Multijurisdictional fisheries performance reporting: How Australia’s nationally standardised approach to assessing stock status compares

Australian marine wild-capture fisheries are managed by eight separate jurisdictions. Traditionally, fishery status reports have been produced separately by most of these jurisdictions, assessing the fish stocks they manage, and reporting on the effectiveness of their fisheries management. However, the format, the type of stock status assessments, the thresholds and terminology used to describe stock status and the classification frameworks have varied over time and among jurisdictions. These differences complicate efforts to understand stock status on a national scale. They also create potential misunderstanding among the wider community about how to interpret information on the status of fish stocks, and the fisheries management and science processes more generally. This is especially true when considering stocks that are shared across two or more jurisdictional boundaries. A standardised approach was developed in 2011 leading to production of the first national Status of key Australian fish stocks reports in 2012, followed by a second edition in 2014 (www.fish.gov.au). Production of these reports was the first step towards a broader national approach to reporting on the performance of Australian fisheries for target species and for wider ecosystem and socioeconomic consequences. This paper outlines the challenges associated with moving towards national performance reporting for target fish stocks and Australia’s successes so far. It also outlines the challenges ahead, in particular those relating to reporting more broadly on the status of entire fisheries. Comparisons are drawn between Australia and New Zealand and more broadly between Australia and other countries.

Variability in the growth, feeding and condition of barramundi (Lates calcarifer Bloch) in a northern Australian coastal river and impoundment

Lates calcarifer supports important fisheries throughout tropical Australia. Community-driven fish stocking has resulted in the creation of impoundment fisheries and supplemental stocking of selected wild riverine populations. Using predominantly tag-recapture methods, condition assessment and stomach flushing techniques, this study compared the growth of stocked and wild L. calcarifer in a tropical Australian river (Johnstone River) and stocked fish in a nearby impoundment (Lake Tinaroo). Growth of L. calcarifer in the Johnstone River appeared resource-limited, with juvenile fish in its lower freshwater reaches feeding mainly on small aytid shrimp and limited quantities of fish. Growth was probably greatest in estuarine and coastal areas than in the lower freshwater river. Fish in Lake Tinaroo, where prey availability was greater, grew faster than either wild or stocked fish in the lower freshwater areas of the Johnstone River. Growth of L. calcarifer was highly seasonal with marked declines in the cooler months. This was reflected in both stomach fullness and the percentage of fish with empty stomachs but the condition of L. calcarifer was similar across most sites. In areas where food resources appear stretched, adverse effects on resident L. calcarifer populations and their attendant prey species should be minimised through cessation of, or more conservative, stocking practices.

How important is the coast? A survey of coastal objectives in an Australian regional city

Defining goals and objectives is a critical component of adaptive management of natural resources because they provide the basis on which management strategies can be designed and evaluated. The aims of this study are: (i) to apply and test a collaborative method to elicit goals and objectives for inshore fisheries and biodiversity in the coastal zone of a regional city in Australia; (ii) to understand the relative importance of management objectives for different community members and stakeholders; and (iii) to understand how diverse perceptions about the importance of management objectives can be used to support multiple-use management in Australia’s iconic Great Barrier Reef. Management goals and objectives were elicited and weighted using the following steps: (i) literature review of management objectives, (ii) development of a hierarchy tree of objectives, and (iii) ranking of management objectives using survey methods. The overarching goals identified by the community group were to: (1) protect and restore inshore environmental assets; (2) improve governance systems; and (3) improve regional (socio-economic) well-being. Interestingly, these goals differ slightly from the usual triple-bottom line objectives (environmental, social and economic) often found in the literature. The objectives were ranked using the Analytical Hierarchical Process, where a total of 141 respondents from industry, government agencies, and community from across Queensland State undertook the survey. The environment goal received the highest scores, followed by governance and lastly well-being. The approach to elicit and rank goals and objectives developed in this study can be used to effectively support coastal resource management by providing opportunities for local communities to participate in the setting of regional objectives.

How important is the coast? A survey of coastal objectives in an Australian regional city

Defining goals and objectives is a critical component of adaptive management of natural resources because they provide the basis on which management strategies can be designed and evaluated. The aims of this study are: (i) to apply and test a collaborative method to elicit goals and objectives for inshore fisheries and biodiversity in the coastal zone of a regional city in Australia; (ii) to understand the relative importance of management objectives for different community members and stakeholders; and (iii) to understand how diverse perceptions about the importance of management objectives can be used to support multiple-use management in Australia’s iconic Great Barrier Reef. Management goals and objectives were elicited and weighted using the following steps: (i) literature review of management objectives, (ii) development of a hierarchy tree of objectives, and (iii) ranking of management objectives using survey methods. The overarching goals identified by the community group were to: (1) protect and restore inshore environmental assets; (2) improve governance systems; and (3) improve regional (socio-economic) well-being. Interestingly, these goals differ slightly from the usual triple-bottom line objectives (environmental, social and economic) often found in the literature. The objectives were ranked using the Analytical Hierarchical Process, where a total of 141 respondents from industry, government agencies, and community from across Queensland State undertook the survey. The environment goal received the highest scores, followed by governance and lastly well-being. The approach to elicit and rank goals and objectives developed in this study can be used to effectively support coastal resource management by providing opportunities for local communities to participate in the setting of regional objectives.

Assessment of a data-limited, multi-species shark fishery in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and south-east Queensland

The status of five species of commercially exploited sharks within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMP) and south-east Queensland was assessed using a data-limited approach. Annual harvest rate, U, estimated empirically from tagging between 2011 and 2013, was compared with an analytically-derived proxy for optimal equilibrium harvest rate, UMSY Lim. Median estimates of U for three principal retained species, Australian blacktip shark, Carcharhinus tilstoni, spot-tail shark, Carcharhinus sorrah, and spinner shark, Carcharhinus brevipinna, were 0.10, 0.06 and 0.07 year-1, respectively. Median U for two retained, non-target species, pigeye shark, Carcharhinus amboinensis and Australian sharpnose shark, Rhizoprionodon taylori, were 0.27 and 0.01 year-1, respectively. For all species except the Australian blacktip the median ratio of U/UMSY Lim was <1. The high vulnerability of this species to fishing combined with life history characteristics meant UMSY Lim was low (0.04-0.07 year-1) and that U/UMSY Lim was likely to be > 1. Harvest of the Australian blacktip shark above UMSY could place this species at a greater risk of localised depletion in parts of the GBRMP. Results of the study indicated that much higher catches, and presumably higher U, during the early 2000s were likely unsustainable. The unexpectedly high level of U on the pigeye shark indicated that output-based management controls may not have been effective in reducing harvest levels on all species, particularly those caught incidentally by other fishing sectors including the recreational sector. © 2016 Elsevier B.V.