP species management strategy (2.3.2)

ETP species information monitoring (2.3.3)

The observer program has over the last 12 months been recording captured sygnathids.

Habitat outcome status (2.4.1)

Habitat management strategy (2.4.2)

Habitat information/monitoring (2.4.3)

Ecosystem outcomes status (2.5.1)

5. Other issues

6. Closing

The observer program is designed to: - Record the target species - Measure the number of prawns per 7kg bucket as an indicator of size, - Validate the abundance and distribution of the target species, - Interactions with Syngnathids (only) are recorded (over the last 12 months)

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders FN 82052 v1 Page 202 202

FN 82052 v1 Page 203 203

I10 PIRSA Fisheries Services

MSC Interview Record

MML Attendees Lead Auditor/Coordinator: Richard Banks

Stakeholders: Affiliation Representatives 1. Andrew Carr, Regional Manager (West), Compliance 2. Mark Spencer, Fisheries Officer, Compliance

Location: Port Lincoln Port Office

Date: 9 September, 2010

Compliance Organisation

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

PIRSA: Australian State Fisheries Government Department

3. MML Questions Assessment team questions for stakeholder response

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

4. Discussion

Resourcing

Responsibility for the compliance of the Spencer Gulf King Prawn fishery is managed by Fisheries Services, West Region. West Region operates from two offices, Port Lincoln and Kadina. Compliance officers are responsible for a number of fisheries in the region, in addition to the Spencer Gulf Prawn Fishery. There are 6 officers based in Port Lincoln, and 4 in Kadina, both under the supervision of a Regional Manager.

Sea Patrols are undertaken by Southern Ranger, which operates with a minimum of 6.

An intelligence gathering system exists for the public to call in - Fishwatch

The focus of activities by compliance officers is based on Three Principles: Education, deterrence and Enforcement. Fisheries Services prepare an annual Risk Assessment, identifying the main risks, strategies and actions.

The main risks for the three Regional Prawn fisheries are identified as:

 Take protected / non protected species (Medium level) FN 82052 v1 Page 204 204

 Fish in closed areas (Low level)  Use of illegal fishing gear (Medium level)  Interactions with obstructions placed on the sea-bed (Low level).

Strategies include:

Target actions are:

Penalties are laid down in the Fishery Regulations. Provision is made for a penalty point system which when accumulated can result in permanent loss of a licence.

Quarterly reports are prepared summarising outcomes, and addressing pertinent issues. These are discussed with industry.

Observations are as follows:

 Functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and systematically understood  A comprehensive MCS system is in place  The industry itself works collectively, always in close proximity to one another on the same fishing grounds. This promotes a strong level of self regulation with a strong degree of confidence that the fishers are compliant  Sanctions are laid down in the regulations and act as an effective deterrent, albeit are rarely applied  Local peer pressure against non compliance is extremely high from within the SG Association structure, and the local public  There is no evidence of systematic non compliance. The number of offences committed is very small (2 for carriage of finfish onboard in the last two years)

The Annex to this report identifies the activities relating to set objectives as laid down the SG Fisheries Management Plan (2007-2011)

6. Closing

Confirmed

FN 82052 v1 Page 205 205

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v1 Page 206 206

I11 Executive Officer, SGWCPFA

MSC Interview Record

MML Attendees Lead Auditor/Coordinator: Richard Banks

Stakeholders: Affiliation Representatives 1. Karen Hollamby, Spencer Gulf and West Coast Prawn Fishermen‟s Association Inc.

Location: SGWCPFA Offices, Port Lincoln Date: 10 September, 2010

Stakeholder comments attributable to Conservation Council of South Australia

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

Fishermen‟s Organisation

3. MML Questions Assessment team questions for stakeholder response

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

Organisational Issues SGWCPFA association increasingly taking on management powers, but reliant on PIRSA for implementation of gazettes.

PIRSA has yet to act on the Co-management report (PIRSA et al), which involved all important stakeholders including CCSA.

Fisheries Council replaced Fisheries Management Councils

The old FMCs dealt with a combination of all prawn fisheries, GoSt Vincent and two other fisheries. The old FMC role is provided by the association, and integrity supported by the appointment of an independent chairperson; Glenn Davis. The SGWCPFA does not interact with the fisheries council unless there is a particular activity. The Fisheries Council has set up „sub committees‟ to deal with stakeholder engagement. The sub committees draw from a wider range of expertise but not specifically from the stakeholder organisations. There is concern from stakeholders, including fishermen, that the Council is not sufficiently participatory, and somewhat remote.

The Fisheries Council is responsible for preparing management plans. The SG Plan preparation will commence in 2011 to be implemented before September 2012. The Council is keen on promoting Co-management. SGWCPFA lodged an application to assess implementation of the co-management system with a request for FRDC support funding. The Project is aiming to understand costs and benefits of co-management.

Research Sub-Committee Comprises 1 PIRSA, 1 SARDI 1 CCSA, and EO, and 6 fishers. 10 member committee. CCSA participation undergoing a trial period. Initial thoughts were to restrict participation as observer, but they are presently fully integrated into the Research Sub-Committee functions. This allows a proper voting role, with their participation on this basis until March next year. To date, they have provided proactive and constructed feed-back.

FN 82052 v1 Page 207 207

Within this programme, there is explicit reference to a strategic approach to research prioritisation, procurement, funding, etc, guided by both economic, but also overall planning needs, which respect compliance with the Management Plan.

A significant priority this last year for the Research Sub-Committee has been to focus on economic issues, following problems in the price of prawn and the strengthening of the Australian exchange rate.

However other issues such as bycatch remain a priority, hence the focus on establishing the lobster minimum landing size as part of the management strategy. Fishers, are extremely proactive is this area, and provide very positive input. There is a genuine interest from SGWCPFA members in ecological interactions and the consequences on bycatches. They have readily participated and cooperated in past bycatch Research activities with SARDI, but there is some concern about the clarity in bycatch information, following the extensive cooperation.

The existing logbook information is also not considered to be that robust, and more could be done to develop logbook data collection, and the presentation of results.

Management Plan The Association is somewhat frustrated about the lack of progress in implementing the ecosystem strategy. The SARDI bycatch research report was slow in coming, and SGWCPFA is about to press PIRSA to take the process further. Letter will be prepared shortly from the Association requesting ERA and early discussions on management mitigation measures.

The Research Committee thoroughly recommended the setting of a bug minimum landing size (117 cm), which was endorsed by the Association Management Committee and is to be gazetted shortly as a licence condition, and is a strong commitment to the management of retained species. Squid is also a partial bycatch, but scientists have stated that shrimp trawl interactions demonstrate much lower risks that the other fisheries in the Gulf.

A risk assessment is overdue but SGWCPFA has prepared a timeline for implementation with the ERA to commence early 2011, and completion of some bycatch strategies by February 2012. Other strategies, such as gear selectivity, may take longer to develop, but fishers are actively engaging with Oceanwatch.

Management actions The Committee at Sea implements real time management actions. These are rarely minuted at meetings at the time as they are documented in a report that is tabled, but references are made during Association minutes.

Management costs The costs of research in fisheries management and compliance are fully cost recovered from the industry through licensing fees. PIRSA costings were recently reviewed with some costs adjusted.

6. Closing

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v1 Page 208 208

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities MSC Interview Record

Attendees Geoff Dews (P2)

Stakeholders: Kathryn Read

Affiliation Representatives Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

Location: Telephone Interview Date: 6 th October 2010 1. Introduction: Kevin Stokes and Geoff Dews (P2) introduced the MSC assessment to Stakeholders, including  Fishery Unit of Certification (and client)  Assessment Team roles and responsibilities  Moody Marine as independent CB accredited to carry out MSC assessments  Purpose of meeting – information collection and identification of issues relevant to fishery assessment  MSC Principles & Criteria and Assessment Process being followed  That stakeholder comments may be non-attributable if required

Stakeholder comments attributable to Southern Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI).

2. Status What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management / industry / eNGO etc)

The status of the group was deemed to be science and management

3. MML Questions

Aim of the consultation was to receive comment from the well informed stakeholders

Introduction: Karthyn Read is the Assistant Director Sustainable Fisheries Department of Sustainability Environment Water Population and Communities.

4. Stakeholder Key Issues

DEWHA undertook the re-assessment of the South Australian (SA) Prawn Trawl Fishery under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC) in October 2009.

In that assessment the Minister stated that through the combination of management arrangements, data gathering, proposed research and the nature of the fishery allows confidence that the fishery management will maintain low bycatch levels, minimise interactions with protected species and manage impacts on the wider ecosystems

ETP species outcome status (2.3.1)

Syngnathids are listed under the Marine Species under the EPBC Act. There are no limits established for Marine species that can be applied to Syngnathids.

ETP species management strategy (2.3.2)

There is a requirement under the Act for the fishery to take all reasonable steps to avoid capture of the listed species. Syngnathids are also listed under CITES as a protected species relating to export.

FN 82052 v1 Page 209 209

ETP species information monitoring (2.3.3) The assessment made in 2009 were not aware of any interactions with Syngnathids from the prawn trawl fisheries although given recent research any recorded interactions and management measures will be used in the fishery reassessment to be conducted in 2014.

5. Information Recommendations to PIRSA on the ecological management of the SA Prawn Trawl Fishery (to be completed by 2014) included: A harvest strategy for bycatch to be undertaken in the fishery. A risk assessment for the bycatch for all three SA Prawn Fisheries. Implementation of appropriate management measures and mitigation responses for high risk species indentified and appropriate management plans and policies updated in regard to bycatch management arrangements. Further investigation/refinement of methods for evaluating and increasing the survivability of bycatch species where appropriate. (Letter to SA Minister for Agriculture Food and Fisheries from DEWHA dated 26 October 2009)

6. Other issues

6. Closing

Confirmed

MML Lead Auditor Stakeholders

FN 82052 v1 Page 210 210

Appendix G: Post peer review email clarification . Hi Richard,

We have a guaranteed three stock assessment surveys a year with independent observers which utilises nine vessels, November, February and April, currently four of these vessels use industry representatives whereby a deckhand from these vessels swap from one vessel to another. These deckhands had to undertake an observer training program which was run by Industry and SARDI over a couple of days to be qualified.

Also if the fishers are to open up any new grounds outside of those established from the harvest strategy during stock assessments surveys, they undertake a spot survey which utilises their industry observers. In 2009/10 there were three spot surveys undertaken, in 2008/09 four were undertaken.

Hope this information is what you were after

Regards Graham

Graham Hooper BSC Research Officer Wildfisheries Program Blue Crab Sub Program, Prawn Sub Program SARDI, Aquatic Sciences ------Work: 08 82075496 Mobile: 0427393401 Mail: PO Box 120 Henley Beach, SA, 5024. E-mail: [email protected] SARDI website: http://www.sardi.sa.gov.au Inshore Crustacean Subprogram webpage: http://www.sardi.sa.gov.au/fisheries/wild_fisheries/inshore_crustacean From: Richard Banks [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 17 February 2011 4:02 PM To: Hooper, Graham (PIRSA-SARDI) Cc: Dixon, Cameron (PIRSA-SARDI) Subject: RE: Manual

Graeme

What is the extent of the observer coverage – how many deployments in a given year?

Richard

FN 82052 v1 Page 211 211

Hi Richard, I think you have assumed that there is observer coverage during commercial fishing operations. There is currently no observer coverage of this nature. As Graham has stated, the only observer coverage occurs during fishery independent surveys to ensure the collection of independent data. We are aware that observing data can be a very useful tool for assessments such as groundtruthing logbook data, estimating species specific depletion rates etc. We regularly remind industry and PIRSA that an observer program may be required in the future to respond to such needs, particularly following the mitigation stage of the by-catch risk assessment process. But you would also be aware that observer programs can be costly when ensuring appropriate and representative coverage. Therefore until a specific need arises a program of this nature will not be pursued. Cheers, Cam

From: Hooper, Graham (PIRSA-SARDI) Sent: Thursday, 17 February 2011 8:07 AM To: Cc: Dixon, Cameron (PIRSA-SARDI) Subject: RE: Manual Hi Geoff, The fishers do not collect any dedicated data on shark captures. The only ones would be interactions with whites in the TEPS logbook. I am not sure about the status of SA and the National action plan, but I guess that the data provided for the bycatch risk assessment may cover this? Certainly shark species will be looked at as a group and individually given their importance (I assume). Again the managers may be able to help out here?

Cam

-----Original Message----- From: Geoffrey Dews [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 23 February 2011 11:10 AM To: Dixon, Cameron (PIRSA-SARDI) Subject: MSC and sharks

Cam

As I understand it South Australia are signed onto the Shark National Action Plan - therefore required to collect bycatch information on sharks - is that the case and do the operators collect that data.

Thanks

Geoff

Hi Geoff, Responses embeded below. I have cc'd Kevin and Richard as I have mentioned about these trawl track data to each of them previously. Note that as I have not yet published this figure, it would be best if you could just use the data below with reference to SARDI unpublished if needed.. Cam

-----Original Message----- From: Geoffrey Dews [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 23 February 2011 10:14 AM To: Dixon, Cameron (PIRSA-SARDI) Subject: MSC questions

Hi Cam Trust all is well and your preparation forthe football season is going well..

FN 82052 v1 Page 212 212

Could you please qualify some pointsarising from the MSC Assessment report.

1. Calculation of areas trawled: a. One concepts that supports the idea that the Spencer Gulf prawnfishery is not depleting the resources is the fact that the total benthic area thatis in contact with trawl doors and nets is not increasing and the 'footprint'caused by trawling operations is only a small proportion of the total area ofthe Gulf. Is there any supporting information as to how you are able tocalculate the 'footprint' of the trawls and how accurate this information is(given that the vessels are not using VMS) and the areas that are trawled areconstant.

The areas trawled are consistent among years. I can send the maps for each year if you wish as well. There is quite a bit of overlap among the trawl track data because they do fish very tightly on most occasions. This was calculated from centre points of gps data for 3 shots per night they generally do 8-10 per night). I assumed that the shots ran north to south, were of a swept area 22m and were of a fixed distance that was calculated from average trawl speed and average trawl time. This footprint is an underestimate because only 3 shots per night are measured. This probably means that because they generally shoot away one shot after the other, the footprint itself will be quite accurate (only just underestimated), but the overlap may be much greater. Here are some stats associated with the areas calculated for the five years of data analysed. PS I meant to include this data in the latest report but it slipped through without.

Season Number of Tracks Track Width (m) Trawl Area Trawl Area (accounting for overlaps) 2003/04 7797 22 1016.58 684.36 2004/05 8382 22 1092.85 678.54 2005/06 7645 22 996.76 629.27 2006/07 8014 22 1044.87 650.96 2007/08 7485 22 975.9 654.12 All Seasons 39323

2. Discard of target and retained species a. Is there any information to suggest that target species arediscarded for any reason (size, quality) and if so is it recorded {I am surethere is not discard of target species in any prawn fishery} b. Is there requirement to record discards of the retained by-product c. Can you confirm if recording of by-catch is voluntary or mandatory

This was my response to kevin for a similar question. It is safe to say there is no discarding of target prawns. Generally the very smallest, non-commercial prawns are not harvested due to the real-time management approach. Size grades up to 30+ (which is quite a small prawn) are kept and sold in small volumes. You could point to the very low proportion of 20+ prawns in the annual commercial catch and the effectiveness of the real time management approach in this respect. See figure 2.9 and 2.10 and table 2.3 of the stock assessment (Dixon et al 2010) to see how well they avoid small prawns.

No they do not record the weight of discarded by-product.

By-catch recording is voluntary.

3. Just to confirm that there is no interaction with seabirds from theprawn trawl operations (I know it's a night fishery but we need to state thelack of seabird interaction).

I have not heard of any seabird interactions. There is a report coming out soon on TEPS interactions. There will not be any seabird interactions reported to my knowledge.

FN 82052 v1 Page 213 213

Hi Richard, Depends on which logbook you are talking about. For the normal daily and monthly catch and effort logbooks data are great. If you mean TEPS logbooks then that is a different story. There is a report on the TEPS logbook that will soon be competed by SARDI (in the next couple of months possibly weeks). It documents three years of data. I have been told that the number of reports is very very poor for prawns, but obviously that cannot be made public until this report is. I will probably indicate this to the research sub-committee when we meet to discuss the future directions for syngnathids. But clearly something must be done with reporting and I think discussion will need to be had regarding whether it is appropriate to have some level of observer coverage. At lkeast that will probably be my suggestion. I have spoken with Simon Clark about the whole research to support MSC stuff and he has arranged a meeting ASAP to discuss. I dont think we will have a problem determining appropriate actions and acting upon them. Cheers, Cam

From: Richard Banks [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 18 February 2011 5:30 PM To: Dixon, Cameron (PIRSA-SARDI) Cc: Hooper, Graham (PIRSA-SARDI); [email protected] Subject: RE: Manual Cam

I am not sure if Geoff has asked this question but forgive the repetition if he has.

What is t response rate to log-book completion?

Richard

FN 82052 v1 Page 214 214

Appendix H:Registered companies / vessels within Unit of Certification: eligible to sell MSC certified product

Authority / Registration No Registered Licence Holder(s) Vessel Name P02 Ribari Pty Ltd Rolland P03 Ajka Pty Ltd Kali II P04 Robert William Bailey Melanie B P05 Robert Allan Britcher Intrepid P06 Nora Jean Davies Lunar Sea P07 Daro Kolega Lauren Maya P08 Anton Blaslov Grozdana B P09 Barolomeo Puglisi Angelina P10 Boric Fisheries Pty Ltd Hanna V P11 Sampson Nominees Pty Ltd Marina T P12 Fromager Pty Ltd Brianna-Rene-Adele P13 Ante Lukin Kylie P14 Ross Hamilton Haldane Bartallumba K P15 Armand N Palmer Millennium III P16 Barry James Evans Night Stalker P17 Coral Muriel Justice Coral J II P18 S & M Letinic Nominees Pty Ltd Marija-L P19 Dinko K Lukin Lukina P20 Ivan Bralic Emma Rose P21 Spencer Gulf Nominees Pty Ltd Kylett P22 Rita Valcic Nikol P23 Reno Martinovic Miss Jenny P24 Thornhill Pty Ltd Sandy S P25 Josip Mezic Jadran P26 Ljiljana Vitlov Michelle P27 Aldo Kolega Monique K P28 Eugene Montgomery Skandia P29 Leon Dean Martin Intruder P30 Clarence John Hood Roslyn Ann P31 Barry J Bowyer Evelyn-L P32 Peter Parissos Australis II P33 Wellmet Pty Ltd Beauie J P34 Frane Bralic Cvita-B P35 Jordan Sarunic Antica-S P36 CG Simms Nominees Pty Ltd Meteha-S P37 Rhyona Pty Ltd Liberty V P38 Tacoma Pty Ltd Atlas P39 Kingslake Pty Ltd Tourville Bay

FN 82052 v1 Page 215 215