ecosystem based fisheries management case study report ... · based on ecosystem boundaries rather...

Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management case study report

West Coast BioregionW.J. Fletcher, J. Shaw, D.J. Gaughan, S.J. Metcalf

Fisheries Research Report No. 225, 2011

Fisheries Research Division Western Australian Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories PO Box 20 NORTH BEACH, Western Australia 6920

ii Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 225, 2011

Correct citation:

Fletcher, W.J., Shaw, J., Gaughan, D.J. and Metcalf, S.J. 2011 Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management case study report – West Coast Bioregion. Fisheries Research Report No. 225. Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. 116pp.

Enquiries:

WA Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories, PO Box 20, North Beach, WA 6920 Tel: +61 8 9203 0111 Email: [email protected] Website: www.fish.wa.gov.au ABN: 55 689 794 771

A complete list of Fisheries Research Reports is available online at www.fish.wa.gov.au

© Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. November 2011. ISSN: 1035 - 4549 ISBN: 978-1-921845-29-1

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 225, 2011 iii

Contents

Executive summary .............................................................................................................. 1

Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 1

1.0 Background ................................................................................................................... 3

1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Context ..................................................................................................................... 3

1.3 WhatdoesEBFMmeanforfisheriesandmarinemanagement? ............................ 4

2.0 Outline of the EBFM process ..................................................................................... 8

2.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 8

2.2 Generaloperatingprocedures ................................................................................. 16

2.3 Work plan and EBFM report structure .................................................................... 16

3.0 The West Coast Bioregion ........................................................................................... 20

3.1 Aboutthebioregion ................................................................................................. 20

3.2 Summaryoffishingandaquacultureactivities ........................................................ 20

3.3 FisheriesmanagementinWestCoastBioregion ..................................................... 21

3.4 EcosystemmanagementinWestCoastBioregion ................................................... 21

4.0 Identification of the scope ............................................................................................ 23

4.1 AppropriatespatialscalesforapplyingEBFMinWesternAustralia ...................... 23

5.0 Identification, assessment and consolidation of assets and issues .......................... 26

5.1 Westcoastecosystemstructureandbiodiversityassets .......................................... 26

5.2 Captured‘fish’speciesassets .................................................................................. 27

5.3 Protected species assets ........................................................................................... 30

5.4 Benthichabitatcategories ........................................................................................ 31

5.5 Generalenvironmentimpacts .................................................................................. 33

5.6 Social and economic issues ..................................................................................... 34

5.7 Social issues ............................................................................................................. 35

5.8 Social issues (outcomes); direct stakeholders .......................................................... 35

5.9 General social outcomes; (indirect stakeholders) .................................................... 36

5.10 Economic outcomes ................................................................................................. 39

5.11 Economic outcomes: Direct stakeholders ................................................................ 39

5.12 Economic outcomes: Indirect stakeholders ............................................................. 40

5.13 Institutionalgovernance ........................................................................................... 41

5.14 Generalexternaldrivers ........................................................................................... 43

iv Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 225, 2011

6.0 Determining whole of agency priorities .................................................................... 47

6.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 47

6.2 Results ..................................................................................................................... 47

6.3 Implications ............................................................................................................. 48

7.0 Summary EBFM outcomes ......................................................................................... 51

7.1 Ecosystemstructureandbiodiversity ..................................................................... 52

7.2 Capturedfishspecies .............................................................................................. 54

7.3 Protected species ..................................................................................................... 57

7.4 Benthic habitats ....................................................................................................... 58

8.0 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 60

8.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 60

8.2 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 62

9.0 References ..................................................................................................................... 64

10.0 Appendices .................................................................................................................... 67

Appendix 1 detailed EBFM reports .................................................................................. 67

Appendix references ............................................................................................................ 104

Appendix2Consequenceandlikelihoodtablesusedforriskanalysisofindividualecologicalassets. ..................................................................................................... 107

Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 225, 2011 1

Executive summary

Thereisanincreasingworld-widerecognitionoftheneedtoshiftthemanagementofnaturalresourcestowardstheconceptknowninAustraliaas‘ecologicallysustainabledevelopment’(ESD).Thisconceptincludestheuseof‘wholeofecosystem’and‘bioregionalapproaches’based on ecosystem boundaries rather than sectoral or jurisdictional boundaries.

This report documents the outcomes of the Western Australian Marine Science Institution (WAMSI)fundedstudytoexaminethecostsandbenefitsofusingabioregionallevel,EcosystemBasedFisheriesManagement(EBFM)approach.TheWestCoastBioregionofWesternAustraliawasselectedasacasestudyandtheoutputsfromtheuseofthedraftnationalEBFMframeworkwerecriticallyexaminedtodeterminewhethersuchanapproachwouldresultinmoreefficientandeffectivemanagementoffisheries.Inaddition,thisreportexaminedwhetherthisEBFMframeworkprovidedbetterlinkagesbetweenmanagementbodies,allowingbroadermarinemanagementcoveringallactivitiesandrelevantagencies–oftendescribedasecosystembasedmanagement(EBM).

UsingthedraftnationalEBFMframeworkasastartingpoint,thisstudymodifiedthisapproachtodevelopaframeworkthatenabledthecosteffectiveimplementationofEBFM.Thefour-stephierarchical,risk-basedapproachthatwasdevelopedavoidedacommonoutcomefromattemptingecosystemlevelassessmentsofmerelygeneratinganimpossiblylargeandcomplexset of issues, uncertainties and expectations.

InapplyingtheEBFMframeworktotheWestCoastBioregionofWesternAustralia(WA),thestakeholderworkshopsinitiallyidentifiedover600ecologicalassets,socialandeconomicoutcomes, governance systems and external drivers.This complexitywas reducedbyconsolidatingalloftheseinto60regional-levelrisks.Amulti-criteriaanalysiswasusedtointegrateallrelatedecological,socialandeconomicvaluesandrisksintojust24‘Agencylevel’prioritiesrangingfromurgenttoverylowpriorities.

Conclusions

This study found that taking an ‘ecosystemapproach’didnot requirehavingdetailedunderstandingoftheecosystemsortheconstructionofcomplexecosystemmodels.Instead,itonlyrequiredtheefficientandsystematicconsiderationofeachecologicalassetintheregionand their associated stakeholder outcomes, to identify those assets that mostrequiredirectmanagementtodeliverthe‘best’outcomesforthecommunity.ThecriticalstepsinachievingEBFMarethereforebeingabletoclearlyidentifytheecologicalassets,linkingthesetosocialandeconomicoutcomesthattheymaygenerateandobjectivelyassessingtheirrisksandoverallpriorityformanagementaction.

ThesimplesetofstepswedevelopedtoimplementEBFMinWAhasenabledadoptionofafullyregional,ecosystembasedapproachwithoutmaterialincreasesinfunding.Ithassuccessfullyreplacedtheprevious,disjointedplanningsystems,withasingle,coordinatedrisk-basedsystemthatisalreadygeneratingefficienciesfortheuseofDepartmental(government)resources.HavingacosteffectiveprocessmeansthatEBFMcanbeappliedinallcircumstances,notjustinthoseregionsoftheworldwherealargeamountofresourcesandscientificdataareavailable.

GiventhesuccessofthisapproachtotheWestCoast(e.g.Fletcher,etal.,2010),thisEBFMframeworkhasnowbeenappliedtoallsixbioregionsinWAandtheresultingprioritiesare

2 Fisheries Research Report [Western Australia] No. 225, 2011

nowusedasthebasisforannualbudgetsettingbytheDepartment(Fletcheretal.,2011).Thishasthereforebeenahighlysuccessfulproject,theoutcomesofwhichhavealreadyseenmajorchangestotheoperationsandplanningprocessesusedbytheDepartment.

Thegenerationofregionallevelplanningstrategiesastheoverarchingbasisforfisheriesmanagement,combinedwiththewideradoptionofthesamesetofstepsatanationalleveltoimplementEBMshouldfacilitatemoreefficientlinkagesandharmonisationwithothergovernmentpoliciesandprocesses.Consequently,wehavefoundthattherehavebeensignificantpositivebenefitsfromtheimplementationofanEBFMapproach,morethanmerelymeetingsomelongforgottenbroad-basedpoliticalcommitment.


1.0 Background

1.1 Purpose

ThepurposeofundertakingthiscasestudywastoassesswhetherthedraftnationalEBFMframeworkcouldreallyassistinprovidingaNaturalResourceManagementplanningstructurefortheoptimalmanagementofmarineresourcesatthebioregionallevel.ThedraftEBFMframeworkwasinitiallydevelopedbytheNationalESDsubprogrambasedontheframeworkthatiscurrentlybeingsuccessfullyusedforsinglefisheryassessmentsanditwasproposedthatthisbetrialledasthemechanismtotryandcollateandutilisetherelevantregional,EBFM-relatedinformationandmanagementprocessesfortheentireWestCoastBioregionofWesternAustralia.

TheoutputsfromthiscasestudyweretoincludethegenerationofamodifiedsetofcomponenttreesthatidentifiedalloftherelevantEBFMlevelassets(ecological),issues(socialandeconomic)anddrivers(governanceandexternalfactors)fromwhicharefinedlistofpriorityissues,basedonariskassessmentprocess,wouldbeusedtoevaluatethecurrentstatusofeachissueandidentifytheneedforadditionalmanagementorresearchactivities.

Asthiswasthefirstfull-scaleattempttoapplyEBFMataregionallevel,itwasexpectedthattheoutputsfromthisstudywouldbereviewedinlightofthelevelofwhetherthisgeneratedimprovementintheoverallmanagementoffisheriesresourcesinacosteffectivemanner.

1.2 Context

Expectationsabout thebenefitsofundertakingmoreholistic formsofnatural resourcemanagementhaveincreasedgreatlyoverthepasttwodecades.Worldwidethishasresultedinalargenumberofconceptsandinitiatives,whichareoftentermed“ecosystem-based”(Sissenwine&Murawski,2004;Sherman,etal.,2005;Rice,2005;Fletcher,2006).Forinstance,intheearly1990stheneedtomanagemarineresourceswithinLargeMarineEcosystems(LME)wasrecognisedandsupportedbytheUnitedNationsConventionfortheLawoftheSea(UNCLOS).InAustralia,theconceptofholisticnaturalresourcemanagementwastermed‘ecologicallysustainabledevelopment’(ESD)andwasformallyadoptedbyalllevelsofgovernment(federal,stateandlocal)nearlytwentyyearsago(CoA,1992).Initially,suchholistic“ecosystem-based”approacheswerefoundtobedifficulttoapplyinapracticalmanner(e.g.Garcia,2000)duetounrealisticexpectations,datalimitationsandcomplexityofbothecosystemsandmanagementsystems;fewgovernmentagenciesinAustraliawereabletoimplementESDandgenerateoutcomesthatleadtoactualmanagementimprovements(ProductivityCommission,1999).

DuringthelastdecadetherehasbeensignificantprogressinthemanagementofnaturalresourcestowardsimplementingESD(Fletcher,2008).ThereforemanagementofindividualfisheriesinWesternAustraliaisalreadybasedonESDprinciplesthatrequirethattheimpactsontargetandbycatchspecies,habitats,andindirectimpactsonthebroaderecosystemareallmanagedusingariskbasedframework(Fletcher,2002;2005)foreachindividualfishery.InimplementingthispolicyandtomeettherequirementsoftheCommonwealthgovernment’sEPBCrequirements(CoA,2001,2007),separateESD-basedassessmentshavebeencompletedforeachmajorWAfishery(e.g.Kangasetal.,2006).AlthoughthisESDbasedprocessiscomprehensiveatanindividual-fisherylevel,theseassessmentsdonotaddressthecombinedeffectsofallfisherieswithinthesameareanordotheycoverthecross-fisheryallocationissues.


TheDepartment,throughitsIntegratedFisheriesManagement(IFM)initiativeisnotonlyseekingtolimittheoverallharvestoftargetspeciestosustainablelevelsbuttoestablishspecificlevelsofaccessbyeachofthevariouscatchingsectors(seeDoF,2000).Theseallocationprocessescoverthesharingissuesamongstcommercialfisheries,recreational,andindigenoussectors(Fletcher&Curnow,2002).Anumberofothersectorsutilise,impactorhaveaninterestwithinthemarineenvironmentbutarenotcoveredbyfisherieslegislation(e.g.shipping,coastaldevelopment,marineparks,tourism).Therefore,conflictsassociatedwithaccessarrangementsarenotsolelyconfinedtoconflictsbetweenfishingsectorsbut,increasingly,betweentheentirewildcapturefishingsectorandotherstakeholdersandindustries(FletcherandCurnow,2002).Suchissuesareusuallyregionallybasedratherthanbeingassociatedwithaparticularresourceandrequiredifferentprocessesandframeworkstoachieveeffectiveoutcomes.Thisallsuggeststhatthemanagementofindividualfisheriessectorsmaybebestifnestedwithinaregionallevelframework.

1.3 What does EBFM mean for fisheries and marine management?

EcosystemBasedFisheriesManagement(EBFM)hasbeendefinedinAustraliaastheassessmentandmanagementofallimpactsandoutcomesrelatedtoanycommercial,recreational,charter,customary,or‘no-take’sectoroperatingwithinanecosystemorbioregion(Fletcher,2006).EBFMthereforedealswiththecumulativeimpactsontheenvironment(includingfishstocks,habitatsandecosystems)fromallthefisheries-relatedactivitiesoperatinginaregion,andincludesexplicitconsiderationoftheoverallsocialandeconomicoutcomesgeneratedbytheseactivities.Italsoidentifiesanyimpactsthatmightbeinfluencedby‘external’sources.Externalsourcescouldincludeclimateshiftsor,importantly,non-fishingactivitiesandprocesses,suchascatchmentmanagementandindustrialactivities,whicharemanagedbynon-fisheryagencies.

Manyofthenegativeimpactsonfisheriesoutcomesaregeneratedbyexternalsourcesoperatingataregionalorecosystemlevel.Consequently,managementplans(orsystems)arerequiredthatcaninfluenceorevenmitigatesuchregionalorecosystemimpacts.Thisisalsothescaleatwhichmostotherrelevantagenciesoperate,sotakingaregionalfocuswouldbetteralignfisheriesmanagementwithotherregionalmarineplanningprocessesthatmaybeoperatinginthearea.Thus,applyingtheEBFMriskassessmentframeworkcouldformastartingpointforahierarchyofthemanagementofindividualactivitiesuptotheholisticmanagementofalltheactivitiesoperatingwithinaregion(oftendefinedasEcosystemBasedManagement-EBM,seeFigure1).

EBFMassessmentsshould,therefore,coverthecumulativeimpactsontheenvironmentthatarisefromthecurrentsuiteoffisheries-relatedactivities.Theseassessmentsshouldalsodocumenttheoverallsocialandeconomicoutcomesthataregeneratedbytheseactivitiesgiventhecurrentallocationsofaccesswithinaregion.Managingfisheriesonanecosystembasisalsorequirestheassessmentofexternaldrivers(e.g.climatechange,environmentalvariability,pollution,introducedpestsanddiseases)onfishstocksandfisheries(Fletcheretal.,2010).

Themanagementoffisheriesandmarineresourcesmustbeecosystem-basedbecause,whilstthemaintenanceofthetargetstockshaslongbeentheprimarymanagementgoalforfisheriesagencies, thereisnowtherecognitionthatnon-targetstocksandthebroaderecosystemmustalsobemaintainedatacceptablelevelsinordertoachievestocksustainability.RecentlegislativechangesandpolicyinitiativesatboththeStateandCommonwealthlevel,reflecting


thecommunity’sconcernsontheseissues,nowrequireacomprehensiveassessmentthatincorporatesecosystem-levelresponsestoextractionforeachcommercialfishery.Thisisimportantforsomefisheriesinordertoenablethemtomaintainaccesstolucrativeexportmarkets.

Giventheoverlapsinthecaptureofsomesuitesofspeciesbydifferentfisherieswithintheoneregion,theassessmentofecosystem-levelimpactshasprovendifficulttoachieveonanindividualfisherybasis(Fletcher,2008).Itwasrecognisedthatanoverallassessmentofeachofthekeyecosystemswouldbemoreappropriatefortheassessmentofthecumulativeimpactsoffisheries.ThemovetoundertakearegionallevelassessmentisthereforealogicalextensionoftheindividualfisherylevelESDassessmentsthathavebeencompletedbytheDepartmentoverthepast8yearsandshouldprovideasoundbasisfortheoverallmanagementofmarineresources.BecauseEBFMexplicitlyconsidersallelements(orvalues)withinanexploitedsystem,thedevelopmentandreportingofanEBFMplanwillalsofacilitatethedevelopmentofregionalmarineplans.

EBFMshouldbeseenasakeystrategytowardsthefullimplementationofESD,whichistheoverallgoalforgovernment(Fletcher,2006).Allthevarious‘ecosystembased’strategiesthatarecurrentlybeingpursuedare,inreality,variationsonathemewiththemaindifferencesbetweenthembeingthescopeofissuesmanaged(seeFletcher2006fordetails).Itisrecognisedthatinadditiontothemanagementoffishingactivities,broaderecosystembasedmanagementisalsorequiredinthemarineenvironment.ThevariousmanagementsystemsshouldpreferablyformahierarchywithinanoverallESDcontext,witheachlevelprovidingthebuildingblocksforthenext(Figure1).Specifically,thedifferencebetweenEcosystemBasedManagement(EBM)andEcosystemBasedFisheriesManagement(EBFM)isthatinEBFMthescopeofissuescoveredisrestrictedtothosethatcanbemanagedordirectlyinfluencedbyafisheriesmanagementagency.EBMwouldbeusedtoimplementbroaderlevelsofmanagementandtypesofimpactsinaregion.Forexample,EBMwouldincludeallactivitiesoperatingintheregion,ofwhichfishingisonlyonecomponent.


Figure 1. Relationship between the three ESD framework levels. The elements included in the gold ovals represent the difference in external drivers between EBFM compared to EBM – modified from Fletcher (2006). Abbreviations have been used for aquaculture (Aqua.), Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and coastal development (Coast. Dev.).

AlthoughtheEBFMframeworkcanconsiderelementsthataremanagedbyotheragenciesorjurisdictions,itisclearlynotpossibletoeffectivelymanagetheoutcomes,orbeheldresponsible,withouttheauthoritytomanagetheimpact.Thisdoesn’tmeanthattheseelementsshouldbeignoredintheEBFMprocess;rathertheymustbetakenintoconsiderationforplanningactualmanagementactions.

The three types of issues to be considered by the Department of Fisheries are those that the Departmentcanmanage,influenceorreactto:

MANAGE TheseissuescomeunderthedirectlegislativeresponsibilityoftheDepartment(e.g.theamountofabalonetakeninthecommercialfishery).RegulationsandmanagementplansaregeneratedtodealexplicitlyanddirectlywiththeseissuesforwhichtheDepartmentmusttakefullresponsibility.

INFLUENCE TheseissuesarenotunderthelegislativeresponsibilityoftheDepartmentandthereforecannotbemanageddirectly,yetbecausetheycomeunderthelegislativeresponsibilityofanotherAgencyorDepartment,theiractionsmaybeinfluencedbyinputintotheirdecision-makingprocess.

REACT TO IssuesgeneratedbytheexternalenvironmentthatcannotbemanagedorinfluencedbytheDepartment.However,becausetheseissuesaffectfactorsforwhichtheDepartmentisresponsible,processesfordealingwiththeseissuesshouldbedeveloped(Fletcher2008).


IftheDepartmentdoesnothavethepowertoregulateormanageanactivity,thereisnopoint(andnobasis)forestablishingobjectives,performancelevelsandthenecessarymanagementarrangements.However,iftheriskofanactivityisfoundtobemedium,highorsevere,thenanappropriatemanagementresponseistohaveaclearprocesstoreferthistotheresponsibleagency.

DuringtheEBFMprocessotherexternaldriversarealsoconsidered,suchasthecurrentglobalrecession,asthesemaycausesignificantchangeforsomeexportfisheriesandconsequentlyimpact the social andeconomicoutcomes. In such situations, alternativemanagementarrangementsthatdonotimpactstocksustainabilitymaybeconsiderediftheycouldassistinalleviatingtheseissues.Inaddition,ifpollutionorreducedwaterqualitywereanissueinestuaries,theimpactsofthiswouldbeconsideredindecision-makingforestuarinefisheries.However,aswaterqualitydoesnotcomeunderthejurisdictionoftheDepartmentofFisheries,theonlyactiontakenmaybetoencouragebettermanagementofoutfallsandpollutionbytherelevantauthority.BecausetheEBFMprocesshasahighlevelofstakeholderinputandthejustificationsreported,thereisareadilyunderstood,transparentreportingframeworkwithwhichtoexplaintherisksandpotentialimpacts.

Expandingthescopefromasingle-fisheryassessmenttoabroaderregionalEBFMapproachposesanumberoflogisticaldifficulties.Chiefamongtheseisthepotentialtorapidlybecomeextremelycomplexgiventhatitwouldcoverallecologicalassets(capturedandnon-capturedspecies,habitats,ecosystems)andthesustainability,socialandeconomicissuesrelevanttotheseassets(Fletcher,2008).Managershave,understandably,beenhighlyconcernedthatimplementingEBFMcouldresultinadramaticincreaseinthenumberofmanagementissuestheywillthenhavetodealwith,withoutincreasedresources,potentiallyleadingtoanoverallpooreroutcome.Inaddition,detaileddataregardingallaspectsoftheecologicalassetsandtheissuesaregenerallynotavailable.Suchdeficienciesoftenraiseunrealisticexpectationsamongstakeholders,andthefearamongmanagementagencies,abouttheprospectthatsignificantresourceshavetobespentbeforeEBFMcanbeimplemented.Tobesuccessfullyimplemented,theinitialEBFMprocessmustbeabletodistilthecomplexityandknowledgerequirementstoalevelthatisacceptablefromthemanagementperspective(i.e.non-threateningandabletobedealtwithintimeframesrelativetobothfisheriesmanagementandpoliticalcycles)withouttheexpectationthatalldatadeficienciesanduncertaintieswillberectified(Fletcher,2008,Garcia,2010).

Fortunately,theseconcernsandexpectationscanbealleviatedusingarisk-basedapproachtodeterminetheappropriatelevelsofmanagementresponse.Similarly,thelevelsofknowledgeavailableforanissueonlyneedtobeappropriategiventherisklevelandthelevelofprecautionadoptedinthemanagementarrangements.ItneedstobemadecleartostakeholdersthatimplementingEBFMdoesnotautomaticallygeneratetherequirementtocollectmoreecological,socialoreconomicdataorthedevelopmentofcomplexmodels.

FormanyfisheriesinWA,theimplementationofEBFMmaynotchangefisheriesregulationsormanagementsubstantially.Pragmatically,onlyassetsthathaveamoderatetosevereriskofchangeasaresultoffishingactivities,orissuesthatmayimpactthesustainabilityoffisheries(i.e.ecologically,economicallyorsocially)arelikelytogenerateadditionalmanagement,monitoringorotheractionsbeingundertaken.


2.0 Outline of the EBFM process

2.1 Background

TheprocessforimplementingEBFMisbasedontheNationalESDreportingandassessmentframeworkofwildcapturefisheriesinAustralia(Chesson,2000,Fletcheretal.,2002,2005).TheEBFMframeworkisastep-wise,risk-basedassessmentprocessthatgeneratesreportsonallrelevantecologicalassetsforanindividualfishery,includingimpactsonthetargetspeciesandthe broader ecosystem, and the potential social and economic issues (or expected outcomes), as wellascurrentgovernancesystems.

Tohelpdealwiththeconfusionidentifiedduringtheconsultationprocessregardingthemeaningofterms,ecologicalresourcesweretermed“assets”,socialoreconomicconcernsorexpectedoutcomesweretermed“issues”andtogethertheseassetsandissueswerethe“components”ofinteresttothestakeholders.These“components”makeuptheEBFMcomponenttrees (seesection2.2).TheriskassessmentofcomponentswasbasedonthestepsoutlinedintheInternationalStandardRiskManagementguidelines (AS/NZ4360,2004;AS/NZSISO31000:2009)andisfullyconsistentwiththeEcosystemApproachtoFisheries(FAO,2003).

Figure 2. Outline of the EBFM Process.


Step 1 – Determine the scope of the assessment and community values to achieve.

ThisstudyfocussedonimplementingEBFMforaregiontermedtheWestCoastBioregion(WCB),oneoffourmarinebioregionsrecognizedbytheDepartmentofFisheriesinWesternAustralia.ImplementingEBFMfortheWCBrequireddevelopingaverycleardescriptionofeachoftherelevantfisheriesandotheractivitiesthatarebeingmanagedinthisregion.Thisincludesthegeographicboundariesoftheareathatwillbeencompassedanddevelopingaverycleardescriptionofeachoftherelevantfisheriesandotheractivitiesthatarebeingmanagedinthisregion.FortheWCBexample,theregionencompassedforEBFMwasa1000kmstretchofcoastlineinthesouthwestofWAfromKalbarri(27°S)inthemidwest;southtoAugusta(115°30’E);outtothe200mdepthcontour;includingallfishingrelatedactivitiesthatoccurredinthosewaters(DoF,2011).

Thescopingprocessmustalsogenerateasharedunderstandingoftherelevantsocial,economicandecologicalvaluesdesiredbythevariousstakeholdergroups.Essentially,whatdoestheWAcommunitywanttoachievefromundertakingmanagementoftheregion’sresources?Thevalues(orhighlevelobjectives)canincludeecologicalsustainability,foodsecurity,socialamenityandeconomicdevelopment.Understandingwhichofthesevaluesisthemostimportanthasmajorimplicationsforwhatshouldbemanagedandhowbesttomanageit.IntheWestCoastcasestudy,theprimaryobjectivewasecologicalsustainabilitywithsocialandeconomicoutcomestakingasecondarylevelandfoodsecuritywasnotconsideredrelevant.

ThebroaderregionalscopeofEBFM,requireddocumentationoftherolesandresponsibilitiesofeachoftherelevantagenciesandstakeholdersinvolved.GiventhatthemainintersectionofEBFMwithEBMwillbeattheleveloftheecosystem,tosuccessfullyintegrateEBFMwithbroaderEBMorotherregionalmarineplanningprocesses,agreementmustbeobtainedbyallrelevantagenciesonthespecificecosystemspresentwithintheregion.

Thefinalpartofthisstepwastodocumenttherolesandresponsibilitiesofeachoftheagenciesandstakeholdersinvolved.Thisinvolveddiscussionswithstakeholdersand,importantly,obtainingagreementsfromothergovernmentagenciesinmulti-agencyforumstoclarifyjurisdictionalarrangementsorobjectives.

Step 2 – Asset and Issue Identification

UsingtheagreedscopeandvaluesfortheWestCoastBioregion,thenextstepwastoidentifyallthepotentialassets(ecological)andissues(social,economic,governanceandexternaldrivers)acrosseachofthefiveEBFMcomponents(dashedline,Figure3).Thecomponenttreestructuresetsouttheelements/valuesthatneedtobeconsideredforEBFM,whichincludestheenvironmental(ecologicalassets),socialandeconomicassetsaswellastheabilitytoachievemanagementoutcomes(institutionalgovernanceandexternaldrivers).TheassetsandissuesidentifiedacrosseachofthefiveEBFMcomponentswerereportedintheformofdetailedcomponenttreesforeachofthelowerbranches(e.g.ecosystemstructure&biodiversity,captured‘fish’speciesetc.)oftheWestCoastBioregiontreebelow(Figure3).


Community Structure& Biodiversity

IntegratedElements

Suite 1

Suite 2

'Fish'Species

HabitatCategories

Protected Species

IndividualElements

EcologicalAssessments

DirectStakeholders

DependentCommunities

State/National

Socio-Economic WellbeingOutcomes

FisheriesAdministration

ExternalFactors

Ability to Achieve

BIOREGION

Figure 3. EBFM Component Tree Structure.

Thesetreeshelptostructuretheassignmentofissuesintoahierarchyofrelatedgroups,whichassistswiththeirlaterconsolidation.Theuseofthegenericcomponenttreeswithinthisframeworkmaximisesconsistencyandminimisesthechancesofmissingissues(Fletcher,etal.,2005).ThesetreescanalsobebeneficialforimplementingEBFMorEBMinotherregionsastheycanbetailoredtosuitindividualcircumstances.

AseriesofworkshopswiththeparticipationofrelevantstakeholdersexaminedeachofthehighlevelEBFMcomponentsandspecificallytailoredeachofthedetailedtreesbyaddingrelevantassetsandissuesnotalreadyincludedanddeletingthosethatwereconsideredbythegrouptobeirrelevant(nottobeconfusedwithhavingminimalknowledge).

ThemajordifferenceintheEBFMcomponenttreestructurecomparedtotheindividualfisheryassessmentsisthattheEBFMprocesshastheecologicalassetsastheprimaryfocusformanagement,ratherthantheactivityoffishingastheprimaryfocus.Inaddition,theEBFMtreehasaseparateEcosystemStructureandBiodiversitybranch,whichrecognisesthateachoftheindividualassetsthataredirectlyorindirectlyimpacted(e.g.habitats,targetspecies,protectedspecies)combinetogethertoformecosystems.Thesehigher-levelassetsusuallylinktotheactivitiesandobjectivesofotherstakeholdersandagenciesthroughEBMandthebroadercommunity.

Objectivestobeachieved,givenanylocal,regionalornationalrequirementsorglobalattitudes,weredetermined.Theseobjectivescouldhavebeenbasedonecologicalconcerns,economicrealitiesorsocialattitudes(seeTable1),withsomeassetshavingmorethanoneassociatedobjective.

Step 3 – Prioritising issues

Athree-partprioritisationprocessbasedonriskassessmentprincipleswasusedtodeterminewhatissuesneededdirectmanagementactions,andthelevelofactionthatshouldbetakenfromawholeofagencyperspective.Table1detailsthecommonlevelsofriskthatwereusedinthisprocess.


Anumberofdifferentriskassessmentmethodsareavailableforuseinprioritisingissues(Scandoletal.,2010)andsomeofthesemethodscanoperatewithminimallevelsofdataandcanbecompletedwithinaworkshopenvironment.Thedeterminationofthemostappropriateriskassessmentmethodology(orprioritysettingprocess)inanyonecircumstancemayvarybaseduponthelevelofinformationavailableandthetypeofissuebeingexamined.TheriskmethodologyusedinthiscasestudywasbasedontheapproachusedintheNationalESDFramework(Fletcher,2005)whichhassubsequentlybeenmodifiedforuseintheassessmentofabroaderrangeofobjectives(Fletcher,2010).

Individual Risks-Therisksassociatedwitheachobjective(seeTable1)foreachindividualassetorissuewereexaminedseparatelyusingformalqualitativerisk(consequencexlikelihood)orproblemassessmentprocessesoutlinedinFletcher(2005,2009).ThesequalitativeriskanalysismethodsarebasedontheAustralian&NewZealandandInternationalStandardRiskAnalysis(StandardsAustralia,2000,2004;IEC/ISO31010,2009),andinvolvetheassessmentofallissuesagainstthespecificobjectivesandoutcomesthatthefisheryistryingtoachievebyexaminingthepotentialimpacts(consequences)thatmayresulttotheseobjectivesandthelikelihood(probability)thataparticularlevelofimpactwillactuallyoccur–whichwhencombinedtogethercalculatestherisklevel.

Asriskisnowdefinedas“theuncertaintyassociatedwithachievingobjectives”(AS/NZSISO31000:2009),alackofspecificdatacanbeexplicitlyincorporatedintothecalculationoftherelevantconsequenceandlikelihoodscoressuchthatthecalculationofriskcouldbecompletedwithwhateverdatawereavailable.Thesemethodsenabledtheanalysisofrisk(usingafiveyeartimehorizon)fortheobjectivesrelatedtospecies,habitatandcommunitystructure/ecosystemsustainability, plus social and economic risk outcomes to be completed (see Appendix 1 for detailsofconsequenceandlikelihoodtables).

Eachissuewasplacedintotheappropriatecombinationofconsequenceandlikelihoodlevels(Figure5)basedupontheinformationavailableandthecollectivewisdomofthepeopleinvolvedintheprocess.Ifmorethanonecombinationisconsideredappropriate,thecombinationwiththehighestriskscoreshouldbechosen(i.e.thistakesaprecautionaryapproach).

Thecombinationwasbasedontheriskoveradefinedtimeperiod-nottheriskofchangeoccurringatanypointinthefuture.Asthisprocessisassessingriskstoobjectivesbasedonamanagementplan,aconvenienttimeframetouseisthetimeframeofthemanagementplan-whichwasconsideredtobeinthevicinityoffiveyears.

Intheformalsystemdescribedpreviously,therisklevelforeachissueiscalculatedastheproductofthescoresforconsequenceandlikelihoodcombinationchosenasbeingthemostappropriatefortheissue.Thepossiblevaluesarebetween1–16(Figure5).


Consequence Level

Minor Moderate Major Severe

Likelihood 1 2 3 4

Remote 1 1 2 3 4

Unlikely 2 2 4 6 8

Possible 3 3 6 9 12

Likely 4 4 8 12 16

Figure 4. Risk Matrix. (see appendix 1 for details and descriptions of the consequence and likelihood levels)

Table 1. Risk categories, descriptions and likely management responses (modified from Fletcher 2008).

Risk Category Risk Value DescriptionLikely Reporting

Requirements

Likely Management

Response

Negligible 1 - 2 Not an issue Minimal Nil

Low 3 - 4Acceptable; no specific control

measures needed

Justification required

None specific

Medium 6 - 8

Acceptable; with current risk

control measures in place (no new

management required)

Full performance report

Specific management

and/or monitoring required

High 9

Not desirable; continue strong management

actions OR new and/or further risk control measures

to be introduced in near future


Increases to management

activities needed

Severe12 - 16

Unacceptable; major changes

required to management in immediate future


Increases to management

activities needed urgently


Consolidating risks–Thenumberof individualriskvaluesgeneratedacrosstheEBFMframeworkfortheentirebioregionwastoolargeforuseinundertakingsensiblemanagementplanning.Furthermore,manyoftheindividualassets,issuesandobjectiveswerealreadythesubjectofspecificmanagementactionsandplanningprocessesattheindividualfisherylevel.ToensurethattheEBFMprocessrecognisedandpreferablyaddedvaluetotheexistingfisherylevelactivities,notmerelyduplicatedthem,itwasnecessarytocombineissuesandriskstoregionalorcategorylevelassets.

Theconsolidationoftheindividualrisksintobroaderassetcategoriesutilisedthebranchstructurepresentinthecomponenttrees(Figure5).Inaddition,theconsolidationofriskscorrespondswithanexistingDepartmentalprocesswherebyallcapturedspeciesareassignedtooneofarelativelysmallnumberof‘speciessuites’thatareconsistentwiththekeyecosystemsub-branches (e.g.nearshore,inshore,offshoreetc.–seeDepartmentofFisheries2009).Thesameprincipleswereappliedtoeachoftheothertreesintheframeworkwiththerisksforeachbranchofthecomponenttreesconsolidatedintwoways:

• Forecologicalassets,specificindicatorspeciesorcomponentswereidentifiedwiththeriskvalueassignedtotheentire‘suite’ofspeciesorfunctionalgroupusingthehighestriskvalueofanyoftheindicatorspecies.Thisreflectsthatmanyfisherymanagementarrangementsoperateattheentiresuitelevelratherthanonlyaffectingasinglespecies;

• Forthenon-ecologicalissues,theconsolidatedriskvaluewastheaverageoftheriskratingsforeachoftheelementsinthesub-branchand,whererelevant,eachsub-branchwithinabranch.Thus,ahierarchicalapproachwasusedsuchthatconsolidationcouldoperateatanumberofdifferentlevelswithineachtree.


Figure 5. Generic ecosystem structure and biodiversity component tree showing three larger ecosystems, which break down into smaller systems and components at the sub-branch levels. The consolidation of individual risks occurs at the mid-tree level (ovals). Sub-branch risks are consolidated into these components. Here the average risk has been used during consolidation as no specific indicator for each ecosystem has been identified.

Agency/bioregional priority setting – Thefinal,andarguablymostimportantpartoftheEBFMprocesswastogenerateawholeofagencypriorityforeachoftheconsolidatedecologicalassetswithinthebioregion.Theseagencyprioritiesincludetheassociatedsocialandeconomicrisksandcanbeusedtoprioritiseagencyinvestment.

TheintegrationofthevariousriskandvaluescoresintoDepartmentalprioritieswasachievedusingasimplemulti-criteriafunctionincludingrisk,GrossValueofProduct(GVP)andsocialamenity.ThecriteriaforassigningtheGVPandsocialamenityscoresarelocatedinTable2.Thepriorityscoreswerebasedonthequalitativeriskassessmentprocesswiththecriteriaforthevaluescoresmodifiedfromthosedevelopedtoassessthevalueofresearchproposals(Fletcheretal.,2003).Allofthescoringincludedthelevelofcurrentactivitiesormanagementcontrolsthatareinplaceorunderway.Hence,someofthescoresappearedtoberelativelylowbecauseofthecurrenthighlevelofcontrolsthatoperate.


Table 2. Criteria used to assess the relative economic (Gross Value Product) and social amenity value associated with each ecological asset in the West Coast Bioregion.

SCORE Risk Economic Value Social Amenity

0 None No Commercial use

n/a

1 Negligible < $1 million Minimal – there is no recreational fishing for the asset and no specific broader community interests.

2 Low $1 – 5 million Some – the asset may be caught recreationally &/or there is some specific interest in the asset by the broader community.

3 Moderate $5 -10 million Important – this is an important asset locally &/or the use or existence of the asset is important to the broader community

4 High $10- 20 million Major – the asset provides a major source of the catch by recreational fishers for the entire region &/or the asset generates major interest for some of the general community.

5 Severe > $20 million Iconic - this is a primary asset targeted by recreational fishers across the region &/or it is an asset that is considered iconic by most in the general community

Agency Priority = (‘Stock’ Risk – External Impact)*((Economic Risk*GVP) + (Social Risk*Social Amenity))

TheAgencyPriorityFormulautilisesthevariousriskandvaluescoresassociatedwitheachassetandrecognisesthatthelevelofDepartmentalactivityshouldbemostlyrelatedtothecurrentecologicalriskfortheasset.ItalsorecognisesthatifthemajorityofthisstockorecologicalriskisgeneratedbyfactorsthatareoutsideDepartmentalcontrol(e.g.pollution),theoverallpriorityfordirectDepartmentalactivityislikelytobereducedaccordingly.Aformulaforusewithinan‘EBM’assessmentwoulddiffer,astherolesofallmanagementagencieswouldbeincludedandthis‘discounting’wouldnotberequired.

Inadditiontotheecologicalrisk,theformularecognisesthatthepriorityforundertakingactivitieswillbeaffectedbythevaluethecommunityplacesoneachasset.Thisvaluewillbebasedonthedirecteconomicbenefit(GVP)andfromindirectbenefitssuchassocialamenity,importancetorecreationalfishers,existencevaluefornon-users.Thereasonforindependentlyassessingtheriskandthevalueforthesocialandeconomicelementsisthattheindividualsinvolvedmayclearlybefacingahighriskofimpacttotheirobjectives,whichcanbeexplicitlyrecognised,butiftheoverallvaluetothecommunityislow,thisislikelytoreducetheprioritytoexpendsignificantagencyresources.Thus,anassetwillgenerateahighscoreandpriorityifitsecologicalsustainabilityriskishigh,plusitisvaluableeconomicallyand/orsociallytothecommunity.


Step 4 – Generating management systems

y Wheredirectactionsarerequired,developclearmanagementsystemsthatincludeoperationalobjectivesandtheabilitytoassessperformance.

y Atperiodicintervalsassessprocessesandamendrisksifnewinformationbecomesavailable.

Thesetwoactivitieswerebeyondthescopeofthiscasestudy.

2.2 General operating procedures

FurtherinformationontheapplicationofeachofthesestepsandthebasicESDframeworkareavailablefromdocumentslocatedontheAustralianEBFMwebsite(www.ebfm.com.au).

ThegenerallybroadscopeoftheissuescoveredwithintheEBFMframeworkrequiresthattheoperationalproceduresforundertakinganEBFMprocessmustinvolvesubstantialstakeholderconsultationplusexpertinputfromscientistsandmanagers.Theinformationthatcanbeconsideredwithintheprocesscanbesourcedimplicitlyorexplicitlyusingacombinationofpublishedinformation,unpublishedrecordsand‘corporateknowledge’fromtheparticipantsandotherrelevantexperts.Thus,alltypesofinformationareconsidered.

Tofunctioneffectively, theEBFMprocesswillgenerallyrequireadedicatedexecutive/administrativeteamtomanagetheconsultationprocesses(e.g.workshops)andalsotheinformationflow(e.g.recordkeeping,generatinginterimandfinalreports).

2.3 Work plan and EBFM report structure

Theremainderofthisreportwastheresultofaseriesofworkshops,meetingsandotherconsultationprocesses(Table3).Alargeamountofmaterialandinformationwasgeneratedforreporting,muchofwhichislocatedwithintheappendices.Thus,thisEBFMreporthasbeenstructuredaroundgeneratingarelativelyhigh-leveldocumentthatcanbeusedbythefisheriesmanagementagenciesaspartoftheirplanningprocessesandalsoasthebasisfornegotiations/discussionswithotherrelevantagencies.

http://www.ebfm.com.au


Meetings and workshops

Table 3. EBFM-related meetings, topics discussed and stakeholder consultation. Abbreviated names are Western Australian Department of Fisheries (DoF), WA Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), WA Department of Water (DoW), National Oceans Office (NOO), Western Australian Marine Science Institution (WAMSI), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Department of Environment, Water, Heritage, and the Arts (Commonwealth, DEWHA), University of Western Australia (UWA), Australian National University (ANU), Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE), National Heritage Trust (NHT) and Western Australian Fishing Industry Council (WAFIC).

Meeting Topics discussed Number of meetings held

Attendees / stakeholders

2006EBFM Working Group Embedding EBFM in a fisheries

strategic policy and management framework – steps forward, external consultation process

1 DoF staff

Abrolhos Island Risk Assessment workshop

Appropriate risk levels for assets 1 External stakeholders and DoF staff

2007EBFM steering committee

Terms of reference, appropriate scale of ecosystems, objectives and role of committee, assets, values and responsibilities, risk assessment

8 DoF staff

EBFM bioregions meeting

Spatial scale of bioregions 2 DoF, DEC, NOO, CSIRO, WAMSI

Component tree workshop and meetings

Ecosystems, ‘assets’ and components to include in EBFM reporting

7 DoF staff, WAMSI

EBFM scoping Project objectives, progress and scope

1 DoF, Murdoch University, WAMSI

Various WAMSI meetings

Node 4 Project progress 18 WAMSI, DoF, CSIRO

WAMSI show and tell WAMSI projects 1 Various attendees, WAMSI, DoF, CSIRO, Universities etc.

WAMSI launch and Node 5 symposium

WAMSI projects 2 Various attendees, WAMSI, DoF, CSIRO, Universities etc.

EBFM workshop What is EBFM? Further development of draft component trees

1 Marine Policy Stakeholder Group, DoF, DEC Marine Science Group, WAMSI, DEWHA

EBFM presentation for IFM

Explanation of EBFM process and expected outcomes

1 DoF staff

Ningaloo data 1 DoF, CSIRONingaloo modelling workshop

Ecosystem modelling 1 DoF staff, CSIRO, universities




Coastal and Marine Reference Group

How EBFM will work 1 DoF, CSIRO, Coastal and Marine Ref. Group

EBFM assets, responsibilities and objectives

Legislative responsibilities, commercial and non-commercial assets, external factors, acceptable impacts

1 EBFM Steering Committee, DoF Supervising Scientists, WC Regional Manager

The EBFM framework and linkages to Regional Marine Planning

How EBFM could be used in the regional marine planning process

1 EBFM steering committee, DEC, DEWHA

EBFM Social aspects Why study social aspects of fisheries? How study social aspects? Integration of social aspects into policy and management.

1 Jackie Schirmer- ANU/Forestry CRC, Murdoch University, DoF staff

Sustainable Marine Ecosystems: Ecologically Sustainable Development for the Marine State’s Fisheries, socio-economic and fisheries presentation

Social and Economic assessment methods- project objectives and discussion

2 Simon Vieira-ABARE, UWA, Murdoch University, EBFM steering committee

EBFM and WAMSI What are EBFM and WAMSI, what are their roles and objectives?

1 DoF staff

EBFM database Process to set-up online database for EBFM

5 DoF staff

EBFM communications How to communicate EVFM objectives effectively

2 DoF staff

South Coast regional marine planning

Marine planning 1 DoF staff, regional attendees

EBFM and NHT Coastal links, and NRM and EBFM

EBFM and NHT Coastal and NRM links

2 WAMSI, DoF, NHT

EBFM assets EBFM assets and links with DoW 1 DoW, DoFEBFM and pearling What is EBFM? How is it important

for pearling1 DoF staff

Qualitative modelling workshop

Modelling for EBFM 1 DoF, Murdoch University, University of Tasmania, CSIRO

2008 Senior Regional Managers meeting

EBFM process, objectives and qualitative modelling

1 DoF staff

Ecological risk assessment for EBFM

Appropriate risk levels 1 DEWHA, Conservation Council, DEC, South Coast NRM, WAFIC, The Wilderness Society, UWA, Recfishwest, EBFM steering committee




EBFM steering committee

Develop plan for West Coast Case Study, cost-benefit analysis, update communications committee, draft social and economic policy, EBFM web-based search portal, EBFM report

6 DoF staff

Regional meeting- Geraldton (Gascoyne)

Discussion of EBFM concepts, objectives and qualitative modelling

1 Regional DoF staff

Social and Economic methodology workshop

Potential assessment methods, costs and requirements

1 ANU, ABARE, Murdoch University, WAFIC, DEWHA, UWA , DEC, Curtin University of Technology, EBFM steering committee

Regional meeting -Albany(South Coast)

Discussion of EBFM concepts, objectives and qualitative modelling

1 Regional DoF staff

Social policy group Discussion of objectives and draft social and economic policy

1 DoF staff

2009EBFM steering committee

Discussion and identification of governance components, social and economic policy, EBFM report

1 DoF staff

Gascoyne/South Coast/North Coast Risk assessment workshop

Appropriate risk levels for EBFM components in these bioregions

2 DoF staff (including regional managers)

External risk assessment workshop (Gascoyne/South Coast/North Coast)

Appropriate risk levels for EBFM components in these bioregions

1 Conservation Council, DEWHA, DEC, The Wilderness Society, WAMSI, Recfishwest, DoF Staff


3.0 The West Coast Bioregion

3.1 About the bioregion

Themarineenvironmentof theWestCoastBioregionbetweenKalbarriandAugusta ispredominantlyatemperateoceaniczone,andisheavilyinfluencedbytheLeeuwinCurrent,whichtransportswarmtropicalwaterdownthecontinentalshelf.Asaresultofthiscurrent,thefishstocksoftheregionaretypicallytemperate.TheLeeuwinCurrentisalsoresponsiblefortheexistenceoftheunusualAbrolhosIslandscoralreefsatlatitude29°Sandtheextendedsouthwarddistributionofmanytropicalspeciesalongthewestandsouthcoasts.

Themostsignificantimpactoftheclear,warm,low-nutrientwatersoftheLeeuwinCurrentisonthegrowthanddistributionofthetemperateseagrasses.TheseformextensivemeadowsinallprotectedcoastalwatersoftheWestCoastBioregionindepthsofupto30mandactasmajornurseryareasformanyfishspeciesaswellasthelargewesternrocklobster(Panulirus cygnus) stock.Weakercounter-currentsonthecontinentalshelf,suchastheCapesCurrent,occurduringsummerandinfluencethedistributionofmanyofthecoastalfinfishspecies.

TheWestCoastBioregionischaracterisedbyexposedsandybeacheswithalimestonereeflineapproximately5kilometresoffthecoast.Seafloorsfurtheroffshoreonthecontinentalshelfaretypicallycomposedofcoarsesandinterspersedwithlowlimestonereef,whichareremnantofold shorelines.

Theonlysignificantmarineembaymentswithin thebioregionareCockburnSoundandGeographeBay.Therearefoursignificantestuarinesystems–theSwan/Canning,Peel/HarveyandLeschenaultestuariesandHardyInlet(Blackwoodestuary).Allofthesearepermanentlyopentotheseaandgenerallyformanextensionofthemarineenvironment.

3.2 Summary of fishing and aquaculture activities

Theprincipalcommercialfisheryinthisregiontargetsthewesternrocklobster,whichisAustralia’smostvaluablesingle-speciesfisherywithalong-termannualcatchof11,000tandavalueof$300million.Therearealsosignificantcommercialfisheriesforotherinvertebrates,includingscallopsandabalone.Commercialfisherstakearangeoffinfishspeciesincludingsharks, dhufish (Glaucosoma herbraicum), snapper (Pagrus auratus),baldchingroper(Choerodon rubescens) and emperors (Lethrinusspp.)usingdemersallineandnetmethods.Beachbasedmethodssuchasbeachseiningandnear-shoregillnetting,andhand-haulednetsareusedtocapturewhitebait(Hyperlophus vittatus),mullet(variousspecies)andwhiting(Sillago spp.).Speciestargetedbyrecreationalfishersinestuariesincludeblackbream(Acanthopagrus butcheri),flathead(Platycephalus spp.)andblueswimmercrabs(Portunus pelagicus)whileherring(Arripis georgianus), tailor (Pomatomus saltatrix)andmulloway(Argyrosomus hololepidotus)aretargetedfrombeaches.

TheWestCoastBioregion,whichcontainsthemajorpopulationcentresofWesternAustralia,isthemostheavilyusedbioregionforrecreationalfishing(includingcharterbasedfishing).Therangeofrecreationalfishingopportunitiesincludesestuarine,beachandboatfishingeitherinembaymentsoroffshorefordemersalandpelagic/gamespecies.Manyoftheseresourcesaresharedbetweenthecommercialandrecreationalsectors.


TheprincipalaquaculturedevelopmentactivitiesintheWestCoastBioregionaretheproductionofblue mussels (Mytilus edulis)andmarinealgae(Dunaliella salina)forbeta-caroteneproduction,andtheemergingblackpearlindustrybasedontheproductionofPinctada margaritifera at theAbrolhosIslands.ThemainmusselfarmingareaisinsouthernCockburnSound,whereconditionsareshelteredandthenutrientandplanktonicfoodlevelsaresufficienttopromotegoodgrowthrates.OwingtothegenerallylowproductivityoftheWesternAustraliancoastlineundertheinfluenceoftheLeeuwinCurrent,areasoutsideembayments(wherenutrientlevelsareenhanced)areunsuitableforbivalveaquaculture.

3.3 Fisheries management in West Coast Bioregion

Mostcommercialfisherieswithinthisregionhavebeenundersomeformoflimitedentrymanagementthatrestrictsaccesstoaspecificnumberoffishersand/ortheireffort/catchlevelsforsometime.Thisincludesthecommercialrocklobsterfisherywheretherearealimitednumberofpotunitsavailableamongothermethodsoflimitingeffort.Similarly,anumberofthelargerdemersalfinfishfisherieshavetime-gearaccesslimitstoregulatethetotallevelsofcapture and those of the key indicator species. Fisheries such as abalone and deep sea crabs usequotastolimitcommercialcatchlevels.Mostofthesefisheriesarealsosubjecttovarioustimeandspatialclosures,aswellasotherregulationssuchassizelimitsforspeciesthatcanberetained.Thesmalltrawlfisheries,inparticular,areheavilyrestrictedintheareaswheretheycanfishwithmuchofthecontinentalshelfinthisregionpermanentlyclosedtotrawling (Figure6a).

Recreationalfishinginthisbioregioniscomingunderincreasinglystronglevelsofmanagement.Bagandsizelimitsarestillthemainmechanismforrestrictingcatch,buttheuseoftimeclosuresisnowbeingappliedtoabalone,lobsters,anddemersalscalefish.

3.4 Ecosystem management in West Coast Bioregion

ThemarinebenthichabitatsandtheirassociatedbiodiversityarelargelyprotectedalongmostoftheWestCoastfromanyphysicalimpactofcommercialfishingduetotheextensiveclosurestotrawling.Theseclosuresinside200mdepthwereintroducedinthe1970sand1980s,inrecognitionofthesignificanceofextensiveareasofseagrassandreefasfishhabitat(Figure6b).Theextentoftheseareasmeansthatover50%oftheWestCoastBioregioninside200mdepthcouldbeclassifiedasamarineprotectedareawithanIUCNcategoryofIV(Table4).

Fishhabitatandbiodiversityprotectionisalsoprovidedwithinindividualmarineprotectedareasalongthewestcoastincluding:

• FishHabitatProtectionAreas(FHPAs)attheAbrolhosIslands,LancelinIslandLagoon,CottesloeReef,andKalbarriBlueholes;

• ReefObservationAreaswithintheAbrolhosIslandsFHPAandclosurestofishingunders.43oftheFishResourcesManagementAct1994atYallingupReef,CowaramupBay,theBusseltonUnderwaterObservatory,andaroundthewrecksoftheSaxonRanger(ShoalwaterBay)andSwan(GeographeBay);and

• MarineconservationareasproclaimedundertheConservationandLandManagementAct1984atJurienBay,Marmion,SwanEstuary,ShoalwaterIslands,andtheproposedCapesMarineParkbetweenCapeLeeuwinandCapeNaturaliste(Figure6b).


TheAustralianGovernment’sDepartmentofEnvironment,WaterHeritageandtheArts(DEWHA)isalsoundertakingaMarineBioregionalPlanningprocessforCommonwealthwatersbetweenKangarooIsland,SouthAustraliaandSharkBay.ThedraftSouthWestMarineBioregionalPlan(MBP)wasreleasedinlate2011andincludesaseriesofproposedmarineprotectedareaswithintheCommonwealthwatersofftheWestCoast.Thisisnotdetailedinthisreport.

Figure 6. a: Map showing areas of permanent and extended seasonal closures to trawl fishing in the West Coast Bioregion. b: Map showing current and proposed marine protected areas in the West Coast Bioregion.

Table 4. The areas and proportions of the West Coast Bioregion making up continental shelf waters (<200 m depth) where habitats are protected from the physical disturbance of trawl fishing. The areas which are formally closed to trawling would be equivalent to meet the IUCN criteria for classification as marine protected areas as category IV. The area of habitat effectively protected refers to the area where trawling doesn’t occur.

Total Area of Shelf

Area of shelf equivalent to IUCN marine protected area <= category IV (%)

Maximum area of actual trawling activity

Total area of habitat effectively protected (%)

19,600 sq nm 11,000 sq nm(56%)

300 sq nm 19,300 sq nm(98%)


4.0 Identification of the scope

ThefirstandarguablymostimportantstepinEBFMistoagreeonthescopeofwhatwillbemanagedwithinthesystem.Wherearetheboundariesandwhatelementsaretobemanaged?Thisisimportanttoclarifyasmanagementsystemscanoperateatmanydifferentspatialscalesanditisnecessarytoavoidconfusionandthereforeincreasetheefficiencyoftheprocess.

4.1 Appropriate spatial scales for applying EBFM in Western Australia

Large scale units

ThemarinewatersofWesternAustraliahavepreviouslybeencategorisedinvariouswaystomeetdifferentobjectivesorcriteriaincludingecological,geomorphologic,jurisdictionaloracombination of these criteria. The Department of Fisheries utilises a set of boundaries that dividetheStateintoanumberofmarineregions,termedbioregions.TheseincludetheNorthCoast,GascoyneCoast,WestCoastandSouthCoastbioregions(Figure7).Itisrecognisedthatwithineachofthesebroadscalebioregionstherewillbeanumberofsmallerecosystemunits.

Figure 7. Map showing the IMCRA ecosystems (coloured regions) and the Department of Fisheries regional boundaries (black lines).

TohelpachieveEBFMandtobetterintegratethisprocesswithotherregionalinitiatives,agreementontheappropriatespatialextentofecosystemsinWesternAustraliawasachievedacrossallthekeyWAgovernmentagenciesthathaveanoperationalorpolicyinterestwithin


themarineandcoastalregions.ForthepurposesofEBFMandotherregionalinitiatives,itwasagreedbytheWAInterdepartmentalCommittee(IDC)thattheIntegratedMarineandCoastalRegionalisationofAustralia(IMCRA)v3.3regionalboundaries(Figure7)wouldbeusedasthebasisfordefiningtheprimary-levelmarineecosystemsinWesternAustralia.BecausetheseboundariesweredevelopedcollaborativelybyStateandCommonwealthGovernmentagenciesthisshouldalsofacilitatebetterintegrationofStateandCommonwealthregionalmarineinitiatives.

West Coast Bioregion

TheWestCoastBioregionwasseenasapriorityregionandassuchwasthefirstregiontobeconsideredintheDepartmentofFisheriesEBFMinitiative.

TheecosystemdivisionsfortheWestCoastBioregion(Figure7)weredefinedbyIMCRAv3.3.as:

• West Coast;

• Leeuwin-Naturaliste;

• Abrolhos Islands.

Regional scale units

TheDepartmentofFisheriesmanagesactivitieswithinparticularecosystem/managementareasthatcorrespondtothegeneraldistributionof‘suites’ofspecies(DoF,2011).Consequently,tomaketheecosystemunitsappropriatetothescaleofmanagement,furtherspatialdivisionsweremadebasedonthefollowingfunctionaldistributionsofspecies:

• Estuaries and Embayments;

• Nearshore,whichincludedwatersfromtheshorelinetoanapproximatedepthof20m;

• Inshoredemersal,whichincludesthebenthicandlowerlayersofthewatercolumnfromadepth of approximately 20m to 250m;

• Offshoredemersal,whichincludesthedeeperdemersalwatersfromadepthofaround250mtotheAustralianEEZ(ExclusiveEconomicZone);

• Pelagic,includingtheupperlayersofthewatercolumnfromthenearshorezonetotheEEZ.

TheadditionalspatialboundariesdescribedabovelinkcloselytothemanagementunitsusedforfinfishinWAandtheManagementPlanboundariesforfunctionalspeciesdistributionandzoningandwillimprovemanagementoutcomesunderEBFM.

Values

Itmustbeensuredthattheeffectivemanagementofoneobjectivedoesnotcauseunwarrantedproblemsintheperformanceofanotherobjective.Theremaybesituationswherebymanagingtooptimiseoneobjectivecanresultinpoorperformanceinanother.Insuchsituationsacompromisewillneedtobemade,preferablybyexplicitlydeterminingwhichoftheobjectivesshouldhaveprecedenceovertheother.

ThemainvaluesthathavebeenidentifiedasbeingrelevanttotheWestCoastBioregionareshowninTable4.


Table 4. Values and high level objectives for the West Coast Bioregion.

ValueHigh Level Objective

1 Species Sustainability Keeping biomass levels above levels where recruitment could be affected.

2 Ecosystem Sustainability Ensuring that any impacts on ecosystem structure and function are kept at acceptable levels.

3 Economic Outcomes The economic benefits to the community are optimised.4 Social Amenity The social amenity (i.e. non-economic benefits) derived by the

community is optimised.5 Social Impacts Social impacts and negative attitudes associated the

management of these resources are minimised.


5.0 Identification, assessment and consolidation of assets and issues

5.1 West coast ecosystem structure and biodiversity assets

TheIMCRAecosystemslistedaboveformthefirsttierinthesectionoftheEBFMframeworkdealingwiththeecosystem(i.e.CommunityStructureandBiodiversity).Thesewerefurthercategorisedtotheregionalscaleunitsmentionedabove(e.g.estuariesandembayments,nearshore etc.).

TomakethecomponenttreesrelevanttotheWestCoastBioregion,theseregionalscaleunitswerefurtherdividedintospecificareas,suchasriversorestuarinesystems(Figure8)andcanagainbedividedintolevelsappropriateformonitoringandreportingforspecificmanagementarrangements.

TheWestCoastandLeeuwin-NaturalisteecosystemsdivideapproximatelyalongthePerthtrench.ThisdivisionwouldnotionallyplacetheSwanRiverintotheWestCoastecosystemandCockburnSoundandthePeelHarveyestuaryintothemoresouthern(Leeuwin-Naturaliste)ecosystem.Giventhecloseproximityandconsiderablelinkagesbetweenthese3systems,theSwanCanningandPeelHarveyestuarinesystemsaswellasCockburnandWarnbroSoundembaymentshavebeenincludedintheWestCoastecosystemforthepurposeofthestudy.

Duringtheriskassessmentprocess,theriskofbroad-scaleecosystemchangeduetoanyimpactoneachidentifiedecosystem(i.e.SwanCanning,PeelHarvey,nearshore,offshoredemersal)wasassessed.Forinstance,theimpactsoffishing,pollution,coastaldevelopmentandsandminingwereincludedintheassessmentofdifferentrisksinFigure8.

Risk legend -

Figure 8. Ecosystem structure and biodiversity individual risks. Ovals represent the level at which sub-branch components were aggregated in the consolidated tree. Numbers indicate components that form part of the multi-criterion assessment (Table 5).

SEVERE HIGH MODERATE LOW


Abrolhos Islands marineLOW-MEDIUMRisk

TheAbrolhosIslandsaremanagedwithina‘FishHabitatProtectionArea’,andarenotcurrentlyconsideredtobeatmajorriskfromfisheriesrelatedactivities.Thisrisklevelwasassessedbasedupontheacceptancethatwhiletherehaslikelybeenachangeintherelativecompositionofsomefinfishspeciestheredoesnot,appeartohavebeeneitheralossofbiodiversityoranoticeablechangeinthetypesofcommunitiespresent.Thisecosystemwillbeespeciallyvulnerabletoclimatechangeimpactsduetotheuniquecombinationofmacroalgaeandcoral.

West coast marineLOW–MEDIUMRisk

Anassessmentofcommunitystructureandtrophiclevelofallcommerciallycaughtfishspeciesoverthepast30yearsthroughanFRDCfundedstudyfoundnoevidenceofsystematicchangesthatcouldbeviewedasevidenceofanunacceptableimpactoffishingonthisecosystem(Halland Wise, 2011).

ArecentlycompletedFRDCfundedprojectprovidedcriticalinformationontherelationshipsbetweenrocklobsterabundance,sizedistributionsandbenthichabitatcharacteristicsindeepwater,andpreliminarydataonthetrophicroleofrocklobsterindeepwaterecosystems.

West coast estuaries-HIGH–SEVERE(non-fishing)Risk

Theestuariesandembaymentswithinthisareahavebeenidentifiedasbeingatsevererisk,duetoexternalfactors(waterqualityissuesduetohighnutrientrunofffromsurroundingcatchment),whichhavethepotentialtoaffectfishcommunities.PoorwaterqualitywithinthePeel–HarveyandSwan-Canningestuaries,andCockburnSoundareofparticularconcern.

Leeuwin-Naturaliste - marineLOWRisk

Therisksofsignificantimpactsonthemarinecommunitiesinthisregionarerelativelylow.

Leeuwin-Naturaliste estuariesHIGHRisk(non–fishing)

ExternalfactorssuchaswaterqualityissuesintheBlackwoodEstuary,duetohighnutrientrun-offfromsurroundingland,aswellasacidsulphatesoilcontaminationareofconcerntosustainablefishstocks.

5.2 Captured ‘fish’ species assets

Thistree(Figure9)includesall‘fish’speciescapturedwhere‘fish’isunderstoodtobethoseanimalsdescribedundertheFishResourcesManagementAct(1994)anddoesnotincludeprotectedspeciesunderStateandCommonwealthlegislation.

Thesuitesofspecies(e.g.estuarine,nearshore,demersalandpelagic)havebeenusedbecausetheallocationofspeciesinto‘suites’meansthatmanagerscanreadilyconsidertheimpactsofchangesinoperationsoffisheries.Inaddition,itwillmeanthatdecisionscanbemademorerapidlyasamatrixofallsuiteswithinabioregionwillbegenerated.Someofthespeciesinthecapturedfishcomponenttreehavethenbeenfurtherdividedintostocksorecosystemgroups(e.g.Australianherring,kingprawns).Foreachspecies,theriskassessmentcoveredabroadrangeofelementsincludingissuessuchasconcernswithabundance,distribution,geneticchanges,alongwithanyimpactsofdiscardingbyafishery,oranyotherimpactonthespeciesbyothersectors(e.g.illegalfishing).


Finfish estuarine-SEVERERisk

Westcoastestuariesarehighlymodified,andoftendegraded,environments.Intheseestuaries,theimpactsofenvironmentalfactorsonfishstockabundancesarelikelytobeatleastasimportantasfishingpressure.

Managementoffishcommunitiesinwestcoastestuariesrequiresacollaborativeeffortbetweenfisheryandhabitatmanagers.

Inshore demersal-SEVERERisk1

Concernsforthesuiteofdemersalspecies(whichincludesdhufish,pinksnapper,baldchingroper)wereconfirmedfollowingrecentreviewsofthestockassessmentscompletedforthethree indicator species.

Near-shore demersal-HIGHRisk

ThereareincreasingconcernsforAustralianHerring,tailorandskipjacktrevallyandwhitinginthenearshoreregiongiventhepotentialforrecreationalfishinglevelstoincreaseduetoincreasedmanagementcontrolsonpopularinshoredemersalspecies.

Offshore Demersal-MEDIUM–HIGHRisk

Someofthekeyindicatorspeciesinthisdeepwaterlocationarevulnerabletooverfishing.OverlapsincatchalsoexistwithCommonwealthtrawlvessels.

PelagicLOWRisk

Thereisnowminimalcaptureofpelagicfishinthisbioregion.

Crustaceans estuarine (Crabs)MEDIUM-HIGHRisk

ThestocksofcrabsinCockburnSoundhavebeenatdepletedlevelsforthepastfewyearsbutarenowintheprocessofrecoverysincetheclosureoffishingoccurredin2007.StocksinotherregionsoftheWestCoastarebeingreviewed.

Shelf (Lobsters and prawns) MEDIUM Risk

Despiterecentlowrecruitmentlevelsthestrongmanagementthatisbeingappliedtotherocklobsterfisheryshouldensurethestocklevelsofkeycrustaceansinthisregion,westernrocklobstersandprawnsarebothcurrentlyatappropriatelevels.

Molluscs nearshore -MEDIUMRisk

Thestocksofabaloneareconservativelymanagedwithstrongmanagementcontrolsonbothcommercialandrecreationalfishers.

1 Notethisriskhassubsequentlybeenreducedgiventhe50%reductionsthathaveoccurredtothecatchlevelsofallsectorsthatcaptured this suite.


Risk legend -

Figure 9. West Coast Bioregion – Captured species risks, ovals represent consolidated risks. Numbers indicate components that form part of the multi-criterion assessment (Table 5).

LOWMODERATEHIGHSEVERE


Risk legend -

Figure 10. West Coast Bioregion – Protected species risks. Ovals represent the level at which risks were consolidated. Numbers indicate components that form part of the multi-criterion assessment (Table 5, p.49).

5.3 Protected species assets

Protectednon‘fish’species(Figure10)aremanagedunderarangeofStatelegislation(WildlifeConservationActandRegulations1950,ConservationandLandManagementAct1984)andCommonwealthlegislation(EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999knownastheEPBCActandtheWildlifeProtectionAct1982).UnderCommonwealthlegislation(generallyappliedtowatersoutsideStatewatersor3nm)itisanoffencetokill,take,tradeormoveprotectedspecieswithoutapermit.

Theprotectednon‘fish’includealargenumberofmarineanimals,includingseabirds,turtles,seasnakesandmammals.Deliberatelycausinginterferencetocetaceanscarriesadditionalpenalties.

LOWMODERATEHIGHSEVERE


Asfishingcanoccasionallyresultinunavoidableaccidentsorincidents,allinteractionswithprotectedspeciesundertheEPBCActmustbereported.IntheWestCoastBioregiontherearesomemammals,fewreptilesandonlyasmallnumberofotherprotectedspeciesthatinteractwithfishingactivities.TherearealsominimalfisheriesintheWestCoastthatproducebycatch(Richard Campbell, pers. comm.).

Certain‘fish’speciesareprotectedunderStatelegislation(FishResourcesManagementAct1994)andCommonwealthlegislation(EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999).Protectedfishspeciesincludeallpipefish,seahorsesandseadragons,manysharkspecies,somefinfishspeciesandasmallnumberofcrustaceansandmolluscs.

Thedecisiontoexamineprotectedspeciesatthespecies,grouporhigherleveldependsuponwhatisconsideredappropriatefortheregioninquestion.Ifalargenumberofspeciesisidentifiedwithsimilarriskprofiles,thesespeciesmaybeaggregatedtoahigherlevel(Fletcher2008).

Theriskassessmentprocessforprotectedspeciesidentifiedriskduetointeractionswithfisheries,whetherbydirectcaptureorindirectlythroughdisturbanceorprovisionoffoodthroughbait.

Protected non ‘Fish’ species turtlesLOWRisk

Thereisminimalimpactofanyfishingactivityonanyturtlespecieswithinthisbioregion.

SeabirdsLOW-MEDIUMRisk

LittlePenguinsareconsideredatriskfromfishingandboating(boatstrikes)inthisregion.

Mammals (sea-lions)LOWRisk

Sealionexclusiondevices(SLEDs)requiredforrocklobsterpotsnearsealionbreedingislandshasreducedthelevelofrisk.

AustralianSeaLionsandSouthernRightWhaleinteractionsmayincreaseinfuturewithincreasingnumbers.

Protected ‘Fish’ species fishLOW-MEDIUMRisk

Bluegroper(RottnestIsland),andCobbler(SwanCanning),WhiteSharks.

5.4 Benthic habitat categories

TheBenthichabitatcategories(Figure11)havebeenbrokenintofunctionaldistributionareasfollowedbyhabitattypesandfurtherdividedintotheecosystemsoftheWestCoastBioregion.Thisistoenablecross-referencingbetweeneachofthecomponenttreeswhendeterminingmanagementprioritiesandassessingresidualrisk.

Thebenthichabitatcategoriesinclude:

• Seagrass;

• Sand;

• RockyReef,whichisgenerallyalgal-dominatedintheWestCoastBioregion;

• Coral Reef;

• Spongeareas;and

• Mangrovecommunities.


As information is limited for many of these habitats, data has been combined for many of the areas.Overashorttimeframe(5years)andalongtimeframe(20years)theriskofunacceptablechangehasbeenestimated(seeRiskAssessmentsection). Risk to benthic habitats from any source,suchassandmining,pollutionandsedimentation,wasincludedintheriskassessment.

Risk legend -

Figure 11. West Coast Bioregion – Habitat risks, consolidated risks are the ovals at the top of the branches. Numbers indicate components that form part of the multi-criterion assessment (Table 5).

Estuaries and embayments sandHIGHRisk(non-fishing)

Many sand habitats in estuarine and embayment habitats are threatened by factors such as poor waterquality,directlossofhabitatthroughcoastalinfrastructureandphysicaldisturbance(e.g.dredging),sedimentationandsmotheringbyalgae.

Thereareminimalimpactsoffishingonthesehabitats.

HIGH LOWMODERATESEVERE


Estuaries and embayments seagrassMEDIUMRisk(non-fishing)

Seagrasshabitatthreatenedbynon-fishingrelatedactivities(coastalinfrastructureandassociateddredging,directhabitatloss,turbidity).

Nearshore sandLOWRisk

Minimaldirectimpactsandhighrecoveryrates.

Nearshore seagrassLOWRisk

Nodestructivefishingmethodsallowedintheseareas.Mostlikelyimpactsfromdevelopments.

Estuaries and embayments sandHIGHRisk(non-fishing)

Many sand habitats in estuarine and embayment habitats are threatened by factors such as poor waterquality,directlossofhabitatthroughcoastalinfrastructureandphysicaldisturbance(e.g.dredging),sedimentationandsmotheringbyalgae.

Thereareminimalimpactsoffishingonthesehabitats.

Estuaries and embayments seagrass MEDIUMRisk(non-fishing)

Seagrasshabitatthreatenednon-fishingrelatedactivities(coastalinfrastructureandassociateddredging,directhabitatloss,turbidity).

Nearshore sandLOWRisk


Rocky reefLOWRisk


Coral reefLOWRisk

Minimal direct impacts.

Offshore demersalLOWRisk

Minimal direct impacts.

5.5 General environment impacts

Thistree(Figure12)detailstheriskassociatedwithgeneralenvironmentalimpactsthatcouldoccurfromfishingoperations.Theserisksarenottobeconfusedwiththeexternaldriverswhichareimpactsnotrelatedtofishing.Manyoftheseimpactsmaynotappearparticularlycriticalatthispoint;however,withtheincreasingfocusoncarbonemissionsandcarbontradingtheyarelikelytobecomemoreimportant.Assessmentandreportingbyfisheryonenvironmentalperformance,includingcarbonemissionsmaybenecessaryinthecomingyears.


Figure 12. General environment component tree.

CO2 Emissions:Thisincludesthepotentialforthefisherytocontributetogreenhousegasemissionsandtheirnotionalcarbonfootprint.AlthoughWAfisherieshavenotbeenformallyassessedfortheirCO2emissions,itisassumedthatthosefisherieswithpowerfulvessels,workingoffshoreandexportingtheirproductwouldhavealargercarbonfootprintthanthoseusingdinghiesfromthebeachandsellingproductlocally.

Water quality: Thiscomponentincludestheimpactsonwaterqualitythatcouldcomefromaquaculture,fishing,orfishingrelatedactivitiessuchasfishprocessing.Itincludesthepossibleaccidentalspillageoffueloroils,particularlyifappropriateprotocolsorcodesofconductarenotinplace.Thereleaseoffishingdebrisintothewatercolumnincludingbaitandbaitpackagingandsullagefromfishingvesselscanalsoimpactwaterquality.Sullagehasthepotentialtobeapollutantinheavilyusedanchorages,whetherforcommercialorrecreationalvessels.Someaquacultureactivitiesmayimpactonnutrientloadsandsedimentationissuesmayariseasaresultoffishingboatharbouroraquaculturefacilityconstruction.

Coastal Impacts:Thesecomponentsareimpactsonthecoastalenvironmentfromfishingandfishing-relatedactivities.Thistreehasbeenfurtherdividedintotheforeshore(abovehighwatermark)andintertidalareas(betweenthehighandlowwatermark).Theforeshoreimpactscouldincludebeacherosionfrom4WDvehiclesaccessingfishingpointsorlaunchingfishingboats.Itmayalsoincludeenvironmentalimpactsfromtheconstructionoffishingboatharbours.Intheintertidalareas,fishingdebrisandrubbishwashedupfromvesselsandleftbyrecreationalfisherscouldallbeissuesforconsideration.

5.6 Social and economic issues

Itshouldbeoutlinedfirstthatbecausethesocialandeconomicvalueswerefoundtohavedifferentobjectives,theirassessmentswerekeptseparateduringthiscasestudy.Thisdivisionleadtobetterfocusonthesocialandeconomicissuesandlessconfusionwhenassessingtherisk.Tobetterlinkthesocialandeconomicissueswithfisherymanagementpriorities,


thetreeswerefurtherdividedintothoseassociatedwiththedirectstakeholdersandthoseofindirectstakeholders.Theindirectstakeholdersincludetheindigenous,regionalandstatewidecommunities.

5.7 Social issues

TheSocialIssues(Outcomes)trees(Figure13and14)coversboththepotentialsocialimpacts(bothpositiveandnegative)ofthefisheryontheparticipants(commercial,recreational,charter,customaryandaquaculture),thewellbeingofthelocalorregionalcommunitiesassociatedwitheachfishingactivityandthegeneralWAcommunity.Theriskofchangetothesocialoutcomewasassessedduringtheriskassessment.

5.8 Social issues (outcomes); direct stakeholders

DirectStakeholdersrefertothosefisherswhoaredirectlyassociatedwithaparticularfishingactivity,whetherthisisthroughacommercialfishery,therecreationalsectororcharterindustry,andwhetherthepersonisacustomaryuseroroperateswithinanaquacultureindustry.

Forconsistencywiththeothercomponenttrees,thedirectstakeholdergroupsweredividedintothoseassociatedwithfinfish,crustaceansandmolluscfisheriesandfurtherintotheirfunctionalspatialgroups(Figure13).NoteveryfisherywithintheWestCoastBioregionisrepresentedonthetree,however,thelistcanbeexpandedatanypoint,particularlyifthereisaperceivedissueinafisherythatisnotlisted.

Figure 13. Detailed component tree for social issues (outcomes) for direct stakeholders.


5.9 General social outcomes; (indirect stakeholders)

Indirectstakeholdersincludethosepeopleinindustriesindirectlyreliantonsomeaspectoffishorfishingaswellasthecommunitiesassociatedwithfishing.ItalsocoversissuesthatmaybeimportanttocommunitiesacrosstheStateincludingtheattitudesoffishconsumers,perceptionsandattitudesofthecommunitytowardsthefishingaswellastheculturalandheritagevaluesthatareapartofafishingcommunity.Similarlytothesocialoutcometreefordirectstakeholders,theriskofchangetoasocialoutcomewasassessed.

Indigenous Communities

ThisoutcomerelatestoindigenouscommunitieswithintheWestCoastBioregionthatareassociatedwiththemarineenvironmentandfishingactivities.Accesstofishinggrounds,thevalueofcatchingfishforculturalandsocialreasons,aswellascustomaryrightsforindigenouscommunities are all considerations in this element.

Regional Communities

Therelianceonandparticipationofregionalcommunities(bothdirectandindirect)infishingactivitiesisanimportantfactorinconsideringtherisktothesecomponents.Acrosseachofthebroadcommunitygroupingslistedbelow,thereareanumberoffactorstobeconsideredwhenassessingtheimportanceofthefishingindustrytoacommunityandthepossibleimpactofchangestoacommunityasaresultofchangestoarelatedfishery.

Associalandeconomicinformationisoftencollectedbytownorcommunity,the‘regionalcommunity’boundariesfortheWestCoaststudyfollowpopulationrelatedareasratherthanthemarine ecosystem boundaries. The boundaries include:

WestCoast;Metropolitan;andLeeuwin-Naturaliste.

West Coast:CommunitiesnorthofthePerthmetropolitanzonebutwithintheWestCoastBioregionthatareassociatedwiththemarineecosystemandfishingactivities.ThemaincommunitiesincludeKalbarri,PortGregory,Horrocks,Geraldton,Dongara,Leeman,GreenHead,JurienBay,Cervantes,Lancelin,LedgePoint,Seabird,TwoRocks(forpopulationnumbers see Huddleston 2006).

Metropolitan:CommunitieswithinthegreaterPerthmetropolitanzoneassociatedwiththemarineecosystemandfishingactivities.ThemetropolitanareaextendsfromTwoRockstoDawesvilleandincludesMindarie,Hillarys,Fremantle,Woodman’sPoint,Kwinana,Warnbroand Mandurah.

Leeuwin-Naturaliste:ThecommunitiesfromDawesvillesouthandincludingtheCapes(betweenCapeLeeuwinandCapeNaturaliste).ThemaintownsincludeBunbury,Busselton,YallingupandAugusta.

Thevaluestobeconsideredmayincludemaintainingthesupportandrecognitionofthefishingindustryortheopportunitiesforcommunitymemberstogorecreationalfishinginminingtowns.

State-wide Communities

Cultural/heritage values:Thesevaluesindicatetheintrinsicimportanceoffishingwithincommunities.Forexample,whetherthecontinuationoffishinginatownwithalonghistoryoffishingisimportanttocommunitymembersandvisitorstotheregionisanindicationofthe


cultural/heritagevalueoffishing.Whetherpeopleenjoyvisitingfishingportsandvaluetheavailabilityoflocallycaughtfreshfishprovidesanindicationoftheassociatedculturalandheritagevalues.

Existence values:Thisisavaluepeoplederivefromtheveryexistenceofthemarineecosystem.Itincludesthevalueorbenefitderivedfromobservingtheoceanandmarinelifewithoutbeingdirectlyinvolvedinfisheriesorfishingactivities.Itcanalsoincludethevaluethosewhohavenoconnectiontothemarineenvironmentbutliketo‘knowitisthere!’

Perceptions/attitudes:Theserefertobroad-scalecommunityunderstanding,thoughtsandfeelingsregardingfishingandincludeviewsonallfishingsectors,includingcommercial,recreational,aquacultureandcustomaryfishing.Theseviewsmaychangeovertimetobemoreorlessacceptingoffishingandalsotoreflectanincreasedunderstandingorknowledgeofaparticular sector or issue.

Seafood Consumers:Peoplewhoeatfishbutdonotnecessarilycatchtheirownfish.Wheretheypurchasetheirfish(fishmonger,supermarketorrestaurant)andwhatisselectedintermsofspecies,qualityandpriceareallrelevantfactors.Thechoiceoflocalfishorimportedproductappearstobeanincreasingmarketdriver,asdoestheconsiderationofsustainablefishingorotherenvironmentalaccreditations.


Figure 14. Detailed component tree for general social issues (outcomes). The dashed line related to direct stakeholders indicates that these elements were dealt with in a previous tree.

State-wide services:Allgenerallyavailableservices,suchaselectricityandacceptablecommunications(i.e.internet,phoneandmail).Inaddition,state-wideservicesincludesthemaintenanceandavailabilityofroadsaswellastheavailabilityoftransport/freightprovisionsforincomingandoutgoingseafoodproductsandfishinggear.Thisvaluealsoincludesboatramps,jetties,fishingboatharboursandmooringareas.

Skills:Referstoskillsprovidedtocommercialfisherstoaidtheirfishingventuresortheirmovementintoalternativeemployment.

Fishing gear suppliers:Businessesthatsellfishinggear(tackle)tocommercialandrecreationalfishersintheWestCoastBioregion.

Fish and bait suppliers:Businessesthatsellfishandbaittothecommercialandrecreationalsectoraswellasthegeneralpublic.


Fishing Tourism:Businessesthatincludefishing,whichmightbeaffectedbychangesinthemarineenvironmentandfisheries.Thisvaluewouldincludebusinessessuchascaravanparks,jetty kiosks, boat hire etc.

Divers and Snorkellers:Peoplewhomayliveinthelocalareaorspecificallyvisitanareatoparticipateindiving.Theyareoftenlookingforareasofhighbiodiversity,largeanimalsandcharismatic species.

5.10 Economic outcomes

Economicevaluationstendtofocuson‘neteconomicbenefits’,whichusepricesandmarketstodescribebenefitstoanindividualgrouporcommunity.Comparedwithsocialevaluationsthisallowsarelativelystraightforwardapproachtothemeasurementsandcomparisonofbenefitsacrossuses(Vieiraetal,2000).

The‘EconomicOutcomes’trees(Figure15and16)coverthepotentialeconomicimpacts(bothpositiveandnegative)ofthefisheryonthefishingindustryaswellasthatofthelocalorregionalcommunitiesthatareassociatedwithfishing.Thecomponenttreeisbrokenintotwomainbranches;onedealingwiththefishingsectorsandtheirassociatedcommunities(directstakeholders and dependent communities) and the other; local communities directly or indirectly affectedbytheindustry(indirectstakeholdersandgeneralcommunity).

5.11 Economic outcomes: Direct stakeholders

Thetreeforthisgroup(Figure15)includesthecommercial,charter,andaquacultureparticipants.Itdoesnotincludetheindigenousorrecreationalsectorbecausethereshouldbenofinancialgainfromfishingactivitiesfortheseparticipants.

Thetreehasbeendividedbasedonthespeciesgroups(finfish,crustaceansandmolluscs)thatarebeingcapturedandthentherelevantsuites(estuarine,nearshore,inshoredemersalandoffshoredemersal)withinwhichtheyarecaptured.Thislinkstheeconomicbenefitsdirectlybacktothestatusofthecapturedspeciesoutlinedabove.


Figure 15. Detailed component tree for economic issues (Outcomes); Direct stakeholders.

5.12 Economic outcomes: Indirect stakeholders

Regional Communities

Economicvaluesmayincludethemaintenanceoffishing-relatedprofitsorgeneralemploymentwithinacommunity,whichmightbeimpactedbychangesinfishing.

Statewide

Seafood processors:Thisvaluerepresentsfishprocessingfacilities,theirownersandemployeesintheWestCoastBioregion.

Infrastructure:Physicalcomponentsofthecommunity,suchasharboursandwharves,whichexistprimarilytoservicecommercialandrecreationalfishingandalsobenefitthegeneralpublic.

Seafood restaurants and food outlets: Businesses that sell seafood product (mostly cooked), throughrestaurantsandfoodoutlets.

Boat builders:BusinessesthatmanufactureandsellboatsintheWestCoastBioregion.

Diving operators:TouroperatorsthatcaterforSCUBAdivingandsnorkelling,notincludingfishing.

Boat sellers:Businessesthatsellnewandsecondhandfishingboats.

Seafood consumers:Weredescribedaboveinasocialcontext;however,inaneconomiccontextseafoodconsumersmaywanttoaccesslocalseafoodproductataffordableprices.


Figure 16. Detailed component tree for general economic outcomes. The dashed line refers to those elements that have been dealt with previously.

5.13 Institutional governance

InstitutionalgovernancecoverssomeofthemostimportantaspectswhenconsideringEBFM.ItquestionswhetheralltheESDandEBFMprinciplesunderpinnedbylegal,institutionaleconomicandpolicyframeworksarecapableofrespondingandtakingappropriatepre-emptoryand remedial actions (ESD 2002).

Theelements in the institutionalgovernance tree (Figure17)coverall the legislative,administrativeandbureaucraticprocessesthatneedtobecompletedtoenabletheissuesintheprevioustreestobedealtwitheffectively(Fletcheretal,2002).ItisdesignedtoconsiderallthemanagementprocesseswithintheDepartmentofFisheries.ExternallinkagesarealsoincludedsuchasconsultationwithkeystakeholdersandconservationNGOs,interactionswithotherStateandCommonwealthDepartments,andlinkageswithUniversitiesandfundingbodies(Figure16).

Inabroadsense,theDepartmentofFisheriesundertakespolicydevelopmentaswellasimplementation.Policydevelopmentisdrivenbyfisherymanagersandisassociatedwithspecific


researchtounderpinpolicydecisions.Policy(andlegislative)implementationcanbeinfluencedbystakeholderinputaswellasotherGovernmentDepartments(Metcalfetal.2009).Externalfactorssuchaspoliticalprocessescanalsoinfluencethedevelopmentandimplementationofpolicy(Metcalfetal.inprep)andarecoveredinthe‘GeneralExternalDrivers’tree(Figure18)notintheGovernancetree.Themanagementprocessescanbefurthersplitintoresearch(withassociatedmonitoringforspecificfisheries)andcomplianceinordertoundertakeallaspectsofpolicyimplementationandassociatedlegislativerequirementsincludingthatforspecificfisheryManagementPlans.

Eachelementoftheinstitutionalgovernancetree(Figure17)relatesspecificallytopartofthegovernanceprocess.TheDepartmentofFisheriesislooselydividedintothemanagementareasofPolicy,ResearchandCompliance.TheexternallinkagesimpactingontheseprocesseshavebeendividedintointeractionswithstakeholdersandotherStateandCommonwealthdepartments.

Figure 17. Institutional Governance detailed component tree. Ovals represent the level at which risks were consolidated.

DoF Management Processes

Policy development:Thecommercial,charter,recreationalandaquaculturesectorsareallcoveredunderpolicydevelopment.Thisarearelatestotheavailabilityandcomprehensiveness


ofManagementPlanswithinfisheries,oracomprehensivepolicyforeachsector.Italsorelatestoappropriatelevelsofresourcesavailabletodevelopandimplementpolicyeffectively.

Research:ResearchintheDepartmentofFisheriesfocusesonthegatheringofnewinformationandlong-termmonitoringtoassessstocklevels,monitorbreedingstocksandundertakeenvironmentalassessments.Italsodealswithfishingandfishing-relatedactivities,inparticularthoserelatedtomanaginganyimpactsoffishingontheecosystem.Thiselementisrelatedtotheavailableresourcestocarryoutthesefunctionseffectively.AlthoughtheResearchDivisionislooselydividedsystematically,thecomponenttreereflectssomefishingsectorsaswellasareasthatmaybeatriskorareofdevelopinginterest.

Compliance and education:ThisvaluerelatestoupholdingtheregulationsundertheFishResourcesManagementAct(1994)withintheDepartmentofFisheries.AlthoughtheDivisionisdividedregionally, theelementshavebeendividedintothecommercial,recreational,charterandaquaculturesectors.Withinthesegroups,individualfisherieshavebeenillustratedtoprovideexamplesofvariedcomplianceneedsrelatedtospecificfisheries.ThequestioniswhethercomplianceisadequateinthefisherytodealwiththeRegulationsandarrangementsintheManagementPlan.

Consultation

Key Stakeholders: Thekeyfishery-relatedstakeholdersgatherinformationfromtheirconstituentsandinputintotheDepartmentbywayofformalconsultationprocessesandcommentintodraftpolicy.Theeffectivenessofthisinputisoftenameasureofpolicyuptake.

Interaction; Government Departments:TheDepartmentofFisheriesinteractswithStateandFederalGovernmentDepartmentsatmanylevelsincludingdemonstratingsustainabilityofallexportfisheriestotheCommonwealthDepartmentofEnvironment,Water,HeritageandtheArts(DEWHA)andthelicensingofaquaculturefacilitiesbytheStateDepartmentofEnvironmentandConservation(DEC).Therearealsointer-jurisdictionalarrangements(e.g.theOffshoreConstitutionalSettlement),aswellasStateandCommonwealthprocesses(e.g.marineparks)thatrequireconsiderableinputandinteraction.

Interaction; Other:NotallgroupsthatinteractwiththeDepartmentarelistedintheInstitutionalGovernancetree.Otherorganisationsthatmaysitoutsidethemainstakeholdergroupsandformalconsultationpathwaysarelistedunder‘InteractionOther.’Thisincludesgroupsinthecommercialandrecreationalfishingcommunity,whichformanddisbanddependingontheirpriorityissuesandotherfundingbodiesthatcouldhavedifferentfundingprioritiesfromtheDepartmentandindirectlyinfluencepolicy.

Theinstitutionalgovernancetreeislikelytobesimilarforallecosystemswithinabioregion.

5.14 General external drivers

TheGeneralExternalDriverstree(Figure18)hasbeendesignedtocapturethemajorissuesthatare/ormayimpactontheecosystemaswellastheperformanceoffisheriesandfishing-relatedactivities.TheseimpactsmayreduceorimprovetheperformanceofafisherybutarenotasaresultoffishingandaregenerallybeyondthescopeoftheDepartmentofFisheries.

Althoughnotabletobecontrolleddirectly,theseexternalissuesstillneedtobetakenintoconsideration,astheyarelikelytoaffectwhatmanagementispossible.Thestrengthorotherwise


oftheexternaldriverswillalsoaffectthestrengthofmanagementandpriorityofresourceallocationforresearchandmonitoring.

Forexample,ifthebreedingstockofanexploitedspecieswasunderthreatinaparticularecosystem,onemanagementmeasuremaybetoreduceorbanfishing,andprovidefurtherresearchiftherewasalackofinformationavailable.If,onreflection,itwasclearthatthereweresignificantexternaldriversadverselyimpactingtheecosystemandfishstock,themanagementresponsesmaybeoflittlevalueandwouldhavetobemodifiedappropriately.

InanEBMscenario,theseexternaldriversandtheirmitigatingmanagementmeasureswouldbeconsideredbytheresponsiblejurisdictions.However,inanEBFMapproach,onlythosemeasureswithinthelegislativecontrolofthefisheriesagencycanbedealtwith.

TherearetwomajortypesofissuesintheExternalDriverstree.Thefirstareimpactsthatarisefromchangestotheenvironmentsuchasclimateandwaterquality.Theseimpactsmaybenaturaloranthropogenic;however,theremaynotbeasinglecauseoradirectsource.Theothergroupareclearlyanthropogenicandimpactdirectlyonfisheriesorecosystems.Forexample,introducedpestsanddiseases,coastaldevelopmentsandpoliticalprocessesareincludedintheseanthropogenicissues.

Forconsistencywiththeothertreesandtoincreasetherelevancetofisheriesmanagement,theExternalDrivershavebeendividedintothefunctionalspatialgroupsdescribedinthe‘captured’species component trees.

Climate:Thiselementimpactsallmanagementareas.Seasurfacetemperature,oceancurrentsandprecipitationhavelongbeenacknowledgedasimpactingonspeciesdistributionandrecruitment.NaturalvariabilityinthestrengthoftheLeeuwinCurrenthasbeenrecognisedashavingastronglinktotherecruitmentlevelsofmanyfishandcrustaceanspeciesinWA(Lenantonetal.,1991),withprecipitationandcycloneeventsaffectingprawncatches(Vanceetal.,1985).Morerecentdatasuggestingchangestoseasurfacetemperature(Caputietal,1995,Fengetal.,2003)mayincreasetheuncertaintyoftheselinkagesandrequireamoreconservativeapproachwithagreateradherencetothe‘precautionaryprinciple’whensettingmanagementtargets.

Water quality:Water-basedactivitiescanhavemajorimpactsonwaterqualityincludingincreased sediment loads, pollution, nutrient enrichment and increased acid sulphate soils. The areasofimpactaregenerallythemostpopulatedareasalongthecoastoraroundestuariesandembayments.Oilspillsinvaluablefishingareaswerealsoincludedintheexternaldriverstree. The Abrolhos Islands and surrounds is an area that has been considered for a ‘particularly sensitiveseaarea’nominationforthisreason.

Other Human Use:Coastaldevelopmentsareparticularlyprevalentinestuariesandembaymentsandmayimpactonorremoveimportantfishnurseryareas,aswellasaffectingthequalityofwaterwithincreasednutrients,exposureofacidsulphatesoils,removalofwetlands,sedgesandothernaturalwaterfilters.

Introduced Pests and Diseases:Theintroductionofexoticspeciesintothemarineenvironmentisamajorthreattonativebiodiversityandecosystemhealth(Padillaetal,1996)aswellasthefishingandaquacultureindustries.Exoticpestspeciesaremostoftentransportedbetweenregionsbyshipsinballastwaterorashullfoulingorganisms.Theycanalsobedeliberatelyintroduced,althoughthisismorecommoninfreshwaterandinlandwaterways.Pestspeciescan


alsoescapefromaquaculturefacilities,althoughstrictLicensingandRegulationsinWAseeksto minimise this risk.

WAhasavastcoastlineandtherehavebeenover102speciesofmarinealgaeandanimalsintroducedofwhichover60ofthosespeciesarethoughttobeintroducedthroughhumanactivity.Astheportfacilitiesonthecoastareconsideredlikelyareasofriskforintroducedmarinespecies,theseareashavebeenlistedinthecomponenttrees.

Exoticdiseasesmaybecarriedinthewatercolumn(e.g.Gaut,2001)althoughthisislikelytobeonlyovershortdistances.WApearlingandaquaculturefacilitiesarespacedaccordinglytoreducethisriskoftransmission.Translocatedspeciesareacommoncauseofvectorsofexoticdiseases,butdiseasesalsospreadintonewareasthroughtheaccidentalentryintothewildofaquacultureandornamentalspecies.Spreadofdiseasecanalsooccurthroughbaitand“fouling”organismsonvesselhulls.Issuesaremorelikelytooccurfromdiseaseagentsthatoccurinlocalpopulationswithoutincident,however,becomeproblematicifmovedtodifferentareaswheretheycancausesignificantdiseaseoutbreaks(Huangetal.,1994).

Political Processes:ExternalprocessesataCommonwealth,Stateandlocalgovernmentlevel,canimpactfisheriesandfishingactivitiesatmanylevels.Forexample,allfisheriesareunabletoexporttheirseafoodproductunlesstheyhavedemonstratedtheyaresustainabletoaCommonwealthDepartment.TheimplementationofCommonwealthMarineParkscanresultincommercialandrecreationalfishingrestrictionsand/orclosures.Theimplementationoffishingrestrictionsoradditionalreportingalsorequiresincreasedfisheriescompliance.

Local governmentplaysanimportantroleintheplanninganddevelopmentofthecoastalstripandaccesstofishinglocationsthroughtheprovisionofboatrampsandjetties.Localgovernmentcanalsorestrictfishingaccessincertainareas,includingthatofcommercialfishersfishingdirectlyfromthebeach(R.Lenanton,pers.comm.).


Figure 18. General External Drivers detailed component tree. Ovals represent the level at which risks were consolidated.


6.0 Determining whole of agency priorities

6.1 Background

Astherearealargenumberofcomponenttrees(11fortheWestCoastBioregion)withmanyelements(e.g.captured‘fish’species>80),thefullreportingofeachassetthathasariskratingotherthannegligible(medium,highandsevere)isonerousandinsomecasesoflittlevalue,asthesummaryinformationisavailableelsewhere.Amalgamatingorconsolidatingtheriskvaluesprovidesausefulsummaryofpriority.Riskareasaswellasallowingforcrosscheckingofoutcomesandimpactsinthesamefunctionalgroups.

Itisimportanttorecordalloftheelementsidentifiedbystakeholders,theirriskratingsandthejustificationsusedincalculatingtherating.AstheprocessbeingundertakenisEcosystemBasedFisheriesManagement(EBFM)ratherthanEcosystemBasedManagement(EBM),theamalgamationofriskandthespatialgroupingshavebeendesignedtocomplementthewayfishstocksaremanagedinWA.

Theconsolidationprocessreducedthelargenumberofindividualissuesdowntoasmallernumberofassetsandissues;however,theremainderwasstillconsideredtoolargetobeofdirectusewithinawholeofagencyplanningandprioritysettingprocess.Moreover,asmanyoftheindividualecological,socialandeconomiccomponentsareinterrelatedtheyneededtobeintegratedpriortoundertakinganyagencyplanningtoensurethatatrulyholisticapproachtomanagementwastaken.

TheDepartment’sprimaryobjectiveistoensurethesustainabilityoftheecologicalassetsfromwhicheconomicorsocialoutcomesandbenefitscanbegeneratedthroughimplementingappropriatemanagement.Consequently,determiningthepriorityforassigningDepartmentalresources to an area must first take into consideration the direct risks to the stocks or environmentinvolved.Followingthisprocess,theriskstoandlevelsofeconomicandsocialoutcomesderivedfromtheuseofthisassetbythevariousdirectandindirectstakeholdersmustbeconsidered.Usingthisconcept,therewereonly22consolidatedecologicalassetsand2additionalconsolidatedgovernancecategoriestouseasthebasisfordeterminingtheDepartmentalwideprioritieswithintheWestCoastBioregion(seeTable5).

6.2 Results

Thesimplemulti-criteriasystemwasusedtointegratethevariousriskandvaluescoresassociatedwitheachofthe22ecologicalassetsand2governancecategoriesfromtheecological,economicandsocialperspectivesandgenerateasinglescorethatwasusedtocompareprioritiesacrosstheentirebioregion(Table4)2.Thepriorityscoresrangedfromabout102downto4,providingarelativelylargedegreeofdiscriminationamongassets.Ofthe24regionallevelcategories,thescoringsuggestedthattherewerefivewithurgentpriorities,twowithhighprioritiesandsixwithineachofthemedium,lowandverylowpriorities.

ThehighestscorewasgeneratedforCapturedSpecies-ShelfCrustaceans,whichisdominatedbytherocklobsterfishery,thelargestandmostvaluablefisheryintheState.Thehighscorereflectsthatthisfisheryiscurrentlyfacinganumberofsignificantissues(e.g.lowrecruitment,exportmarketdownturnetc.,DepartmentofFisheries2009).Theseincluderecentreductionsin

2 WhentheEBFMprocessiscompletedinotherbioregions,comparisonofprioritiesacrosstheentirestatewillbepossible.


recruitmentlevelsandhencemajorreductionsintheallowablecatchestoensurethebreedingstocklevelsarenotimpacted.Inaddition,theincomelevelsforthefishersarebeingaffectedbyrelativelylowpricesduetooverseasmarketconditionsandhighexchangerates.Theseconditionsareexacerbatingtheimpactsofincreasedcostsassociatedwithfuelandlabourandgeneratingsignificantsocialissuesforthecatchingandprocessingsectorsaswellasflowonimpactstodependentcommunitiesandservicegroups.Substantialincreasesineffortarenowunderwaytounderstandthecause(s)ofthelowrecruitment,plusexaminewaystomakethefisherymoreprofitablewithintheboundsoftheloweracceptablecatches.

Averyhighscorewasalsogeneratedfortheinshoredemersalfinfishsuiteofspecies.Thissuiteiscaughtbythreeseparatecommercialfisheries,isamajorcomponentofarecreationalcharterfisheryandistheprimarytargetgroupfortheboat-basedrecreationalfishingsector.Consequently,toensurethatalltheEBFMobjectivesforthisbioregionallevelassetareattainedrequiressuccessfulmanagementactionstobetakenwithinanumberofseparatebutinterconnectedfisheries.

Todealwithdecliningstockstatusoftheindicatorspecies,intensivemanagementactivitieshavebeenimplementedoverthepastthreeyearsacrossallrelevantfisheriestoreducetheirlevelofcaptureoftheentiresuiteby50%(Wise,etal.,2008).Thisincludesaformalprocesstodetermineexplicitlevelsofaccesstotheresourceamongthevariouscommercialandrecreationalsectors(DoF,2010).Theseactionshavegeneratedsignificanteconomicandsocialimpactsforthecommercialindustrythroughrestrictionsonwhichlicenseeshadaccesstothefishery,theimpositionofcommercialclosurestosomezonesandreductionsinthetotalaccesslevelsallowed.Similarly,theimpositionofthestrongmeasures(includinglicences,closedseasonsandreducedbaglimits)tosufficientlyreducetherecreationalcatchgeneratedanintenselevelofpublicdebate.

Atthelowerendofthepriorityscale,thepelagicfinfishsuitereceivedonlyaverylowpriority.Thissuitehashadrelativelyminorlevelsoffishingforthepastdecadeduetopoormarketsanddifficultiesintheircaptureateconomicallyviablerates.Consequentlytheriskstothestocksarecurrentlylowtonegligible(andhencenoadditionalrisksforothertrophiclevels),plusthereisminimalcommercialactivity/riskandeffectivelynorecreationalcaptureofspeciesinthissuite.

TheoutcomefortheWestCoastecosystemstructureandbiodiversitywasbothamoderateriskandpriorityscore.Thiswasbasedonanassessmentofthecommunitystructureandtrophiclevelsofallcommerciallycaughtfishspeciesoverthepast30years.Thisassessmentfoundnoevidenceofsystematicchanges,whichwouldbeevidenceofanunacceptableimpactontheecosystem.Giventhatthemainelementswithinthisecosystemthatwereconsideredtobeatriskwerealreadythesubjectofintensemanagement,therewasnoneedforadditionalmanagementactivitiesapartfromtheestablishmentofanongoingmonitoringscheme.ThismonitoringschemewouldhavesamplinglocationsbothwithinandoutsideofareasclosedtofishingandiscurrentlybeingcarriedoutbytheWesternAustralianMarineScienceInstitute(WAMSI).

6.3 Implications

Inmostofthe24categories,thetotalscoresandtheprioritiesareconsistentwithboththelevelsofecologicalriskandthecurrentlevelsofactivitybeingundertakenbytheDepartment.Insomecases,however,severerisksassociatedwiththebenthichabitatsinestuarine/embaymentsdidnotresultinahighDepartmentalprioritybecausenearlyalloftheriskisgeneratedbyactivities(e.g.harbourdredging,sedimentation)thataremanagedbyotheragencies.Similarly,thepriorityfor


finfishwithinestuariesisnotashighasexpectedjustfromtherisklevel,becausethemajorityoftherisktothesestocksisgeneratedbyexternalfactors,suchascoastaldevelopmentresultinginsedimentation/lossofhabitat,agriculturalrun-offetc.TheDepartmenthasalreadybannedthecaptureofthosestocksmostatriskandworkswiththeotheragenciesthatareresponsibleforcatchmentmanagementtotryandinfluenceimprovementstowaterqualityoutcomes.

OneareawherethereappearstobeamismatchbetweenthepriorityscoreandthecurrentlevelofDepartmentalactivityisforintroducedpestsanddiseases.Thisscoredamediumtohighprioritybutcurrentlythereareveryfewresourcesassignedtothisissue.Havingbeenidentified,thissituationisnowbeingaddressedthroughbothbudgetaryreprioritisationofexistingresourcesandfromsubmissionstogovernmenttocoverthisexpandingriskarea.

Table 5 Outcome from the multi-criteria assessment for the evaluation of ecological assets in the West Coast Bioregion in 20093. The risk scores used are the outcomes of the consolidated risk assessments. The criteria for scoring GVP and Social Amenity are located in Table 3.

ASSET /ISSUEStock/

Environ Risk

GVPEconomic

RiskSocial

AmenitySocial Risk

Other Human

External Impacts

on Stock/ Env. Risk

Total Score and Overall Current Priority

12. WC Crustaceans - Shelf (Lobster)

3 5 5 3 3 0 102 Urgent

8. WC Finfish - Inshore Demersal

5 2 4 4 4 1 96 Urgent

7. WC Finfish – Nearshore

4 1 3 5 4 0 92 Urgent

22. WC Governance - External Linkages

2 5 4 5 4 0 80 Urgent

21. WC Governance - Internal Processes

2 5 4 5 4 0 80 Urgent

3. WC Ecosystem – Abrolhos

3 5 3 5 2 0 75 High

11. WC Crustaceans - nearshore/estuarine

4 2 3 5 3 0.5 73.5 High

23. WC External - Climate Change

3 5 3 5 2 1 50 Medium

24. WC External - Introduced Pests & Diseases

3 3 1 3 4 0 45 Medium

13. WC Molluscs –nearshore

3 4 2 3 2 0 42 Medium

2. WC Ecosystem – Marine

3 5 2 5 2 1 40 Medium

6. WC Finfish – Estuarine

5 1 3 4 4 3 38 Medium

3 Notetheserisksandprioritieshavebeenupdatedsincetheseweredevelopedin2009.


ASSET /ISSUEStock/

Environ Risk

GVPEconomic

RiskSocial

AmenitySocial Risk

Other Human

External Impacts

on Stock/ Env. Risk

Total Score and Overall Current Priority

14. WC Protected species - non fish – mammals

3 1 1 3 3 0 30 Medium

1. WC Ecosystem – Estuarine

4 3 3 4 4 4 25 Low

9. WC Finfish -Offshore Demersal

4 2 2 1 1 0 20 Low

19. WC Benthic - Inshore Demersal

2 5 1 4 1 0 18 Low

17. WC Benthic - Estuaries

5 1 3 3 4 4 15 Low

4. LN Ecosystem Estuarine

4 3 2 3 3 3 15 Low

5. LN Ecosystem marine

2 1 1 3 2 0 14 Very Low

15. WC Protected species - non fish – non mammals

2 1 1 4 3 1 13 Very Low

18. WC Benthic - Nearshore

2 3 1 4 2 1 11 Very Low

20. WC Benthic - Offshore

2 1 1 2 1 0 6 Very Low

16. WC Protected species - fish

1 1 0 3 2 0 6 Very Low

10. WC Finfish- Pelagic

2 1 1 1 1 0 4 Very Low

Integrating EBFM into departmental planning and reporting

FollowingthecompletionoftheEBFMbasedassessmentfortheWestCoastBioregion,thevalueofthisapproachwasreviewedbytheCorporateExecutivegroupwithintheDepartmentanditwasagreedthattheDepartment’sRiskRegister,whichisthebasisforthebudgetplanningprocess,wouldberevisedusingthesetofEBFMecologicalassetsfromeachoftheState’sBioregions(ofwhichtheWestCoastisone)astheprimarycategories.Thissystemwillbeupdatedannuallybasedontheoutcomesofthepreviousyear’sactivitiesandanyresultingshiftsinrisk/valuescoresfordeterminingthebudgetprioritiesforthefollowingyear.

ThemeasurementoftheDepartment’sperformanceinmanagingtheseregionallevelecologicalassetshasalreadybegunwiththecurrentstatusandsummaryofactivitiesfortheWestCoastassetsnowincludedintheAnnualReportstoParliament(e.g.seeDoF,2011).Thisreportingisexpectedtobecomemorecomprehensiveoverthenextfiveyears.


7.0 Summary EBFM outcomes

Thefollowingsetoftablessummarisesthestatusandrisklevelsforeachoftheconsolidatedassets in 20094.ThetablealsooutlineswhatcurrentactivitiesareunderwayplustheDepartmentallevelofrelativepriorityforthisissueforfutureactivities.Forexample,anecosystem/valuemaybedeterminedtobeathighriskduetosubstantialnon-fishingimpacts.ThepriorityforfutureDepartmentofFisheriesactivitiesforthisvaluewouldbelowerthaniftheriskwasduetofishing-relatedactivities(see‘Residualrisk’and‘Agencyprioritysettingformula’).Notetheserisksarebasedonafiveyearfuturehorizon,notnecessarilythesameratingasforcurrentstatus.

4 ThistableisnowupdatedannuallyandreportedintheStateofFisheriesandAquaticResourcesReport–someriskscoreshavethereforechanged


7.1

Eco

syst

em s

truct

ure

an

d b

iodiv

ersi

ty

Obj

ectiv

es -

H

IGH

LE

VE

L -

Mai

ntai

n he

alth

y fu

nctio

nal e

cosy

stem

s

S

PE

CIF

IC F

ISH

ER

Y -

Man

age

cum

ulat

ive

fishe

ries

impa

cts

at a

ccep

tabl

e le

vels

Eco

syst

em

Ris

k L

evel

Sta

tus

Cu

rren

t A

ctiv

itie

s

Pri

ori

ty f

or

futu

re

Dep

artm

ent

of

Fis

her

ies

Act

ivit

ies

Abr

olho

s Is

land

s M

arin

e

LOW

-

ME

DIU

M

The

Abr

olho

s Is

land

s ar

e m

anag

ed w

ithin

a ‘F

ish

Hab

itat

Pro

tect

ion

Are

a’,

and

are

not

curr

ently

co

nsid

ered

to

be a

t m

ajor

ris

k fr

om f

ishe

ries

rela

ted

activ

ities

. T

his

risk

leve

l was

ass

esse

d ba

sed

upon

the

ac

cept

ance

tha

t w

hile

the

re h

as li

kely

bee

n a

chan

ge

in t

he r

elat

ive

com

posi

tion

of s

ome

finfis

h sp

ecie

s th

ere

does

not

, ap

pear

to

have

bee

n ei

ther

a lo

ss o

f bi

odiv

ersi

ty o

r a

notic

eabl

e ch

ange

in t

he t

ypes

of

com

mun

ities

pre

sent

. T

his

ecos

yste

m w

ill b

e es

peci

ally

vul

nera

ble

to c

limat

e ch

ange

impa

cts

due

to t

he u

niqu

e co

mbi

natio

n of

mac

ro a

lgae

and

cor

al.

The

re a

re a

num

ber

of r

esea

rch

prog

ram

s in

thi

s ec

osys

tem

. T

hese

incl

ude

mon

itorin

g of

the

hea

lth

of c

oral

com

mun

ities

at

the

Abr

olho

s Is

land

s. T

his

prog

ram

, ut

ilise

s pe

rman

ent

cora

l tra

nsec

ts lo

cate

d at

eac

h of

the

isla

nd g

roup

s, w

ill c

olle

ct im

port

ant

base

line

info

rmat

ion

on c

oral

com

mun

ities

, al

low

ing

rese

arch

ers

to q

uant

ify w

heth

er lo

bste

r fis

hing

w

ith p

ots

resu

lts in

dam

age

to s

ensi

tive

cora

l ha

bita

ts,

and

to d

eter

min

e th

e vu

lner

abili

ty o

f co

ral

com

mun

ities

at

the

Abr

olho

s to

clim

ate

chan

ge.

Sur

veys

of

the

com

mun

ity s

truc

ture

of

finfis

h ar

e al

so

unde

rway

as

part

of

the

WA

MS

I in

itiat

ive.

Sco

re –

75

Hig

h


Eco

syst

em

Ris

k L

evel

Sta

tus

Cu

rren

t A

ctiv

itie

s

Pri

ori

ty f

or

futu

re

Dep

artm

ent

of

Fis

her

ies

Act

ivit

ies

Wes

t C

oast

Mar

ine

LOW

–

ME

DIU

M

An

asse

ssm

ent

of c

omm

unity

str

uctu

re a

nd t

roph

ic

leve

l of

all c

omm

erci

ally

cau

ght

fish

spec

ies

over

th

e pa

st 3

0 ye

ars

thro

ugh

an F

RD

C f

unde

d st

udy

foun

d no

evi

denc

e of

sys

tem

atic

cha

nges

tha

t co

uld

be v

iew

ed e

vide

nce

of a

n un

acce

ptab

le im

pact

of

fishi

ng o

n th

is e

cosy

stem

.A

rec

ently

com

plet

ed F

RD

C f

unde

d pr

ojec

t pr

ovid

ed

criti

cal i

nfor

mat

ion

on t

he r

elat

ions

hips

bet

wee

n ro

ck

lobs

ter

abun

danc

e, s

ize

dist

ribut

ions

and

ben

thic

ha

bita

t ch

arac

teris

tics

in d

eep

wat

er,

and

prel

imin

ary

data

on

the

trop

hic

role

of

rock

lobs

ter

in d

eep

wat

er

ecos

yste

ms.

Fur

ther

eco

logi

cal r

esea

rch

in d

eep

wat

ers,

su

ppor

ted

by W

AM

SI

and

the

FR

DC

, w

ill c

ompa

re

fishe

d an

d un

fishe

d ar

eas

usin

g a

deep

-wat

er

refe

renc

e ar

ea. A

key

obj

ectiv

e of

thi

s pr

ojec

t w

ill

be t

o en

able

pot

entia

l eco

syst

em im

pact

s of

lobs

ter

fishi

ng t

o be

qua

ntifi

ed.

Dev

elop

men

t of

sam

plin

g m

etho

dolo

gies

to

effe

ctiv

ely

mon

itor

bent

hic

habi

tats

in

fis

hed

and

unfis

hed

area

s.M

ajor

exp

erim

enta

l and

mod

ellin

g ba

sed

proj

ects

are

un

derw

ay a

t Ju

rien

Bay

by

CS

IRO

and

EC

U t

hrou

gh

WA

MS

I no

de 1

.

Sco

re –

40

Mod

erat

e

Est

uarie

s

HIG

H –

S

EV

ER

E

The

est

uarie

s an

d em

baym

ents

with

in t

his

area

ha

ve b

een

iden

tifie

d as

bei

ng a

t se

vere

ris

k, d

ue

to e

xter

nal f

acto

rs (

wat

er q

ualit

y is

sues

due

to

high

nu

trie

nt r

unof

f fr

om s

urro

undi

ng c

atch

men

t),

whi

ch

have

the

pot

entia

l to

affe

ct f

ish

com

mun

ities

. P

oor

wat

er q

ualit

y w

ithin

the

Pee

l – H

arve

y an

d S

wan

-C

anni

ng e

stua

ries,

and

Coc

kbur

n S

ound

are

of

part

icul

ar c

once

rn.

The

Por

t of

Fre

man

tle p

rovi

ded

fund

ing

to t

he

Dep

artm

ent

to a

sses

s th

e po

tent

ial i

mpa

cts

of a

pr

opos

ed n

ew o

uter

por

t de

velo

pmen

t in

Coc

kbur

n S

ound

on

impo

rtan

t as

pect

s of

the

bio

logy

of

the

nativ

e fa

una,

and

use

r gr

oups

in t

he v

icin

ity. A

fin

al

repo

rt w

as r

ecen

tly p

repa

red

and

com

bine

d w

ith

asso

ciat

ed s

tudi

es u

nder

take

n by

oth

er o

rgan

isat

ions

on

asp

ects

of

the

prop

osed

dev

elop

men

t. T

hese

as

pect

s in

clud

ed m

odel

led

chan

ges

to c

ircul

atio

n pa

ttern

s in

Coc

kbur

n S

ound

, an

d po

tent

ial i

mpa

cts

to p

engu

in a

nd d

olph

in p

opul

atio

ns,

to a

llow

for

a f

ull

risk

asse

ssm

ent

of t

he p

ropo

sed

deve

lopm

ent.

Mur

doch

Uni

vers

ity is

und

erta

king

a n

umbe

r of

ec

osys

tem

bas

ed s

tudi

es a

nd m

odel

ling

wor

k w

ithin

the

Sw

an R

iver

and

the

Pee

l Har

vey

and

Lesc

hena

ult

estu

arie

s as

par

t of

the

WA

MS

I no

de 4

.

Sco

re –

25

Low


Eco

syst

em

Ris

k L

evel

Sta

tus

Cu

rren

t A

ctiv

itie

s

Pri

ori

ty f

or

futu

re

Dep

artm

ent

of

Fis

her

ies

Act

ivit

ies

Leeu

win

-N

atur

alis

teM

arin

e

LOW

The

ris

ks o

f si

gnifi

cant

impa

cts

on t

he m

arin

e co

mm

uniti

es in

thi

s re

gion

are

rel

ativ

ely

low

in t

his

regi

on.

Sco

re –

14

Ver

y Lo

w

Est

uarie

sH

IGH

E

xter

nal f

acto

rs s

uch

as w

ater

qua

lity

issu

es in

th

e B

lack

woo

d E

stua

ry,

due

to h

igh

nutr

ient

run

-off

from

sur

roun

ding

land

, as

wel

l as

acid

sul

phat

e so

il co

ntam

inat

ion

are

of c

once

rn t

o su

stai

nabl

e fis

h st

ocks

Sco

re –

15

Low

7.2

Cap

ture

d f

ish

spec

ies

Obj

ectiv

es –

H

IGH

LE

VE

L -

Mai

ntai

n at

leve

ls t

hat

are

cons

iste

nt w

ith e

cosy

stem

fun

ctio

n.

S

PE

CIF

IC F

ISH

ER

Y-

Mai

ntai

n sp

awni

ng b

iom

ass

of a

ll ca

ptur

ed s

peci

es a

t le

ast

abov

e th

e le

vel t

hat

min

imis

es t

he r

isk

of r

ecru

itmen

t ov

er f

ishi

ng.

Sp

ecie

s A

ssem

bla

ge

Ris

k le

vel

Sta

tus

Cu

rren

t A

ctiv

itie

sP

rio

rity

fo

r fu

ture

A

ctiv

itie

sF

infis

hE

stua

rine

SE

VE

RE

W

est

coas

t es

tuar

ies

are

high

ly

mod

ified

, an

d of

ten

degr

aded

, en

viro

nmen

ts.

In t

hese

est

uarie

s, t

he

impa

cts

of e

nviro

nmen

tal f

acto

rs o

n fis

h st

ock

abun

danc

es a

re li

kely

to

be a

t le

ast

as im

port

ant

as f

ishi

ng

pres

sure

. M

anag

emen

t of

fis

h co

mm

uniti

es

in w

est

coas

t es

tuar

ies

requ

ires

a co

llabo

rativ

e ef

fort

bet

wee

n fis

hery

an

d ha

bita

t m

anag

ers.

With

red

uced

leve

ls o

f co

mm

erci

al f

ishi

ng in

the

se e

stua

ries,

th

e re

sear

ch f

ocus

has

shi

fted

to g

athe

r a

grea

ter

leve

l of

info

rmat

ion

from

the

rec

reat

iona

l sec

tor

and

fishe

ry-in

depe

nden

t so

urce

s. R

esea

rch

to m

onito

r th

e st

atus

of

the

fish

stoc

ks in

th

is f

ishe

ry is

bas

ed o

n fis

hery

-inde

pend

ent

surv

eys

of a

nnua

l re

crui

tmen

t, m

onth

ly C

AE

S r

etur

ns p

rovi

ded

by in

dust

ry a

nd

volu

ntar

y re

crea

tiona

l log

book

s.

Sco

re –

38

Mod

erat

e


Sp

ecie

s A

ssem

bla

ge

Ris

k le

vel

Sta

tus

Cu

rren

t A

ctiv

itie

sP

rio

rity

fo

r fu

ture

A

ctiv

itie

sF

infis

hIn

shor

e D

emer

sal

SE

VE

RE

Con

cern

s fo

r th

e su

ite o

f de

mer

sal

spec

ies

(whi

ch in

clud

es d

hufis

h,

pink

sna

pper

, ba

ldch

in g

rope

r) w

ere

conf

irmed

fol

low

ing

rece

nt r

evie

ws

of

the

stoc

k as

sess

men

ts c

ompl

eted

for

th

e th

ree

indi

cato

r sp

ecie

s.

Str

ong

man

agem

ent

actio

ns h

ave

now

bee

n ta

ken

on

both

com

mer

cial

and

rec

reat

iona

l sec

tors

. D

eter

min

ing

the

appr

opria

te c

atch

sha

res

for

com

mer

cial

and

rec

reat

iona

l use

rs

is n

ow u

nder

con

side

ratio

n th

roug

h th

e IF

AA

C p

roce

ss.

The

re

is o

ngoi

ng m

onito

ring

of t

he a

ge s

truc

ture

of

the

indi

cato

rs a

nd

the

catc

h le

vels

of

each

cat

chin

g se

ctor

. W

ork

on t

he s

tock

st

ruct

ure

and

ocea

nogr

aphi

c in

fluen

ces

is a

lso

unde

rway

by

WA

MS

I pr

ojec

ts.

Sco

re –

96

Urg

ent

Nea

r-sh

ore

Dem

ersa

lH

IGH

The

are

incr

easi

ng c

once

rns

for

Aus

tral

ian

Her

ring,

tai

lor

and

skip

jack

tr

eval

ly a

nd w

hitin

g in

the

nea

rsho

re

regi

on g

iven

the

pot

entia

l for

re

crea

tiona

l fis

hing

leve

ls t

o in

crea

se

due

to in

crea

sed

man

agem

ent

cont

rols

on

popu

lar

insh

ore

dem

ersa

l sp

ecie

s.

Two

new

NR

M a

nd F

RD

C f

unde

d pr

ojec

ts h

ave

begu

n to

ex

amin

e th

e st

atus

of

the

key

indi

cato

r st

ocks

in t

his

suite

of

spe

cies

. T

hese

will

com

plim

ent

the

wor

k th

at is

has

bee

n un

derw

ay m

onito

ring

recr

uitm

ent

of k

ey s

peci

es o

ver

the

past

10

yea

rs.

Sco

re-

88U

rgen

t

Offs

hore

D

emer

sal

ME

DIU

M –

HIG

H

Som

e of

the

key

indi

cato

r sp

ecie

s in

thi

s de

epw

ater

loca

tion

are

vuln

erab

le t

o ov

erfis

hing

. O

verla

ps in

ca

tch

also

exi

st w

ith C

omm

onw

ealth

tr

awl v

esse

ls.

Man

agem

ent

arra

ngem

ents

for

to

cove

r fis

hing

in t

hese

dep

ths,

es

peci

ally

for

rec

reat

iona

l sec

tor,

are

in t

he p

roce

ss o

f be

ing

final

ised

.

Sco

re –

20

Low

Pel

agic

LOW

T

here

is n

ow m

inim

al c

aptu

re o

f pe

lagi

c fis

h in

thi

s bi

oreg

ion.

Low

leve

l mon

itorin

g of

cat

ch le

vels

onl

y ar

e ne

eded

. S

core

– 4

Ver

y Lo

wC

rust

acea

nsE

stua

rine

(Cra

bs)

ME

DIU

M -

H

IGH

The

sto

cks

of c

rabs

in C

ockb

urn

Sou

nd h

ave

been

at

depl

eted

leve

ls

for

the

past

few

yea

rs b

ut a

re n

ow

in t

he p

roce

ss o

f re

cove

ry s

ince

the

cl

osur

e of

fis

hing

occ

urre

d in

200

7.

Sto

cks

in o

ther

reg

ions

of

the

Wes

t C

oast

are

bei

ng r

evie

wed

.

Res

earc

h fu

ndin

g (D

BIF

) w

as o

btai

ned

in 2

007

to (

a) a

sses

s re

cove

ry o

f bl

ue s

wim

mer

cra

b sp

awni

ng s

tock

and

rec

ruitm

ent

in C

ockb

urn

Sou

nd (

b) e

xam

ine

the

gene

tic d

iffer

ence

bet

wee

n th

e C

ockb

urn

Sou

nd s

tock

with

tha

t in

War

nbro

Sou

nd a

nd

the

Sw

an R

iver

; (c

) un

dert

ake

a 12

mon

th r

ecre

atio

nal s

urve

y in

the

Pee

l-Har

vey

estu

ary;

(d)

ass

ess

the

stat

us o

f th

e cr

ab

popu

latio

n in

the

Pee

l-Har

vey

estu

ary

(e)

unde

rtak

e co

mm

erci

al

mon

itorin

g in

the

Wes

t C

oast

Est

uarin

e, W

arnb

ro S

ound

and

M

andu

rah-

Bun

bury

fis

herie

s.U

sing

the

dat

a co

llect

ed t

he C

ockb

urn

Sou

nd is

rev

iew

ed

annu

ally

. M

anag

emen

t in

the

Man

dura

h re

gion

will

be

revi

ewed

in

201

0 to

det

erm

ine

whe

n th

e re

sear

ch r

esul

ts a

re a

vaila

ble.

Sco

re –

73.

5 H

igh


Sp

ecie

s A

ssem

bla

ge

Ris

k le

vel

Sta

tus

Cu

rren

t A

ctiv

itie

sP

rio

rity

fo

r fu

ture

A

ctiv

itie

sS

helf(

Lobs

ters

an

d pr

awns

)

ME

DIU

M

Des

pite

rec

ent

low

rec

ruitm

ent

leve

ls

the

stro

ng m

anag

emen

t th

at is

bei

ng

appl

ied

to t

he r

ock

lobs

ter

fishe

ry

shou

ld e

nsur

e th

e st

ock

leve

ls o

f ke

y cr

usta

cean

s in

thi

s re

gion

, w

este

rn

rock

lobs

ters

and

pra

wns

are

bot

h cu

rren

tly a

t ap

prop

riate

leve

ls.

In a

dditi

on t

o th

e lo

ng s

tand

ing

com

preh

ensi

ve m

onito

ring

of t

he

lobs

ter

fishe

ry,

new

res

earc

h pr

ojec

ts a

re lo

okin

g at

iden

tifyi

ng

fact

ors

affe

ctin

g th

e lo

w w

este

rn r

ock

lobs

ter

puer

ulus

se

ttlem

ent

in r

ecen

t ye

ars.

Inc

ludi

ng g

enet

ics,

oce

anog

raph

ic

stud

ies

and

mod

ellin

g.E

xten

sive

cha

nges

hav

e be

en m

ade

to t

he m

anag

emen

t of

the

co

mm

erci

al lo

bste

r fis

hery

to

ensu

re t

hat

the

spaw

ning

sto

ck

rem

ains

at

acce

ptab

le le

vels

into

the

fut

ure.

Sco

re –

102

Urg

ent

Mol

lusc

sN

ears

hore

ME

DIU

M

The

sto

cks

of a

balo

ne a

re

cons

erva

tivel

y m

anag

ed w

ith s

tron

g m

anag

emen

t co

ntro

ls o

n bo

th

com

mer

cial

and

rec

reat

iona

l fis

hers

.

Long

-sta

ndin

g re

sear

ch m

onito

ring

and

stric

t m

anag

emen

t ar

rang

emen

ts a

re li

kely

to

cont

inue

for

bot

h se

ctor

s.E

xplic

it ac

cess

allo

catio

ns t

o ea

ch s

ecto

r ha

ve b

een

dete

rmin

ed

thro

ugh

the

IFM

pro

cess

com

plet

ed in

200

9.

Sco

re –

42

Mod

erat

e


7.3

Pr

ote

cted

spec

ies

Obj

ectiv

es –

H

IGH

LE

VE

L -

Fis

herie

s ar

e co

nduc

ted

in a

man

ner

that

avo

ids

mor

talit

y of

, or

inju

ries

to,

enda

nger

ed,

thre

aten

ed o

r pr

otec

ted

spec

ies.

S

PE

CIF

IC F

ISH

ER

Y -

Cum

ulat

ive

impa

cts

of a

ll W

A f

ishi

ng a

ctiv

ities

do

not

gene

rate

unac

cept

able

impa

cts.

Pro

tect

ed

fish

sp

ecie

sR

isk

leve

l S

tatu

sC

urr

ent

Act

ivit

ies

Pri

ori

ty

Pro

tect

ed

non

‘Fis

h’

spec

ies

Tur

tles

LOW

RIS

KT

here

is m

inim

al im

pact

of

any

fishi

ng

activ

ity o

n an

y tu

rtle

spe

cies

with

in t

his

bior

egio

n.

Mon

itorin

g in

tera

ctio

ns o

nly.

All

maj

or f

ishe

ries

have

bee

n as

sess

ed u

nder

Par

t 13

of

the

Com

mon

wea

lth E

PB

C a

ct t

o en

sure

the

y ar

e no

t ca

ptur

ing

unac

cept

able

leve

ls.

Sco

re -

13

Lo

w

Sea

bird

sLO

W

-ME

DIU

M

RIS

K

Littl

e P

engu

ins

are

cons

ider

ed a

t ris

k fr

om f

ishi

ng a

nd b

oatin

g (b

oat

strik

es)

in t

his

regi

on.

Mon

itorin

g in

tera

ctio

ns o

nly

All

maj

or f

ishe

ries

have

bee

n as

sess

ed u

nder

Par

t 13

of

the

Com

mon

wea

lth E

PB

C a

ct t

o en

sure

the

y ar

e no

t ca

ptur

ing

unac

cept

able

leve

ls.

Mam

mal

sLO

W R

ISK

Sea

lion

exc

lusi

on d

evic

es (

SLE

Ds)

re

quire

d fo

r ro

ck lo

bste

r po

ts n

ear

sea

lion

bree

ding

isla

nds

has

redu

ced

the

leve

l of

risk.

Aus

tral

ian

Sea

Lio

ns a

nd S

outh

ern

Rig

ht W

hale

inte

ract

ions

may

incr

ease

in

fut

ure

with

incr

easi

ng n

umbe

rs.

Impl

emen

ting

SLE

Ds

into

the

Abr

olho

s Is

land

s in

add

ition

to

the

area

aro

und

Jurie

n B

ay c

olon

y is

und

er d

iscu

ssio

n.M

onito

ring

inte

ract

ions

con

tinue

s.A

ll m

ajor

fis

herie

s ha

ve b

een

asse

ssed

und

er P

art

13 o

f th

e C

omm

onw

ealth

EP

BC

act

to

ensu

re t

hey

are

not

capt

urin

g un

acce

ptab

le le

vels

.

Sco

re –

30

Mod

erat

e

Pro

tect

ed

‘Fis

h’

Spe

cies

Fis

hLO

W-M

ED

IUM

R

ISK

Blu

e gr

oper

(R

ottn

est

Isla

nd),

and

C

obbl

er (

Sw

an C

anni

ng)

Whi

te S

hark

s.

Ban

s on

the

cap

ture

and

ret

entio

n of

the

se s

peci

es h

as a

lread

y oc

curr

ed.

All

maj

or f

ishe

ries

have

bee

n as

sess

ed u

nder

Par

t 13

of

the

Com

mon

wea

lths

EP

BC

act

to

ensu

re t

hey

are

not

capt

urin

g un

acce

ptab

le le

vels

.

Sco

re -

6V

ery

Low

Cru

stac

eans

No

RIS

KN

A

Mol

lusc

sLO

W R

ISK

Few

spe

cies

in t

his

cate

gory

.N

A


7.4

B

enth

ic h

abit

ats

Obj

ectiv

es –

H

IGH

LE

VE

L -

Mai

ntai

n he

alth

y an

d pr

oduc

tive

habi

tats

SP

EC

IFIC

FIS

HE

RY

- E

nsur

e di

rect

impa

cts

on h

abita

ts f

rom

fis

hing

are

mai

ntai

ned

at a

ccep

tabl

e le

vels

.

Ben

thic

Hab

itat

Ris

k le

vel

Sta

tus

Cu

rren

t A

ctiv

itie

s P

rio

rity

Est

uarie

s an

d E

mba

ymen

tsS

and

HIG

H

(non

–fis

hing

)

Man

y sa

nd h

abita

ts in

est

uarin

e an

d em

baym

ent

habi

tats

are

thr

eate

ned

by f

acto

rs s

uch

as p

oor

wat

er q

ualit

y, d

irect

loss

of

habi

tat

thro

ugh

coas

tal

infr

astr

uctu

re a

nd p

hysi

cal d

istu

rban

ce e

.g.

dred

ging

), s

edim

enta

tion

and

smot

herin

g by

alg

ae.

The

re a

re m

inim

al im

pact

s of

fis

hing

on

thes

e ha

bita

ts.

Rev

iew

and

com

men

t on

any

app

licat

ions

su

bmitt

ed t

o E

PA

on

pote

ntia

l im

pact

on

thes

e ha

bita

ts.

Sco

re -

15Lo

w

Sea

gras

sM

ED

IUM

R

ISK

(n

on-

fishi

ng)

Sea

gras

s ha

bita

t th

reat

ened

non

-fis

hing

rel

ated

ac

tiviti

es (

coas

tal i

nfra

stru

ctur

e an

d as

soci

ated

dr

edgi

ng (

dire

ct h

abita

t lo

ss,

turb

idity

).

Rev

iew

and

com

men

t on

any

app

licat

ions

su

bmitt

ed t

o E

PA

on

pote

ntia

l im

pact

on

thes

e ha

bita

ts.

Nea

rsho

reS

and

LOW

RIS

K M

inim

al d

irect

impa

cts

and

high

rec

over

y ra

tes.

Rev

iew

and

com

men

t on

any

app

licat

ions

su

bmitt

ed t

o E

PA

on

pote

ntia

l im

pact

on

thes

e ha

bita

ts.

Sco

re –

11

Ver

y Lo

w

Sea

gras

sLO

W R

ISK

No

dest

ruct

ive

fishi

ng m

etho

ds a

llow

ed in

the

se

area

s. M

ost

likel

y im

pact

s fr

om d

evel

opm

ents

. R

evie

w a

nd c

omm

ent

on a

ny a

pplic

atio

ns

subm

itted

to

EP

A o

n po

tent

ial i

mpa

ct o

n th

ese

habi

tats

.M

angr

oves

ME

DIU

M

RIS

K(n

on-f

ishi

ng)

Man

grov

e co

mm

uniti

es a

t Abr

olho

s Is

land

s.R

evie

w a

nd c

omm

ent

on a

ny a

pplic

atio

ns

subm

itted

to

EP

A o

n po

tent

ial i

mpa

ct o

n th

ese

habi

tats

.

Roc

ky R

eef

LOW

RIS

KM

inim

al d

irect

impa

cts

and

high

rec

over

y ra

tes.

Wor

k fr

om t

he r

ock

lobs

ter

ecos

yste

m s

tudi

es

will

pro

vide

info

rmat

ion

abou

t th

is h

abita

t. C

oral

Ree

fLO

W R

ISK

Min

imal

dire

ct im

pact

s.P

erm

anen

t co

ral t

rans

ects

loca

ted

at e

ach

of t

he A

brol

hos

isla

nd g

roup

s, w

ill c

olle

ct

impo

rtan

t ba

selin

e in

form

atio

n on

cor

al

com

mun

ities

, al

low

ing

rese

arch

ers

to q

uant

ify

whe

ther

lobs

ter

fishi

ng w

ith p

ots

resu

lts in

da

mag

e to

sen

sitiv

e co

ral h

abita

ts.


Ben

thic

Hab

itat

Ris

k le

vel

Sta

tus

Cu

rren

t A

ctiv

itie

s P

rio

rity

Insh

ore

dem

ersa

lA

ll H

abita

ts

LOW

RIS

KM

inim

al d

irect

impa

cts.

W

ork

from

the

roc

k lo

bste

r ec

osys

tem

stu

dies

w

ill p

rovi

de in

form

atio

n ab

out

this

hab

itat.

Sco

re –

18

Low

Offs

hore

de

mer

sal

All

Hab

itats

LO

W R

ISK

Min

imal

dire

ct im

pact

s.N

ilS

core

– 6

Ver

y Lo

w


8.0 Discussion

8.1 General

ThepurposeofthiscasestudywastoassesswhethertheEBFMframeworkcanassistnaturalresourcemanagementplanningfortheoptimalmanagementofmarineresourcesatabioregionallevel.Itwasalsotheintentiontoensurethattheplanningstructures,tomeetthelegislativeresponsibilitiesoftheDepartmentofFisheries,werebeingundertakeninaholisticmanner.TheEBFMframeworkthatwasdevelopedthroughthiscasestudywasultimatelysuccessfulinmeetingbothoftheseobjectivesbecauseapragmatic,management-focusedapproachwastaken.

UndertakinganEBFMprocessthatcoveredanentirebioregioncouldhaveeasilybecometoocomplextobeofanypracticalvalueformanagement.Thesystemneededtodevelopthemechanismstointegratetheissuesidentifiedandinformationgatheredintoaformthatcouldbeusedbyamanagementagency.Inparticular,arisk-basedapproachhadtobeusedsothatautomaticcollectionofmoredataand/ortheexpectationfordirectmanagementofallidentifiedissuesdidnotoccurunlesssuchactionswerenecessary.

TheEBFMframeworkalsohadtoaccommodatetheexpectationsofstakeholdersinarealisticmanner.Thisinitiallyinvolvedcapturingallrelevantissuesofconcern(orperceivedconcern)fortheWestCoastBioregionatthelevelofinterestofthevariousstakeholdergroups.Whilethislargenumberofindividualelementswereultimatelyconsolidatedintoregionallevelassets,thedetailswerenotlostbutaresubjecttoperiodicreview(seeAppendix1fordetails).Moreover,theseassessmentswillgenerallyformthebasisofdetailedworkplansfortheprojectsdesignedtoaddresstherisksassociatedwiththerelevantconsolidatedasset.Theframeworkdealswiththemulti-fisherynatureoftheissuesbecauseitisabletointegratetheexistingmanagementarrangementsandinformationavailableattheindividualfisherylevel,andnotmerelyreplicateprocesses.Finally,clearlydeterminingtherelativepriorityofissues,allowsforamoreefficientuseofgovernmentresourcesbecauseanyexpenditureonresearch,complianceorpolicyprojects,whichiscurrentlydirectedtowardslow-riskelements,could(andshould)beredirectedtowardshigherriskelements.

TheEBFMframeworkoutlinedhereassessestherisksandprioritiesassociatedwithhavingeffectivemanagementattheregionallevel.Itdoesnotascertainwhatprecisemanagementapproachesmightbeappliedtothespecificrisksidentified.Thisstepshouldremainpartoftheindividualfisheryplansandrisksmustalsobeviewedascriticaltoachievingbroaderobjectives.Thetwoprocesses:riskassessmentandthedeterminationofmanagementapproachesarenotindependent processes.

Giventhelargescaleoftheregionandthepotentiallylimitlessissuesthatcouldbecovered,theapproachtakentoapplytheEBFMprincipleswasnecessarilypragmatic.Thedecisionsonwhatwouldbethespecificconsolidatedassetsandcategoriesdeterminedbytheprocesssometimeshadtoinvolvecompromises,butthealternativesprobablywouldnotnoticeablyaffecttheoveralloutcome.Similarly,someoftheriskandvaluescorescouldberefined,butgenerallynotbyadegreethatwouldmateriallychangetheoverallpriorityforanasset.Finally,thescoringsystemusedfortheprioritisationofdepartmentalriskshadtobesufficientlysimplesoitcouldbeappliedinallcircumstances.Ifthesystemwastoocomplexitwasunlikelytohavebeenadopted.


TheformuladevelopedtogeneratetheprioritieswasappropriateforourcircumstancesgiventhelegislativeresponsibilitieswithintheFisheriesAct.Thedetailsofthismaynotbeappropriateinallcircumstances,suchasiftheoneagencyisresponsibleforallmarinemattersorwhereadifferentemphasishastobeplacedonsocialoreconomicoutcomes.Wehavenowchangedthecalculationtoenableawholeofgovernment(EBM)scoretobegeneratedinadditiontotheEBFM score for use just by the Department of Fisheries.

Theprocessofexplicitlyarticulatinghowprioritiesareeffectivelydeterminedwasitselfaveryusefulexerciseasthisstephadpreviouslyusedanimplicitprocessandislikelytohavebeenappliedinconsistently.AvaluableoutcomewastherecognitionthatwehadalreadybeenimplicitlydiscountingtherisksgeneratedbyactivitiesunderotherlegislativemanagementsystemswhendeterminingDepartmentalpriorities.Hence,thiswasnotonlyusefulforsettingourinternalprioritiesfordirectmanagementactionsbutalsofordiscussionswithotheragenciesplusgovernmentaboutwhetherthecurrentjurisdictionalandmanagementresponsibilitiesareappropriate.

TheapplicationandconsolidationoftheEBFMframeworktoidentifyandassignrisksfortheWestCoastBioregionandthenconsolidatingtheseuptoalevelthatwaspracticalformanagement,hasnotonlyassistedinimprovingtheplanningprocesses,buthasalsorevitalisedtheapproachtoidentifyingandmanagingtherisksacrosstheentireportfoliooftheDepartment.Ithasreinforcedtheformaladoptionofriskmanagementprinciplesastheappropriatebasisfornaturalresourcemanagementagencies(Fletcher2008;Fletcheretal.,2010).

FollowingthesuccessfulcompletionoftheEBFMprocessfortheWestCoastBioregion(whicheffectivelytook2yearstocomplete),thesameprincipleshavesubsequentlybeenappliedtotheotherbioregionsinWesternAustralia.NowthataclearformathasbeengeneratedandtherearedetailedexamplesfromtheWestCoasttouseasaguide,thetimetakentoundertaketheseassessmentshasbeensubstantiallyshorter(afewmonths).UpdatingtherisksisnowplannedtooccuronanannualbasisasaformalpartoftheDepartmentalplanningcycle.

AtthebeginningofthestudytherewasahighdegreeofmisunderstandingofEBFMacrosstheagencyandthereforeahighlevelofscepticismwhetherthisprocesswouldgenerateanyusefuloutcomesandevenconcernaboutitspotentialdrainonresources.Thehighlevelofscepticismcontinuedlargelyuntilthestepsthatconsolidatedtheissuesdowntoasmallergroupofassetcategoriesandthemethodstointegratetheecologicalsocialandeconomicfactorsintoasingleanalysistoproducemeaningfulwhole-of-agencyprioritiesweredeveloped.Withouttheseitishighlylikelythattheoutcomefromthiscasestudywouldhavejustbeenseenasanotherresearchprojectthatinvolvedhighlevelsofdatacollectionandconsumedmorethanitsfairshareofresources,staffandstakeholdertime,yetdeliverednothinguseful.

ItissignificantthatnoneoftheindividualprocessesusedwithinthisEBFMframeworkareparticularlynovelorcomplicated.Thecombinationofrelativelysimplestepshas,nonetheless,provenparticularlypowerfulandeffectiveingeneratingregionallevelmanagementoutcomes,anaccomplishmentthathaspreviouslyproventobeextremelydifficulttogenerate.

ThenextphaseinthedevelopmentofthisprocessistoidentifythemechanismstofurtherengageotheragenciesinvolvedinthemanagementofactivitieswithinthemarineenvironmentandtodeterminehowtheirprocessescanlinktotheEBFMframework.


8.2 Conclusion

TheapplicationoftheEBFMframeworkhasnotonlyassistedtheDepartmentofFisheriesinimprovingitsplanningprocessesfornaturalresourcemanagement,buthasalsorevitalisedtheapproachtoidentifyingriskswithintheDepartment.BecausetheEBFMframeworkwasappliedinamannerthatformallycapturedallrelevantelementsofconcern(orperceivedconcern)fortheWestCoastBioregion,thisallowsmoreefficientuseofgovernmentresourceswhenaddressingnaturalresourcemanagementissues.Forexample,expenditureonresearchorpolicyprojectsdirectedtowardslow-riskelementscould(andwill)beredirectedtowardshigherriskelements.

Evaluating whole of agency risk

Prioritisingrisksusingameaningfulandtransparentmethodisfundamentaltoanymanagementprocess.UsingtheESD/EBFMprocessofriskassessment,eachassetorissueunderthejurisdictionoftheDepartmentofFisheriescanbeassignedascoreasaresultoftheecological,socialandeconomicrisksgeneratedfromtheriskassessmentprocess.

OtherissuesidentifiedusingtheEBFMprocess,suchasinstitutionalgovernanceandexternaldrivers,canalsocontributetotherankingandprovideanotionalscorethatcanbeusedtoprioritisewholeofagencyrisk.Inacosteffectivemanner,thisframeworkcanbeusedtodealwithwholeofagencyissuesbyassessingriskandidentifyingpriorities.

This study found that taking an ‘ecosystemapproach’didnot requirehavingdetailedunderstandingoftheecosystemsortheconstructionofcomplexecosystemmodels.Instead,itonlyrequiredtheefficientandsystematicconsiderationofeachecologicalassetintheregionand their associated stakeholder outcomes, to identify those assets that mostrequiredirectmanagementtodeliverthe‘best’outcomesforthecommunity.ThecriticalstepsinachievingEBFMarethereforebeingabletoclearlyidentifytheecologicalassets,linkingthesetosocialandeconomicoutcomesthattheymaygenerateandobjectivelyassessingtheirrisksandoverallpriorityformanagementaction.

ThesimplesetofstepswedevelopedtoimplementEBFMinWAhasenabledadoptionofafullyregional,ecosystembasedapproachwithoutmaterialincreasesinfunding.Ithassuccessfullyreplacedtheprevious,disjointedplanningsystems,withasingle,coordinatedriskbasedsystemthatisalreadygeneratingefficienciesfortheuseofDepartmental(government)resources.HavingacosteffectiveprocessmeansthatEBFMcanbeappliedinallcircumstances,notjustinthoseregionsoftheworldwherealargeamountofresourcesandscientificdataareavailable.

GiventhesuccessofthisapproachtotheWestCoast(e.g.Fletcher,etal.,2010),thisEBFMframeworkhasnowbeenappliedtoallsixbioregionsinWAandtheresultingprioritiesarenowusedasthebasisforannualbudgetsettingbytheDepartment(Fletcheretal.,2011).Thishasthereforebeenahighlysuccessfulproject,theoutcomesofwhichhavealreadyseenmajorchangestotheoperationsandplanningprocessesusedbytheDepartment.Thegenerationofregionallevelplanningstrategiesastheoverarchingbasisforfisheriesmanagement,combinedwiththewideradoptionofthesamesetofstepsatanationalleveltoimplementEBMshouldfacilitatemoreefficientlinkagesandharmonisationwithothergovernmentpoliciesandprocesses.Consequently,wehavefoundthattherehavebeensignificantpositivebenefitsfromtheimplementationofanEBFMapproach,morethanmerelymeetingsomelongforgottencentralagencypoliticalcommitment.


Cost benefit

In roundfigures thedevelopmentand triallingof theEBFMframeworkcosta totalofapproximately$500,000overatwoyearperiod,withanadditional$300,000overafurtherthreeyears.Thislatterperiodincludedthesuccessfulapplicationofthisframeworktoeachoftheotherfivebioregions.

Theprimarycomponentofthiscosthasbeentheneedfor2dedicatedstafftomanagetheprocessoverthefirsttwoyears,followedbyonepersontocontinuetherefinements,consultationsandextensionstoallareasoverthesubsequent3years.Consequently,thecostperbioregionbecamerelativelylowandnowtheframeworkhasbeendevelopedandimplementedineachbioregionitisarelativelyinexpensiveprocesstoupdateonanannualbasis.AkeypointhereisthatwithoutastrategicinvestmentintriallingtheEBFMframeworktherewouldstillbeongoingconfusionoverhowtoassignprioritiesacrosstheagency.

AcriticalareathatwillbeinformedbytheEBFMprocessisthedebatearoundimplementationofmarineparks,andno-takeareas.Theriskassessmentsundertakenhaveshownthattheregionsorareasathighestriskintermsofecosystemsaretheestuaries.Conversely,themarinehabitatsandecosystemsoftheWestCoastBioregionaremostlyallratedasbeingatlowriskbytheEBFMprocess,whichreflectsthelackofanysignificantnegativeimpactsonthemajorityofmarinewatersinthisbioregion.


9.0 ReferencesAustralianFisheriesManagementForum(AFMF)(2010)EcosystemBasedFisheriesManagement

PolicyStatement.AustralianFisheriesManagementForum.

Agnew,D.J.(1997)TheCCAMLRecosystemmonitoringprogram.Antarctic Science,9(3):235-242.

Bianchi,G.,Sandberg,P.Skjoldal,H.R.andThorarinsson,K.(2009)SummaryandMainConclusionsofBergenConference.In:TheEcosystemApproachtoFisheries.CABInternationalandFAO,Rome,pp1-19.

Bianchi,G.andSkjoldal,H.R.(2008)Theecosystemapproachtofisheries.FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,Rome,Italy,377pp.

CommonwealthofAustralia(1992)NationalStrategyforEcologicallySustainableDevelopment.AGPS,Canberra.

Craik,W.(1996)TheGreatBarrierReefMarinePark,Australia:Amodelforregionalmanagement.Natural Areas Journal,16(4):344-353.

DepartmentofEnvironment,Water,HeritageandtheArts(DEWHA)(2009)Guidelinesfor theecologicallysustainablemanagementoffisheries,Edition2.Canberra,18pp.

DepartmentofFisheries(2000)ProtectingandsharingWesternAustralia’sCoastalFishresources.Fisheries Management Paper No. 135.

DepartmentofFisheries(2002)PolicyfortheimplementationofecologicallysustainabilitydevelopmentforfisheriesandaquaculturewithinWesternAustralia.Fisheries Management Paper No. 157, DepartmentofFisheries,GovernmentofWesternAustralia,70p.

DepartmentofFisheries;(2010)StateoftheFisheriesReport2008/2009.W.J.FletcherandK.Santoro(eds.).DepartmentofFisheries,GovernmentofWesternAustralia,pp.295.

DepartmentofFisheries(2011)ResourceAssessmentFrameworkforFinfishResourcesinWesternAustralia. Fisheries Occasional Publication. No. 85 24pp

deYoung,C.(2009)Thehumansideoftheecosystemapproachtofisheriesmanagement:preliminaryresultsofanFAOexpertconsultation.In:The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries. CAB International andFAO,Rome,pp.86-94.

Dunlop,J.N.(2003)AconservationsectorperspectiveonESDassessmentinWesternAustralianfisheries.In:Towardssustainabilityofdata-limitedmulti-sectorfisheries.AustralianSocietyforFishBiologyWorkshopProceedings.S.J.Newman,D.J.Gaughan,G.Jackson,M.C.Mackie,B.Molony,J.StJohn,P.Kailola,eds.FisheriesOccasionalPublicationNo.5,DepartmentofFisheries,Perth.pp.43–45.

EPBCAct.1999.EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct.CommonwealthofAustralia.

FAO(2003)Fisheriesmanagement.2.Theecosystemapproachtofisheries.FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries No. 4. Rome, 112 pp.

Fletcher,W.J.(2005)ApplicationofQualitativeRiskAssessmentMethodologytoPrioritiseIssuesforFisheriesManagement.ICES Journal of Marine Research62:1576-1587

Fletcher,W.J.(2006)FrameworksformanagingmarineresourcesinAustraliathroughecosystemapproaches:Dotheyfittogetherandaretheyuseful?Bulletin of Marine Science,78(3):691-704.

Fletcher,W.J.(2008)ImplementinganEcosystemApproachtofisheriesmanagement:LessonslearnedformapplyingapracticalEAFMframeworkinAustraliaandthePacific.Pp112-124.In:TheEcosystemApproach.EdsG.Bianchi&H.R.Skoldal.FAOCABI,Rome.


Fletcher,W.J.(2010)PlanningprocessesforthemanagementofthetunafisheriesoftheWesternandCentralPacificRegionusinganEcosystemApproach.ForumFisheriesAgency,Honiara,SolomonIslands.Faciliator’sVersion6.1January2010

Fletcher,W.J.&Curnow,I(2002)Processesfortheallocation,reallocationandgovernanceofresourceaccessinconnectionwithaframeworkforthefuturemanagementoffisheriesinWesternAustraliaAscopingpaperdevelopedforconsiderationandusebytheIntegratedFisheriesManagementReviewCommitteeFisheriesManagementReportNo.759pp.

Fletcher,W.J.,Chesson,J.,Fisher,M.,Sainsbury,K.J.,Hundloe,T.,Smith,A.D.M.andWhitworth,B.(2002)NationalESDreportingframeworkforAustralianfisheries:the“howto”guideforwildcapturefisheries.Version1.01.FRDCProject2000/145.FisheriesResearchandDevelopmentCorporation,FRDC-ESDReportingandAssessmentSubprogram,publicationNo.1,120pp.

Fletcher,W.J.,Chesson,J.,Fisher,M.,Sainsbury,K.J.andHundloe,T.(2003) T h e E S Dassessmentmanualforwildcapturefisheries:Version1.FRDCProject2002/086.FisheriesResearchandDevelopmentCorporation,FRDC-ESDReportingandAssessmentSubprogrampublicationNo.4, 135 pp.

Fletcher,W.J.,Chesson,J.,Sainsbury,K.J.,Hundloe,T.J.andFisher.M.(2005.)Aflexibleandpracticalframeworkforreportingonecologicallysustainabledevelopmentforwildcapturefisheries.Fisheries Research,71:175-183.

Fletcher,W.J.Shaw,J.,Metcalf.S.J.&D.J.Gaughan(2010)AnEcosystemBasedFisheriesManagementframework:theefficient,regional-levelplanningtoolformanagementagencies.Marine Policy 34 (2010)1226–1238)

Fletcher,W.J.,Gaughan,D.,Metcalf,S.,Shaw.,J(2011)Usingaregionallevel,riskbasedframeworktocosteffectivelyimplementEcosystemBasedFisheriesManagement(EBFM).InEcosystems2011.UniversityofAlaskaSeaGrant.AK-SG10-01(inpress)

FisheriesandAgricultureOrganisation(FAO)(2003)Fisheriesmanagement.2.Theecosystemapproachtofisheries. FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries No. 4, 112 pp.

GarciaS.M.(2000).TheFAOdefinitionofsustainabledevelopmentandtheCodeofConductforResponsible Fisheries: an analysis of the related principles,criteria and indicators. Marine and Freshwater Research51,535–41.

Garcia,S.M.(2010).Governance,scienceandsociety:theecosystemapproachtofisheries.In:Marine fisheries conservation and management.R.Q.Grafton,R.Hilborn,D.Squires,M.TaitandM.Williams(eds.).OxfordUniversityPress,NewYork, pp.87-98.

Gerritse,R.G.,Wallbrink,P.J.andMurray,A.S.(1998)AccumulationofphosphorusandheavymetalsinthePeel-HarveyestuaryinWesternAustralia:Resultsofapreliminarystudy.Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science,47(6):679-693.

Kauman,L.,Heneman,B.,Barnes,J.T.andFujita,R.(2004)Transitionfromlowtohighdatarichness:Anexperimentinecosystem-basedfisherymanagementinCalifornia.Bulletin of Marine Science, 74(3):693-708.

Millington,P.andFletcher.W.(2008).Geelongrevisited:fromESDtoEBFM–futuredirectionsforfisheriesmanagement.WorkshopReport.FRDC2008/057, Melbourne.

Penn,J.W.andFletcher,W.J.(2010)TheefficacyofsanctuaryareasforthemanagementoffishstocksandbiodiversityinWAwaters.Fisheries Research Report No. 169, Department of Fisheries, Western Australia, 44pp.

Peters,N.E.andDonohue,R.(2001)NutrienttransporttotheSwan-CanningEstuary,WesternAustralia.Hydrological Processes,15(3):2555-2577.

PitcherT.J.,Kalikoski,D.,Pramod,G.andShort,K.(2009)Nothonouringthecode.Nature,457:658-659.


PitcherT.J.,Kalikoski,D.,Short,K.,Varkey,D.andPramod,G.(2009)Anevaluationofprogressinimplementingecosystem-basedmanagementoffisheriesin33countries.Marine Policy,33:223-232.

ProductivityCommission (1999) Implementation ofEcological SustainableDevelopment byCommonwealthDepartmentsandAgencies:InquiryreportNo.5.Ausinfo,Canberra,283pp.

Sherman,K.(1991)Thelargemarineecosystemconcept–researchandmanagementstrategyforlivingmarine resources. Ecological applications,1(4):349-360.

Sherman,K.(1995)Achievingregionalcooperationinthemanagementofmarineecosystems:theuseoftheLargeMarineEcosystemapproach.Ocean and Coastal Management,29(1-3):165-185.

Sherman,K.,Sissenwine,M.,Christensen,V.,Duda,A.,Hempel,G.,Ibe,C.,Levin,S.,Lluch-Belda,D.,Matishov,G.,McGlade,J.,O’Toole,M.,Seitzinger,S.,Serra,R.,Skjoldal,H.-R.,Tang,Q.,Thulin,J.,Vandeweerd,V.andZwanenburg,K.(2005).Aglobalmovementtowardsanecosystemapproachtomanagementofmarineresources.MarineEcologyProgressSeries300:275–279

Sissenwine,M.andMurawski,S.(2004)Movingbeyond‘intelligenttinkering’:AdvancinganEcosystemApproachtoFisheries.MarineEcologyProgressSeries,274:291-295.

Smith,K.A.,Norriss,J.andBrown,J.(2009)Populationgrowthandmassmortalityofanestuarinefish,Acanthopagrusbutcheri,unlawfullyintroducedintoaninlandlake.AquaticConservation:Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems,19(1):4-13.

Vieira,S.,Schirmer,J.andLoxton,E.(2009)Socialandeconomicevaluationmethodsforfisheries:Areviewoftheliterature.Fisheries Research Contract Report No. 21, Department of Fisheries, GovernmentofWesternAustralia,90pp.

Watson-Wright,W.M.(2005).Policyandscience:differentrolesinthepursuitofsolutionstocommonproblems. Marine Ecology Progress Series300:291–296.

Wise,B.S.,St.John,J.andLenanton,R.C.(2007)Spatialscalesofexploitationamongpopulationsofdemersalscalefish:implicationsformanagement:Part1:stockstatusofthekeyindicatorspeciesforthedemersalscalefishfisheryintheWestCoastBioregion.Final FRDC report - project 2003/052. FisheriesResearchReportNo.163,DepartmentofFisheries,GovernmentofWesternAustralia.


10.0 Appendices

Appendix 1 detailed EBFM reports

Ecosystem structure and biodiversity

Background

TheregionalecosystemdivisionsfortheWestCoastBioregionlocatedwithincontinentalshelfareasasoutlinedaboveinFigure7include:

• West Coast;

• Abrolhos Islands; and

• Leeuwin-Naturaliste.

TheFisheriesDepartment,throughtheOffshoreConstitutionalSettlement,hasjurisdictionforallthesebioregionsextendsoutto200nauticalmileEEZboundary.Thusthefunctionalfisheriesdivisionswithineachoftheseecosystemscaninclude(whererelevant)estuarine,embayments,nearshore,inshoredemersal(20m-250m),offshoredemersal(250m–EEZ)andpelagic(20m–EEZ)areas.

West coast ecosystem structure and biodiversity

Description

TheIMCRAboundaryforthe(Central)WestCoastecosystemincludesthewatersfromKalbarrisouthtothePerthtrench(Figure7).TheWestCoastisatemperateoceaniczone,witholigotrophicwatersthatareheavilyinfluencedbytheseasonalflowoftheLeeuwinCurrent.ThiswarmbodyofwateroftropicaloriginflowsmoststronglyduringthewintermonthsofApriltoSeptember(PearceandWalker1991).ThestrengthofthiscurrentvariesannuallydependingonthevalueoftheElNino-SouthernOscillation(ENSO).ThestrengthoftheLeeuwinCurrenthasbeenshowntohaveamajorinfluenceonanumberofmarinespeciesincludingthewesternrock lobster (Caputi et al., 1996).

Itisrecognisedthattherehavebeenfew,broad-scaleecologicalstudieswithinthemarineecosystemsofthisregion(Bellchambersetal,2010).Thereare,however,anumberofprojectscurrentlybeingundertakenorhavebeenrecentlycompleted(seedescriptionsfollowing)thatwillprovidebaselinedescriptionsofthecommunitiesandassemblageswithinthisecosystem.Assuch,settingexplicitreferencepointsforthemanagementofecosystemstructureandbiodiversitywithintheseareashavenotyetbeenundertakenbutwillbepossiblegiventheresultsfromanumberofWAMSIprojectsandotherinitiatives.

Marine

Nearshore:Thenearshoreecosystems(<20m)arecomprisedlargelyoflimestonereefscoveredwitharangeofmacroalgae.Sandareashaveseagrassandspongehabitat.Bellchambers(2009)reviewedtheavailableliteratureanddescribedtheregionasbeingcharacterisedbylimestonereefsrunningparalleltothecoastlinebetweenoneandtenkilometresoffshore(SemeniukandSearle, 1986). The kelp Ecklonia radiatadominatesthesereefs(Phillipsetal.,1997;Wernbergetal.,2003a,Wernbergetal.,2003b)andformsextensivekelpbeds(SteinbergandKendrick,


1999).Otheralgaeoccursonthesereefs,oftenassociatedwithE. radiata and on small patches ofreef(Kendricketal.,1999,VanderkliftandKendrick,2004).

Bellchambers(2009)notedthatthemacroinvertebratefauna(0.5mm-20mm)presentintheseshallowwaterecosystemsincludedvariouscrustaceans,molluscs,polychaetes,andechinoderms,whicharehighlyabundant(Edgar,1990;EdgarandShaw,1995).Thesemacroinvertebratesarecommonlyconsumedbyhigherorderconsumers,suchasfishandlobsters(JollandPhillips,1984;Jernakoffetal.,1993;EdgarandShaw,1995),suggestingthatthesemacroinvertebratesmaybeimportantforsupportingnear-shorefoodwebs.

ThenearshoreregionincludesRottnestIslandwhichhasavariablecoastlinecharacterisedbylimestonereefsystems,cliffsandintertidalplatformsthatcanextendfromafewmetresto200minwidth(Playford1988).Therearealsoalargenumberofsandybays.Amarinereservecoversaround3810ha(RottnestIslandAuthority2003)todepthsof20-30mandischaracterisedbylimestonereef,seagrassbedsandsandyareas(Smallwoodetal.,2006).

AsaresultoftheinfluenceoftheLeeuwincurrent,thewatersaroundRottnestIslandarewarmerthanthosealongthemainlandcoastwhichprovidestheconditionsfortherelativelyhighlevelofcoralandtropicalfishspeciesfoundaroundtheisland(Hutchins,1991).Ofthe420fishspeciesrecordedinthewaterssurroundingRottnestIsland,about20%areendemictoWAandover90are tropical species (Hutchins, 1979).

Inshore and offshore demersal:Recentresearch(Waddingtonetal.,2010)hasdemonstratedthatsignificantalgalandspongeassemblagesoccurinthedeep-watercoastalecosystemofthewestcoastandsuggeststhatbenthicprimaryproductionisasignificantcontributortoproductionintheseecosystems.Thespongeandalgalassemblagesdescribedinthestudyhavesignificantbiomassesofmacroinvertebrates,whicharesufficienttosupportsecondaryproductioninthisregion(WaddingtonandMeeuwig,2010).Macroinvertebratebiomassesobservedindeep-coastalecosystemsarelowcomparedtoshallowwaterecosystemsinthisregion(dataconvertedfromLenantonetal.,1982;RobertsonandLucas1983)andarelikelytoreflecttheoligotrophicnatureofthisregion(Cresswell,1991;Johannesetal.,1994).ArecentlycompletedFRDCfundedprojectprovidedcriticalinformationontherelationshipsbetweenrocklobsterabundance,sizedistributionsandbenthichabitatcharacteristicsindeepwater,andpreliminarydataonthetrophicroleofrocklobsterindeepwaterecosystems.

Whiletheecosystemprocessesinfluencingobservedabundancesofmacroinvertebratesarenotpresentlyknown(andmayinvolvebottom-upand/ortop-downprocesses),thedescriptionofbenthiccommunitiesprovidedintherecentFRDCstudyandvariousWAMSINode4projectsprovideausefulbasisforfutureinvestigationofsuchecosystemprocesses.

Estuaries and embayments–HIGHRisk

TheWestCoastRegionincludesestuariesandembaymentsthataresurroundedbythelargestdensityofthepopulationinWesternAustraliaandarethereforeveryimportantforsocialreasons.

Swan Canning estuary: This estuary has been described as the ‘heartland of Perth and there arenumerouscomprehensivedescriptionsavailableforfishfauna(Seddon,1972,Shaw1988,Brearley,2005).Increasingpopulationsurroundingtheestuary,hasgivenrisetocatchmentclearing,foreshoredegradation,pollution,highnutrient(excessivenitrogenandphosphorus)drainageinputsandmorerecentlyacidsulphatesoils,algalbloomsanddeoxygenationleadingtofishkills.Forthesereasons,inFebruary2000,theSwanRiverwasclosedtofishing,boating


andswimmingforthefirsttime.Morerecently,concertedmanagementandclean-upprogramshavebeenundertakenandnutrientreportcardsareavailable(seewww.swanrivertrust.wa.gov.au) for the system.

The Peel Harvey Estuary:Thisestuaryis80kmssouthofPerthandcomprisesthelargestinlandwaterbodyofsouth-westernAustralia(Brearley,2005).Thisconnectedshallowwatersystemhasanextensivecatchmentareaand,priortoeutrophication,providedidealconditionsforseagrassgrowth(Halophila ovalis and Ruppia megacarpa). In the 1970s, increases in nutrients fromsurroundingagriculturallandledtoeutrophicationinthePeelHarveyestuaryfollowedbysignificantmacroalgaeandblue-greenalgaegrowth.Toalleviatethisalgalproblemanumberofstrategieswereadopted,includingtheconstructionoftheDawesvilleChanneltoincreasetidalflowandflushnutrientsouttosea.Theresultwasamoretidalmarinesystemandchangestothefishandcrustaceanfauna(R.Lenanton,pers.comm.).ThereareextensivedescriptionsofthePeelHarveyestuarineenvironmentpriortotheDawesvillechannelconstruction(seeBrearley,2005).Morerecently,MurdochUniversityandWAMSIareundertakingresearchwithafocusonthefishcommunities.Theinitialresultsofthisstudysuggestthatfishcommunitiesarerevertingbacktopre-DawsevilleChannelcomposition.

Cockburn Soundisashallowcoastalbasinlyingapproximately20kmsouthofPerthandcoveringan area of approximately 124 km2.Waterdepthsrangefromsandyshallowstoapproximately20minthecentralbasin(CockburnSoundManagementCouncil,2007).InthefirstcomprehensiveenvironmentalstudyofCockburnSound,asignificantdeteriorationinwaterqualitywasfoundaswellasthelossofoverhalftheseagrassbedsandalargevarietyofcontaminantsfromindustrialdischarges.Althoughwaterqualitywasimprovedsincethisfinding,furtherstudieshaveindicatedadecline.TheSouthernMetropolitanCoastalWatersStudy1991-1994,reportedthatcontaminatedgroundwaterwasfoundtobethemainnutrientinput,mostlyintheformofnitrogen.EcosystemhealthappearstohavestabilisedinCockburnSoundwithregularandcomprehensivereportcardstrackingtheprogressofenvironmentalquality(CockburnSoundManagementCouncil,2007).However,thechangeinfishcommunitiessuggestschangewithinthesystemisstilloccurring.Ongoingmonitoringofwaterqualityisessentialtotrytodeterminethedriversbehindthesechanges.

West coast ecosystem risk status: moderate (5 year timeline)

Estuaries and Embayments – SEVERERisk

Atthestakeholderworkshops,theriskofsignificantchangeinestuarinesystemswasdeterminedtobesevere,largelybecauseofexistinghabitatchanges,increasednutrients,incidenceoftoxicalgalblooms,acidsulphatesoils,reducedabundancesofsomefishspeciesandattimes,fishkills.Itwasthoughtthattheseimpactswerelargelyaresultofsignificantanthropogenicinfluencesandmaydeterioratefurtherfromincreasedurbandevelopmentsandfishingpressure.

Marine–MODERATERisk

Anassessmentofcommunitystructureandtrophiclevelofallcommerciallycaughtfishspeciesoverthepast30yearscompletedviaanFRDCfundedstudyfoundnoevidenceofsystematicchangesthatcouldbeviewedasevidenceofanunacceptableimpactoffishingonthisecosystem.TheriskassessmentcompletedaspartoftheMSCprocessforrocklobsterconcludedtherewasamoderateriskfordeeperwatercommunities,mostlyfromthelackofknowledgeofthisregion.

TheEBFMriskassessmentworkshopconcludedthatinthelonger-term(e.g.20years)areasoftheWestCoastcouldundergoevengreaterchangethanpresent(e.g.RottnestIsland,Swan

http://www.swanrivertrust.wa.gov.au

http://www.swanrivertrust.wa.gov.au


CanningandPeelHarveyestuaries)largelyasaresultofclimatechangepredictions,particularlyaffectingthelevelofcoralversuskelpforest.

Legislative responsibility and primary and other relevant management authorities

TheDepartmentofFisherieshaslegislativeresponsibilityundertheFRMAformuchoftheecosystemstructureincludingthethreeFishHabitatProtectionAreas(LancelinIslandLagoon,KalbarriBlueHolesandCottesloeReef)intheEstuariesandEmbaymentsoftheWestCoastBioregion.

Otheragencieshaveprimarymanagementresponsibilityandtheirownspecificobjectives)fordifferentareaswithinthisecosystemincludingtheresponsibilityformarineparksintheregion(JurienBay,MarmionMarineParkandtheSwanCanningRiverpark)bytheDepartmentofEnvironmentandConservation(DEC).TheCockburnSoundManagementCouncil,RottnestIslandAuthorityandSwanRiverTrustalsohaveprimaryresponsibilityintheselocations.TheDepartmentofWaterisresponsibleforthefreshwaterinflowandqualityoffreshwaterflowintoestuaries,whiletheDepartmentofAgricultureandFoodisresponsibleforagriculturalrun-offfromfertilisersandlivestockaswellasbankerosionduetolivestock.ThePlanningandDevelopmentCommissionaswellaslocalgovernmentsareresponsibleforcoastalandwatersheddevelopmentthatmayimpacttheestuarythroughtheremovalofforeshorevegetationandgreaterrun-offduetoanincreasedamountofimpervioussurfaces(i.e.roads,footpaths).

Objectives

TheDepartmentofFisherieshasanumberofobjectivesatdifferentlevelsrelatingtoecosystemstructure and function.

• Regional:Maintainhealthyfunctionalecosystems.

• Fishery:Tomanagefisheriesandaquaculturesuchthatonlyacceptablelevelsofimpactoccuron the ecosystem.

• External:Toidentify,describeandinfluenceexternaldrivers(outsideDoFlegislativecontrol)that may impact on the functional ecosystems.

DoFdoesnothavelegislativeresponsibilityforallimpactsonWestCoastEcosystemStructureandBiodiversityandcanonlyacttotrytoinfluenceoutcomesthroughotherdepartments/agenciesregardingtheseimpacts.Othernon-DoFobjectivesforspecificareaswithintheWestCoastBioregioninclude:

• MarineParks:Toprotectnaturalfeaturesandaestheticvalues,promotescienceandeducation,andatthesametimeenablerecreationalandcommercialuseswheretheseactivitiesdonotcompromiseconservationvalues.

• RottnestIslandAuthority:Tominimiseenvironmentalimpactsandenhancesustainability.

• Cockburn SoundManagementCouncil has a number of objectives relating to theenvironmentalhealthofCockburnSoundincluding:

- Maintainecosystemintegrity in termsofstructure(e.g.biodiversity,biomassandabundanceofbiota)andfunction(e.g.foodchainsandnutrientcycles).

- Maintenanceofaquaticlifeforhumanconsumption,suchthatseafoodissafeforhumanconsumptionwhencollectedorgrown.

- Maintenanceofaquaculturesuchthatwaterisofasuitablequalityforaquaculturepurposes.


Operational objectives, indicators and performance measures

Currentlyunderdevelopment.

Awaitingtheresultofanumberofcurrentresearchprojects(seebelow).

Monitoring and research programs

Current:

y WAMSI Projects 4.2 and 4.3

o AssessmentofCommunityStructure,Biodiversity,HabitatandClimateChangeandtheimpactofanthropogenicinfluences

� Developmentofbioregionallevelassessmentsofthestatusofcommunitystructure

� Establishmentofindicatorregionsforlongtermmonitoringandassessmentofchanges

� Establishmentoffisherydependentindicatorsofclimateshifts

� Costeffectiveongoing,generalbiodiversityandhabitatmonitoringmethods

o TrophicInteractionsandEcosystemModelling

� Process based assessments of trophic relationships (Jurien Bay)

� Ecosystemmodellingofspecific,highriskorpriorityregions

y ThesecollaborativeWAMSIprojectsincludefundingfromDepartmentofFisheries,MU,UWA and ECU.

y SRFME/FRDCJurienBayprojectexaminingchangesincommunitystructure

Recentlycompleted/inpress

y Developmentofalong-termprogramtomonitorcoastalcommunitieswithintheSwanregion(Bellchambersetal.2009),fundedbyPerthRegionNRMandDepartmentofFisheries.

y Identifyingindicatorsoftheeffectsoffishingusingalternativemodels,uncertainty,andaggregationerror(Metcalfetal.2011).

y Assessmentof thebenthicbiotaofdeepcoastalecosystemsassociatedwithwesternrocklobster(Panuliruscygnus)populationsalongthetemperatewestcoastofAustralia(Waddingtonetal.2010)

y Abundanceandsizeofwesternrocklobster(Panuliruscygnus)asafunctionofbenthichabitat:Implicationsforecosystem-basedfisheriesmanagement.(Bellchambersetal.2010).

y SecuringWA’sMarineFutures:StudyareasintheWestcoastregioninclude;JurienBay,AbrolhosIslands,CapeNaturaliste/GeographeBay(Radfordetal.2008).

y EffectofwesternrocklobsterfishingontheecosystemsoffWesternAustraliaStudyareas;JurienBay,LancelinandDongaraFundedbyFRDC04/049andDepartmentofFisheries(Bellchambers 2010).

y AssessingcommunitystructurethroughfisherydependentdataFRDC(HallandWise2011).


Management actions (DoF)

Current:

Maintainfishingatlevelssuchthattheappropriatebiomasslevelsofalltargetedandnontargetedfishspeciesarecontinued.

ProposedNewActions:

Facilitatedevelopmentofanagreementregardingappropriateindicators,performancemeasuresandmonitoringschedule.

Actions if performance is considered unacceptable:

Adjustmanagementsettingsforindividualfisherieswherenecessary.

Review period

TwoyearstocoincidewiththeoutcomesofcurrentandrelevantWAMSIprojectsalreadyunderwaywhenmoredefinitiveindicatorsandperformancemeasureswillbeavailable.

Abrolhos Islands ecosystem structure and biodiversity

Description

TheAbrolhosIslandsareoneofthethreeIMCRAregionsthatfallwithintheWestCoastBioregion(Figure7).FormallyknowastheHoutmanAbrolhosIslands,theycompriseacomplexofreefsandislandslocatedattheedgesofthecontinentalshelfbetween28°and29°Sapproximately60kmoffshorefromGeraldton.TheentireStatewatersofthisregionareaFishHabitatProtectionArea(FHPA),whichincludeshighlyvaluedmarinecommunitiesandhistoricshipwrecksitesofinternationalimportance.WithintheAbrolhosIslandsFHPAtherearefourReefObservationAreaswheretakingfishexceptrocklobsterisnotpermitted.Therearealsoanexceptionalarrayofbirds,diverseterrestrialvertebratesandvaluablevegetationtypesincludingmangrovesanddwarfeucalyptusstands(FMP220).

TheAbrolhosIslandshaveanunusualgeologyandfallwithinazoneofbiogeographicaloverlap.Forinstance,largetropicalcoralreefsareoftenincloseassociationwithstandsoftemperatealgae.TheAbrolhosIslandsincludesthemostsoutherlycoralreefsystemintheIndianOcean.

Theregionincludeshighabundancesofthewesternrocklobsterandprovidesalargeproportionofrocklobstercatchforthestate.Scallopsandfinfishcommunitiesarealsoimportantandhavebeentargetedbycommercial,recreationalandcharterfishers.Inadditiontothecommunitydiversitythereisalsoanincreasinglevelofecotourismwithintheregion.

Abrolhos Islands ecosystem risk status - Moderate

Theinternalandexternalstakeholderworkshopratedtheriskleveloverthecomingfiveyearsaslowtomoderaterisk.Itwasconcludedthatsomeelementsoftheecosystemmayhavechangedbyameasurableamount,mostnotablytherelativespeciescompositionofsomefinfishspecies(Nardietal.,2004).Thisdoesnot,however,appeartohavebeencausedbyeitheralossofbiodiversityoranoticeablechangeinthetypesofcommunitiespresent.


5years–WithcurrentmanagementarrangementsitwasconsideredthattheimpactsoneachoftheelementsoftheecosystemattheAbrolhosIslandswouldmostlikelyremainthesameasatcurrentlevels.

20Years-(HighRisk)–WiththepotentialincreaseinoceantemperaturesduetoclimatechangeandthepossibilityofaconcomitantshiftinthestrengthanddynamicsoftheLeeuwincurrentitwasconsideredPossible(3)thattheremaybeaSignificant(3)changetothecommunitystructureandbiodiversityinthisregion,whichrepresentsaHighRiskformanyoftheidentifiedecosystemvaluesatthistimescale.Anysealevelchangeswouldalsoincreasetheriskfromthecurrentrating.

Legislative responsibilities

TheDepartmentofFisheriesmanagestheAbrolhosIslands,includingtheterrestrialareas,andisresponsibleforthefacilitationofwhole-of-GovernmentServicedeliveryinthearea.MajorpartnersintheservicedeliveryaretheDepartmentofEnvironmentandConservation,theWesternAustralianMuseum,WesternAustralianPlanningCommission,DepartmentofTransport and Tourism Western Australia.

Objectives

FortheAbrolhosIslandsFHPAtheobjectivesare;

y Toconservetheecosystemandculturalheritagevaluesand,

y Toenablemultiple,equitableandsustainableuseanddevelopmentofthehistoricalandeconomicvaluesoftheAbrolhossystem.

Thespecificecosystemstructureandbiodiversityvaluesthatshouldbemaintainedforthisregioninclude:

y thediversityofhabitats(particularlycoralreef,algaeandsponge),fishandinvertebrates;and

y theuniquecombinationsoftropical,temperateandendemicmarinefinfishandinvertebratespecies.

TheDepartmenthasdifferentobjectivesforthedifferentscaleswithintheAbrolhosecosystem.

Regionalobjective:Maintainhealthyfunctionalecosystems.

Fisheryobjective:Tomanagefisheriesandaquaculturesuchthatonlyacceptablelevelsofimpact occur on the ecosystem.





Current:

Thereareanumberofresearchprogramsinthisecosystem.TheseincludemonitoringofthehealthofcoralcommunitiesattheAbrolhosIslands.Thisprogram,utilisespermanentcoraltransectslocatedateachoftheislandgroupsandwillcollectimportantbaselineinformationon


coralcommunities,allowingresearcherstoquantifywhetherlobsterfishingwithpotsresultsindamagetosensitivecoralhabitats,andtodeterminethevulnerabilityofcoralcommunitiesattheAbrolhostoclimatechange.

Therearealsoalargenumberofrelevantpostgraduate,WAMSIandNHTresearchprogramsthathavebeen,orarecurrently,underwaywithintheAbrolhos.

Proposed:

y EstablishmentofaseriesofreferenceregionswithintheAbrolhosIslands.

y Developmentofacoordinatedandintegratedmonitoringprogram.

Management actions

Current:

y ExplicitlymanagetheactivitiesofallstakeholdersthatoperatewithintheFHPAtoensurethattheircollectiveimpactsdonotcauseunacceptableeffectsonthekeycomponentsoftheecosystemandbiodiversityoftheAbrolhosIslandsregion.

y Allrecreationalandcommercialactivitiesmustbeconsistentwiththelevelofprotectionrequired.TheseareoutlinedindetailwithinthedraftmanagementpaperoftheHoutmanAbrolhos system (DoF, 2007).

y Identifyingandprotectingpriorityareas.

y EstablishingtheAbrolhosislandsasaseparatezoneforthemanagementofmostfishingactivities.

y Managingthecommerciallobsterfishery,thecommercialwetlinefishery,aquaculture,recreationalfishingandcharterboatsectors.

y Implementingspecificspatialandtemporalclosurestoeachtypeoffishingmethod.

y Managingmoorings.

y Managingterrestrialactivitiesandtheirpotentialflowonimpacts.

y Encouragingmanagementorientatedresearchintothemarineenvironmentwithinthisregion.

ProposedNewActions:

y FinaliseManagementplanfortheAbrolhosIslands.

y EncouragingacoordinatedapproachtotheresearchundertakenwithintheAbrolhosIslands.

y Seekfundingtoestablishreferencesites,undertakeregularmonitoringandsurveysoftheregion.

Actions if performance is considered unacceptable:

y ReviewmanagementplanfortheAbrolhosIslandsand,whererelevant,thespecificfisheries/activitiesthatgeneratedtheunacceptableperformance.

External drivers

Climate change:Thisispredictedtohaveasignificantimpactontheoceanographiccurrents,temperatureandchemistryoftheregion.GiventheuniquepropertiesofthecurrentsassociatedwiththeAbrolhosandthedominanceoftheLeeuwinCurrentasanoverarchingstructuring


force,anychangesinthesecouldhavemajorflow-onimpactstotheecosystemandbiodiversityoftheregion(see20yearriskassessment).

Management Responses/Activities:Ensure that these risksare taken intoaccountwhenestablishingreferencesitesandindrawingconclusionsfromanychangesobservedinthecommunitystructureandbiodiversityofthisregion.

Shipping:Thisregionislocatedwithinahighlypopulatedshippingroute.Thereisapotentialforshippingtoimpacttheecologythroughaccidentsreleasingoilsandfuelandpossiblyhazardouscargo.Anapplicationforthegazettingofa‘ParticularlySensitiveSeaArea’wasproposedbytheDepartmentofFisheriesandalthoughtheconceptreceivedstrongstakeholdersupportwasnot continued.

Management Responses/Activities:LiaisewithDepartmentofTransportandmaritimeauthoritiestoensurethattherisksofshippingincidentsarekeptatremoteornegligiblelevels.

Review Period

5 years

Leeuwin-Naturaliste ecosystem structure and biodiversity

Description

TheLeeuwin-NaturalisteregionformsthemostsouthernecosystemintheWestCoastBioregion.PopulationpressureinthisecosystemislowerthanintheWestCoastecosystemandthisislikelyreflectedinthelowerecologicalrisks.

Theareacomprisestheshallowsemi-shelteredwatersofGeographeBay,HamelinBayandFlindersBayandincludesextensiveseagrassmeadowscomprisingpredominantlyPosidonia and Amphibolisspp(LimbourneandWestera2006).Itisthoughtthattheexceptionallyclearwatersintheareaallowtheseagrassestocolonisedeeperwaters(30m)andminimisetheirexposuretodirectoceanicswells(KirkmanandKuo1990).

Inthemoreexposedareas,(CapeLeeuwintoCapeNaturaliste)therearediversereefsystemswithavarietyoffish,invertebrateandalgalspecies.RecentworkwithUnderwaterVideoCameras(UVC)andBaitedRemoteUnderwaterVideoCameras(BRUVS)aspartoftheMarineFuturesproject(UniversityofWesternAustralia)recorded42and69speciesoffishrespectivelyaswellas220speciesofalgaefrom20families.Thesenumbersareconsistentwithotherstudiesrecorded around the temperate Australian coast (Radford et al 2008).

Leeuwin-Naturaliste ecosystem risk status - Marine (Low)

Therisksofsignificantimpactsonthemarinecommunitiesinthisregionarerelativelylowinthisregion.

Leeuwin-Naturaliste ecosystem risk status – Estuaries (High)

ExternalfactorssuchaswaterqualityissuesintheBlackwoodEstuary,duetohighnutrientrun-offfromsurroundingland,aswellasacidsulphatesoilcontaminationareofconcerntosustainablefishstocksintheLeeuwin-Naturalistebioregion.

TheEBFMRiskAssessmentworkshopconcludedthatinthelonger-term(e.g.20years)theestuariesLeschenaultandBlackwoodwouldbeatincreasedriskofecosystemchange,resulting


fromincreasedinputscombinedwithreducedrainfallandfreshwaterflow(Leshenault)andYaragadeeaquiferissuesaswellassaltwedgeimpactsfortheBlackwoodestuary.

Legislative responsibility and primary and other relevant management authorities

TheDepartmentofFisherieshaslegislativeresponsibilityundertheFRMAformuchoftheecosystemincludingtheReefObservationAreas(CowaramupBay&YallingupReef).OtheragencieshaveprimarymanagementresponsibilityforspecificareasincludingtheDepartmentofEnvironmentandConservation(DEC),whichisthePrimaryManagementAuthorityfortheMarineParksintheregion(ShoalWaterandtheproposedCapesMarinePark).TheLeschenaultInletManagementCouncilhasanadvisoryroletoDEC.

Objectives

TheDepartmentofFisherieshasanumberofobjectivesatdifferentlevelsrelatingtoecosystemstructure and function.

y Regional:Maintainhealthyfunctionalecosystems.

y Fishery:Tomanagefisheriesandaquaculturesuchthatonlyacceptablelevelsofimpactoccuron the ecosystem.

y External:Toidentify,describeandinfluenceexternaldrivers(outsideDoFlegislativecontrol)that may impact on the functional ecosystems.

Inaddition,thereareotherobjectivesforspecificareaswithinthisregion.

MarineParks:Toprotectnaturalfeaturesandaestheticvalues,andpromotescienceandeducationwhileenablingrecreationalandcommercialusewheretheseactivitiesdonotcompromiseconservationvalues.





y StudyofthebenthiccommunityinGeographeBay(Laurensonetal.,1993)

y Annualresearchsurveysofjuvenilefishrecruitment

y Radfordetal2008.WAMarineFutures;BenthicModellingandMappingFinalReport(UWA)

y LimbournandWestera2006.Areview,gapanalysisandassessmentofcurrentinformationrelatingtomarineandcoastalenvironmentsintheSWRegion.

y WAMSIstudyinLeschenaultestuary

Proposed:

y nil


Current:

y Tryandmaintainappropriatebiomasslevelsofallkeytargetfishspecies.


ProposedNewActions

y Facilitatedevelopmentofanagreementregardingappropriateindicatorsandperformancemeasures.

Actions if performance is considered unacceptable

y Adjustmanagementsettingsforindividualfisheriesifnecessary

External drivers

SeeExternaldrivercomponenttreeFigure17.

Review period

Fiveyears.

Captured ‘fish’ species

Background

ThissectionoutlinesthecurrentstatusandmanagementofallthecapturedfishspecieswithintheWestCoastBioregionandprovidesprioritiesforfutureactivities.Thisincludesthemaintargetspeciesplusallthebyproductandbycatchspecies(exceptprotectedspecieswhicharecoveredinthefollowingSection).Toenabletheseassessmentstobedoneinanefficientmanner,thespecieshavebeendividedintoaseriesof‘suites/assemblages’(Figure19).

Thedifferentsuitesweredeterminedusingafunctionalapproach,whichwasbasedonacombinationofhabitat,taxonomicandbiologicalaffiliationsofthespeciescombinedwiththepracticalaspectsassociatedwithmanagement.Thearethreemainbranches-finfish,crustaceansandmolluscswhich,wherenecessary,arefurthersubdividedintouptofourseparatemanagementareas-estuarine/embayments,nearshore,inshoreandoffshore.Eachofthedifferentsuites/assemblagesisthereforecapturedeitherindifferentecosystemsand/orbyusingdifferentcombinationsoffishingmethods.Thismeansthateachofthedifferentsuitescanbemanagedrelativelyindependentlyandthereforeindividuallyprioritised.Innearlyallcasestheindividualsuitescanbesubdividedintomoreprecisecategories(e.g.theestuarinegroupcanbesubdividedintothedifferentestuaries)howeverthislevelofdetailwasconsideredtoogreattobeofvalueinbothgettinganoverviewattheregionallevelanditisalsotoofinetomakeprioritydecisionsatthemanagementlevelforestablishingprogramsofactivitywithintheDepartment.

Finfish

Crustaceans

Estuarine/Embayment

Finfish

Molluscs

Nearshore

Finfish

Crustaceans

Inshore Demersal

Finfish

Offshore Demersal

Finfish

Pelagic

Captured 'Fish' Species

Figure 19. Summary component tree for captured species showing the overall risk level for each of the main captured species suites/assemblages in the West Coast Bioregion.


Eachofthesuitescontainsalargenumberofspecies,whichmeansthatitisnotpossibletoquantitativelyassessthestatusofallspecies.Thestatusofeach‘suite’ofspeciesisthereforedeterminedbythestatusoftheassociatedindicatorspecies.Indicatorspecieswerechosenbasedupon:

y Theirlevelofrepresentativenessfortheparticularhabitat,communityorenvironmentalconditionsmostassociatedwiththesuite;

y Theirlevelofimportance(targeted)tothecommercialorrecreationalsector;plus,mostimportantly,

y Theirvulnerabilitytofishingcomparedtotheotherspecieswithinthesuite.

Toensurethattherewasanobjectivelybasedselectionsystemoftheindicatorspeciesforeachsuite,whichcoveredeachoftheseelements,theDepartment’sformalmulti-criteriaanalysiswasused.Ifoneormoreindicatorspeciesisconsidered‘atrisk’thentheentiresuiteisconsideredtobeatthislevelofrisk.Whereseparatestocksofindicatorspeciesexistwithinthesuiteattheregionallevel(e.g.crabsindifferentestuaries),therangeofrisklevelsisnoted.

Therisklevelforeachindicatorspeciesisinitiallydeterminedirrespectiveofwhetherthecauseoftheriskismainlyduetofishingorthroughsomeexternalfactorsuchaswaterquality.Externalfactorsareimportanttonotebecausemanyoftheproblemsidentifiedwithinestuariesandembaymentsarenotgeneratedbyfishing.Thedegreetowhichthisriskisgeneratedbyexternalfactorsisrecordedbecauseitcanaffectthetypeofactivitiesthatwouldbeundertakendirectly by the Department and the Departmental priority.

Usingthemosttargetedandvulnerablespeciesinthesuiteastheindicatorsprovidesthemostprecautionaryandrobustassessmentmethodology.Thismethodisalsothemostefficientmethodbecause in most cases the assessment of the indicator species is already a normal component oftheannualassessmentprocessandminimaladditionalresourcesarerequiredtoundertakearegionallevelapproach.TheinformationleadingtothejustificationsforeachsuitecanbefoundineitherthecurrentStateoftheFisheriesreportorvariousESDReportSeriesandtheIFMFisheriesManagementReports.

Objectives

Thefollowingarethekeyobjectivesthatareusedtoassessthestatusandriskforeachofthesuites.

Highlevel-Maintainstocksatlevelsthatareconsistentwithecosystemfunction.

Specificfishery-Maintainspawningbiomassofallcapturedspeciesatleastabovethelevelthatminimisestheriskofrecruitmentoverfishing.

Captured fish species - Estuarine/embayment

Description

General:Whilstcommercialfishingwasanearlyfeaturewithinallof theestuariesandembaymentsintheWestCoastBioregion,fewcommercialfishersnowremainwithincreasednumbersofrecreationalfisherstargetingavarietyoffinfishandCrustacea.Themostimportantfinfishspeciescapturedaremullet,whiting,herring,cobblerandblackbream.Themostimportantcrustaceanscapturedintheseregionsareblueswimmercrabsandriverprawns.


Commercial Fisheries:ThecommercialfisheriesthattargetthesespeciesincludetheWestCoastEstuarineManagedFishery(WCEF),whichoperatesintheSwan/CanningandPeel/Harveyestuaries,isamulti-speciesfisherytargetingblueswimmercrabsandmanyfinfishspecies.InCockburnSoundthereistheCockburnSound(LineandPot)fisherytheCockburnSound(FishNet)ManagedFisheries.ThecommercialblueswimmercrabfisheriesintheWestCoastBioregionaretheCockburnSoundCrabManagedFishery,theWarnbroSoundCrabManagedFishery, Area I (Comet Bay) and Area II (Mandurah to Bunbury) of the Mandurah to Bunbury ExperimentalCrabFishery.Blueswimmercrabsaretargetedusingavarietyoffishinggearbutmostnowusepurpose-designedcrabtraps.BlueswimmercrabsarealsoretainedbytrawlersoperatinginCometBayaspartoftheSouthWestTrawlManagedFishery.

Recreational fishery:RecreationalcrabbingintheWestCoastBioregioniscentredlargelyontheestuariesandcoastalembaymentsfromGeographeBaynorthtotheSwanRiverandCockburnSound.Blueswimmercrabsrepresentthemostimportantrecreationally-fishedinshorespeciesinthesouth-westofWAbyrateofparticipation.Themajorityofrecreationalfishersusedropnetsorscoopnetsanddivingforcrabsisbecomingincreasinglypopular.

Key issues:TherearesignificantanthropogenicfactorseffectingtheWestCoastBioregionsuchaschangesinwaterquality,pollutioninputs,habitatdegradationandfishingpressure.

Estuarine and Embayment captured species risk status – Finfish (Severe)

Indicatorspecies-BlackBream,Cobbler.KingGeorgeWhiting,PerthHerring.

Withinthesuiteofestuarinespecies,oneoftheindicatorsspeciesisratedatsevererisk(cobbler),whileanother(Perthherring)isathighrisk.

Cobbler:(Severe)Cobblerpopulationsaregeneticallyuniquewithineachwestcoastestuary.DespiterecentincreasesincatchinthePeel/Harveyestuaryin2008,thebreedingstocklevelsinthe3mainwestcoastestuariesappeartobeverylow,duetoacombinationofenvironmentalfactors(e.g.lossofbreedinghabitat),fishingpressureandthebiologicalcharacteristicsofthisspecies(e.g.lowfecundity,aggregatingbehaviour)thatmakeitinherentlyvulnerabletodepletion.

Perthherring:(High)WhilerecreationalfishersdonottargetPerthherring,thespeciesisconsideredtoberepresentativeofestuarinehealthasitspawnsintheupperreachesoftheSwanRiver.StocksofPerthherringaredepletedintheSwanestuaryand,accordingtoanecdotalevidence,arealsodepletedinthePeel/Harveyestuary.

Blackbream:(Medium)Blackbreampopulationsaregeneticallyuniquewithineachwestcoastestuary.Thecatchratesofbreamincreasedmarkedlyafter1990intheSwan/CanningEstuarysuggestingrecentincreasesinbreamstockabundanceintheseestuaries.Followingthisassumption,itcouldbeassumedthatbreedingstocklevelsarecurrentlyadequatetomaintainrecruitment.Environmentalfactorsandfishingarelikelytobesignificantsourcesofmortality.InallWesternAustralianestuaries,thelegalminimumlengthissetabovethelengthatmaturityandthereforeaffordsprotectiontoeachbreedingstock.

KingGeorgewhiting:(Medium)KingGeorgewhitinguseestuariesandcoastalwatersasnurseryhabitatswhilejuvenile(aged0to3+).Theyaremostvulnerabletocapturewhileresidinginestuarieswherethesizeatcaptureisconsiderablylessthanthesizeatmaturity.Targetedrecreationalfishingforthisspecies,bothinshoreandoffshorewillneedtobemonitoredtoensureoverallfishingmortalitydoesnotincreasetoanunsustainablelevelinthefuture.The


currentbreedingstocklevelisconsideredadequate.Lowjuvenilerecruitmentoccurredin2007suggestingthattherewillberelativelylowcatchesinwestcoastestuariesinthenext2-3years.

Estuarine and Embayment captured species risk status – Crustaceans (Severe)

IndicatorSpecies–BlueSwimmerCrabs,Prawns.

AnumberofcrustaceanspeciesarenolongerapparentwithinthePeelHarveyandSwan/Canningestuariesincludingschoolprawns(SwanandPeel)andKingprawns(Swan).

BlueSwimmerCrabs:(Medium–High)Thereareanumberofrelativelyseparatepopulationsofblueswimmercrabsalongthewestcoast.ThespawningstockinCockburnSoundisnowconsideredtoberecoveringfollowingtwoyearsoffishingclosures.WhilethecrabstocksinotherlocationsintheWestCoastarecurrentlyconsideredtobeadequate,giventhecollapseexperiencedinCockburnSound,thereisanintensiveresearchprogramcurrentlyunderwaytoinvestigatetheirstatusinthePeelHarveyandCometBayregions.

SchoolandKingPrawns:(Severe)PrawnstocksinboththeSwanandPeelHarveyestuariesarenolongeratlevelsthatproducereasonablecatchlevels.ArecentsurveyfailedtofindanykingprawnswithintheSwanRiver.

Legislative responsibility and relevant management authorities

JurisdictionwithintheestuariesandembaymentsoftheWestCoastBioregioniscomplex.WhiletheDepartmentofFisherieshasoveralllegislativeresponsibilityforall‘fish’undertheFRMA,withintheSwanRiverEstuary,theSwanRiverTrustisthePrimaryManagementAuthority(SwanandCanningRiversManagementAct2006).Inaddition,theDepartmentofWater,DepartmentofAgricultureandFoodanddifferentLocalGovernmentsadjacenttoestuarinesystemsalsohaveavarietyofmanagementroles.InCockburnSound,thereistheCockburnSoundManagementCommitteeandpartsoftheareaareunderthecontroloftheFremantlePortAuthority.


Current:

Finfish

y Commercialcatchdatawhereavailable,RecreationalAnglerProgram(RAP),occasionalrecreationalcreelsurveys.

y Specificprojectsareunderwayforcobbler,includingarecruitment-monitoringprogramusingfishtraps.

y TherearealsolarvalandjuvenilesurveysforPerthherringunderway(DoF).

y Along-termcomparativesurveyisbeingundertakenintheSwanestuary(MU)andintheBlackwoodEstuary.

y Factorsinfluencingrecruitmentsuccessandthegrowthratesofblackbreamarebeingstudied.

Crabs

y AnnualtrawlprogramsconductedinCockburnSoundprovideinformationonthestatusofthespawningstockandsubsequentstrengthofrecruitment,alongwithdataonthegeneralcrab population.


Proposed:

y Developacommercialcatch-monitoringprograminPeelHarvey,WarnbroSoundandtheSwanRiver.

y ExaminethegeneticrelationshipbetweentheCockburnSoundstockandthoseinWarnbroSoundandtheSwanRiver.

y Developafishery-independentsamplingprogramtoassessthestatusofthePeel-Harveycrab stock.


Current:

y Reducedorverylimitedcommercialfishing.Recreationalbaglimits.

Proposed:

y Adaptingfishingcatchandefforttoexternaldrivers.

y Improvedliaisonwithcatchmentmanagers.

External Drivers

AnthropogenicinfluencesimpactsignificantlyontheestuarinesystemsintheWestCoastBioregion.NutrientinputintheSwanRiverandPeelHarveyhasbeenassessedassevere,ashasdeoxygenationandacidsulphatesoils.Pollutioninputshavealsobeenflaggedasanexternaldriver,particularlyinCockburnSound.Coastaldevelopmentsincludingcanals(PeelHarvey)havebeenratedas‘highrisk’.

Captured fish species – Nearshore

Description

General:Coastaldevelopmentandinfrastructureislikelytoimpactthenearshoreareaparticularlyaroundpopulationcentres.Manyofthefishspeciesinthisgroupareheavilytargeted.Theindicatorspeciesforthenearshore‘suite’includeAustralianherring,tailor,whitingandgarfish.Somestocks(e.g.Australianherringmetropolitan)arelikelytobeoverexploited.

AnumberofmolluscspeciesarealsotargetedinthisareaoftheWestCoastBioregionbycommercialandrecreationalfishers.Abaloneandscallopsarethemostvaluablemolluscspeciesandoctopusareincreasinglybeingtargeted.Scallopsarefishedbythecommercialsectoronly,andfoundincommercialquantitiesintheAbrolhosandGeographeBayareas.Abalone,whilstfoundallalongthecoastarenotuniformlydistributed.Themostvulnerableareaforabaloneisoff the Perth metropolitan area.

Commercial Fisheries:TherearethreemainfisheriesoperatinginnearshoreareasoftheWestCoastBioregion.Thecommercialabalonefisheryoperateswithsinglediversworkingoffsmallvessels(generallylessthan9minlength).TheAbrolhosIslandsandMidWestTrawlManagedFishery(AIMWTF)targetsmainlysouthernsaucerscallopswhiletheSouthWestTrawlFishery(SWTMF)targetsscallopsinFremantleandGeographeBay.

Recreational Fisheries:Recreationalfishingforfinfishisintenseinnearshorewatersandisgenerallyundertakenusingline-basedmethodsfromtheshoreorboats.


TherecreationalfisheryharvestmethodforabaloneisprimarilywadingandsnorkellingwiththemainfocusofthefisherybeingthePerthmetropolitanstocks.

Key Issues:Thefishingpressurefromtherecreationalsectorsonnearshorefinfishspeciesisexpectedtoincreaseasaresultofchangestotherecreationaldemersalfisheryregulations.

Nearshore captured species risk status – Finfish (High)

IndicatorSpecies:Australianherring,tailorandwhiting.

Australianherring:(High)TheAustralianherringstockappearedtobeatsatisfactorylevelsinallregionswhenassessedinthelate1990s–andaboveaconservativebiologicallimitreferencepointof40%ofthetotalvirginbiomass.However,thestatusofthestockisnowuncertain.TheavailableinformationstronglysuggeststhattheabundanceofAustralianherringinsouthwesternWAislowerthaninthelate1990s,duetoconsecutiveyearsoflowrecruitment.Thereasonsforlowrecruitmentareunclearbutareprobablyrelatedtoenvironmentalfactors.Inaprolongedperiodoflowrecruitment,relativelyhighcatchesofbreedingfish,especiallybyrecreationalfishersonthelowerwestcoast,areofconcerninregardtothesustainabilityofthefishery.

Tailor:(High)Availableevidence(asignificantdeclineinboat-basedcatch,anecdotalreportsoflowshore-basedcatchrates,highlyvariableannualrecruitment)suggeststhat,despiterecentchangestobagandsizelimits,therecreationalexploitationrateoftailorintheWestCoastBioregionisatanunacceptablelevel.

Whiting:Therehasbeennoassessmentonthestockstatusofthemainwhitingspeciesinthewestcoastregion(Yellow-finnedwhiting,Sillago schomburgkii).Thisisscheduledtobeginin2009/10throughtheprovisionoffundsfromNRM.

Nearshore captured species risk status – Molluscs (Low to medium)

IndicatorSpecies-Roe’sAbalone,Scallops,Octopus.

Roe’sAbalone:Themainperformancemeasureforthefisheryrelatestothemaintenanceofadequatebreedingstocksineachareaofthefishery.Thisisassessedusingacombinationofthelevelofquotaachievedandtheeffortrequiredtoreachthisquota,bothofwhichreflectstockabundance.In2008,catchandeffortinmostareasfishedwerewithintheagreedranges,indicatingthatoverallbreedingstocklevelswereadequate.

Scallops:TheannualfishingseasonarrangementsintheAIMWTMFaresetsothatthemajorityofmaturescallopsareabletospawnbeforefishingoccurs.Breedingstocksarethereforeprotectedensuringrecruitmentisdependentonlyonenvironmentalconditionseachyear.

Octopus:Thebreedingstocklevelofoctopusonthewestcoastiscurrentlynotassessed.FisherycatchratesinCockburnSound,usingunbaitedpipesasthemethodofcapture,providearelativeannualindexofoctopusabundance.Ameanannualcatchrateiscalculatedfromdatasuppliedbycommercialfishersinvoluntarydailylogbookssince2003.TheannualcatchrateinCockburnSoundhasbeengraduallyincreasingsince2005,probablyasaresultofimprovedfisherknowledgeandgeartechnology.


TheDepartmentofFisherieshasclearlegislativeresponsibilityundertheFishResourceManagementAct1994,forallretainedfishspeciescaughtinStatewaters(3nm)whichgenerallyincludesallthenearshorewatersouttoadepthof20m.



Current:

Finfish:

RefertocurrentStateoftheFisheriesforcurrentmonitoringandresearchprojects.

AprojectundertakenaspartofWAMSI4.5.3modelledthedifferentbehaviouralchangesthatmayoccurduetotheannualseasonalclosureplacedondemersalfishing(finfish)in2009(Metcalfetal.2010).Thisprojectidentifiedthelikelybehaviouralresponsesandhighlightedtheneedforbehaviouralassessmentswhenimplementingnewrulesandlegislation.

Current–Molluscs:

Scallops:DailymonitoringofthecommercialscallopfleetcombinedwithVMS,providesrealtimemonitoringofcatchandeffort.Recruitmentsurveysprovidepredictivecatchinformationtohelpdetermine;whentheseasonwillopenandclose.

Abalone:CurrentresearchisfocusedonmonitoringandstockassessmentofRoe’sabaloneusingcatchandeffortstatisticssuppliedbycommercialfishersanddigitalvideoimagery(DVI)surveysbyindustrydivers,whosurveyselectedsiteswithanunderwatervideocamera.

FisheryindependentsurveysofthesizeanddensityofRoe’sabaloneacrossthenear-shoresub-tidalreefhabitatatelevenindicatorsitesbetweenMindarieKeysandPenguinIslandarealsocompleted annually.

Octopus:AnFRDCprojectiscurrentlyunderwaytodeterminethefishingefficiencyofoctopustriggerpots,estimatepotentialharvestfromoctopusfisheriesandcalculatetheeffectsoffishingclosuresonoctopuspredationratesonrocklobsters.Thiswillinvolveestimatingfishingefficiency,determiningthepopulationdemographicsofthetargetedOctopus tetricus, determiningsustainableharvestlevelsandassessingtheinterconnectednessoflocaloctopuspopulations.


Current:

Finfish:Recentadditionalmeasuresincluderecreationallicencesforboatfishingandaseasonalclosureforrecreationaldemersalfishing.

Abalone:ThecommercialRoe’sabalonefisheryismanagedprimarilythroughoutputcontrolsintheformoftotalallowablecommercialcatches(TACCs),setannuallyforeachareaandallocatedtolicenseholdersasindividualtransferablequotas(ITQs).

TherecreationalRoe’sabalonefisheryismanagedunderamixofinputandoutputcontrols.Themanagementfortherecreationalsectorisrestrictivewithadedicatedlicencerequiredtofish,andthefisheryonlyopenforapproximately6hoursperyear(onehourperweekforsixweeks).

ThesophisticatedsuiteofmanagementarrangementsinplaceandtheproactivemanagementusedintheAbaloneFisheryhaveresultedinthemaintenanceofabalonestocksandthesuccessfulcontinuationofafisheryonavulnerablespeciesinahighlypopulatedarea.


Scallops:AIMWTMFoperatesunderaninputcontrolsystem,withrestrictionsonboatnumbersandtrawlgearsizeaswellasseasonalclosuresandsignificantspatialclosuresprotectingallnear-shorewaters.Thefisheryoperatestoathresholdcatchleveltoceasefishingfortheseasonatanagreedminimumcatchrate.

External drivers

Finfish:Itislikelythatfactorsotherthanfishing(e.g.thestrengthoftheLeeuwinCurrent)significantlyinfluencesthemigrationpatternsofpre-spawningherringandotherinshorefinfish,thedistributionofspawningandthedispersaloflarvae.Thesefactorswouldthenaffectjuvenilerecruitmentsuccessandthecatchabilityandabundanceofadultfishineachregion,whichultimatelydeterminesthetotalbreedingstocklevel.

Molluscs: ThereisastrongrelationshipbetweenthestrengthoftheLeeuwinCurrentandscalloprecruitment.

General:Coastaldevelopmenthasbeenassessedasa‘high’riskinthenearshoreareaandincludesmarinas,boatrampsportdevelopments.Marinepestsarerankedashigherrisksinsomeportareas,includingGeraldton.

Captured fish species - Inshore demersal

Description

General:Theinshoredemersalmanagementareaextendsfrom20m-250mdepthsandincludeshabitatssuchassand,rockyreef(algaldominated),coralreefandspongegardens.Speciesintheinshoredemersalmanagementareaaregenerallyassociatedwiththeoceanfloororbenthoswithinthisdepth.Themajorityofthewesternrocklobsterfisheryoperatesinthisregion,whichformsthebasisofthelargestfisheryinWAandAustralia.

ThereisalsoahighleveloffishingfordemersalfinfishinthisregionespeciallyforkeytargetspeciessuchastheendemicWestraliandhufishandbaldchingroper,pinksnapper,andbreakseacod.Theindicatorspeciesforthefinfishwithinthisregionareallover-exploitedandtheyhavehistoricallybeentargetedbythecommercialandrecreationalsectorsandareconsideredhighvalue‘trophyfish’.Thesespeciesareslow-growing,longlived,generallyformspawningaggregationswhichmakesthemparticularlysusceptibletofishingmortality.

Commercial fisheries:TheWestCoastRockLobsterManagedFishery(WCRLF)targetsthewesternrocklobster,Panulirus cygnus,onthewestcoastofWesternAustraliabetweenSharkBayandCapeLeeuwin,usingbaitedtraps(pots).Withanannualproductionthataveragesabout11000t,thisisAustralia’smostvaluablesingle-speciesfishery.

ThefinfishfisheriesincludetheWestCoastDemersalScalefish(Interim)ManagedFishery(WCDSIMF).Fishersusehandlinesanddroplinestotargetdemersalspecies.However,fishersintheWestCoastDemersalGillnetandDemersalLongline(Interim)ManagedFisheryandtheWestCoastRockLobsterManagedFisheryalsocatchdemersalspecies.

Recreational fisheries:TherecreationalrocklobsterfisheryprimarilytargetswesternrocklobstersinthePerthmetropolitanareaandGeraldtonusingbaitedpotsandscubadiving.

Recreationalfisherstargetingdemersalfinfishspeciesfishalmostexclusivelyfromboatsusinglines.DemersalscalefisharealsotargetedbythecharterboatindustryintheWestCoastBioregion.


Inshore demersal captured species – Scalefish (High to Severe)

Indicator Species:WesternAustraliandhufish,pinksnapper,baldchingroper;whiskeryshark,duskywhalers.

Scalefish:AssessmentsofthestatusofscalefishstocksintheWCDSFareconductedprimarilythroughestimatesoffishingmortality(F),usingarangeofmethods,foreachoftheindicatorspecies.EstimatesofFaredeterminedseparatelywherepossiblefromsamplescollectedfromboththecommercialandrecreationalsectorsineachofthezoneswherethosespeciesareimportantincatches.ValuesofFarethencomparedtointernationalbenchmarkstodeterminetheoverallstatusofthestocksintheWCDSF.

Independentexternalreviewsoftwostockassessments(basedondatacollectedbetween2002and2006andduring2007/08)havebeencompleted.ThereviewssupportedtheDepartment’sconclusionsthatoverfishingwasoccurringofthestocksofdhufish,pinksnapperandbaldchingroperintheWestCoastBioregionandmanagementactionsarerequiredtoensuresustainability.TheseresultssupportedtheimplementationofaseasonalclosureandaFishingFromBoatLicencefordemersalrecreationalfishingintheWestCoastBioregion.

Sharks:Duskyshark.Asbreedingbiomassisalreadylikelytobeattheminimalacceptablelimitreferencepoint(40%ofitsunfishedlevel)andcontinuingtodecline,thisstockrequirescarefulmonitoringandmayrequireadditionalspecies-specificrecoverymeasuresinthefuture.

Whiskeryshark.Theage-structuredpopulationmodelestimatedthatmaturefemalebiomasshadincreasedbybetween1.3and1.8%peryearsince2001/02,exceptin2004/05whenitestimateda3.0%declineinthefemalebreedingstock.Thisstockisrecoveringadequately.

Inshore demersal captured species – Crustaceans (Medium)

Indicator Species:WesternRockLobster

Rock Lobster:Thecurrentlevelofeggproductionisnearrecordlevelsandthebiologicalmanagementobjectiveofensuringthateggproductionofrocklobstersremainsabovethethresholdlevelswith75%confidenceoverthefollowingfiveyearswillbemetbythecurrentandproposedmanagementarrangementsinspiteoftherecordlowrecruitmentlevelsthathavebeenexperiencedrecently.Thereforetherisktothelobsterstockisatacceptablelevels.


AstheDepartmentofFisherieshasclearlegislativeresponsibilityundertheFishResourceManagementAct1994,forallretainedfishspeciescaughtinStatewatersandformostofthefishspeciestothe200nmAustralianFishingZone(AFZ)orEconomicExclusionZone(EEZ)aspartoftheOffshoreConstitutionalSettlement(OSC).


Current–Lobster:

y Researchactivitiescontinuetofocusonthecorebusinessofassessingstocksustainabilityandforecastingfuturecatchlevels.

y Collection of monthly commercial catch, effort and processor data

y Commercialmonitoringatsixlocations.


y Voluntarylogbookprogram.

y Puerulussettlementmonitoring

y Small-meshpot

y Fishery-independentbreedingstock

y Taggingoflobsters/analysisoftagging

y MonitoringofMarineSanctuaryzonesatRottnestIsland.

y Stock assessment

y Developmentandmaintenanceofpopulationdynamicsmodel

y Economicassessmentofmanagementstrategies(CRCapplicationpending)

y Undertakinganoceanographicmodellingstudy(FRDC-funded)

y Environmentalfactorspuerulussettlement.(FRDC-funded)

y Novelstatisticaltechniques(FRDC-funded)

y Colonisationofpueruluscollectors(FRDC-funded)

Current–Finfish:

y Researchisfocusedonthemonitoringandrecoveryofthekeydemersalfishstocksinthissuite

y Commercialcatchandeffort(CAES)data,RecreationalLogbookProgram(RAP),spawningandrecruitmentsurveysandcreelsurveys.

y Monitoringagecompositionsandassessmentsoffishingmortalityofdhufish,snapperandbaldchingroper

y The stock structures are being examinedusing genetic otolithmicrochemistry andoceanographictechniquesunderWAMSIsub-project4.4.2

y ModellingRecreationalFishingBehaviour(WAMSI4.5.3)(Metcalfetal.2010)

Proposed:

y Deepwatersettlementoflobsters

y BreedingstocksurveyinBigBankregion

y Oceanographicsurvey


Current–Lobsters:

Thisfisheryismanagedusingatotalallowableeffort(TAE)systemandassociatedinputcontrols.Theprimarycontrolmechanismisthenumberofpotslicensedforthefishery,togetherwithaproportionalusagerate,whichcreatestheTAEinpotdays.

Therecreationalcomponentofthewesternrocklobsterfisheryismanagedunderfisheriesregulations,whichimposeamixofinputandoutputcontrolsonindividualrecreationalfishers.Thesearrangementsaredesignedtocomplementthemanagementplanforthecommercialfishery


Withtherecordlowpuerulussettlementin2008/09,significanteffortreductionswereinstigatedforthewhites(ca.35%)andreds(ca.60%)portionsoftheseasontoensurecarryoverintothepredictedlowcatchyearsof2010/11and2011/12.

Current–Finfish:

Considerablerationalisationofthecommercialfleethasbeenundertakenandsignificantreduction of recreational effort is to be implemented.

In 2009, each commercial boat in the WCDSIMF has been allocated a share of the total effort (fishingdays),withaviewtomanagingthefisherytoatotalallowablecommercialcatch(TACC).Followingreviewofthecatcheseachyear,thenumberofeffortdaysallocatedtocommercialfisherscanbemodifiedtoensurecatchdoesnotexceedtheTACC.

Boat-basedrecreationalfisherstargetingdemersalscalefishnowrequireaboatfishinglicenceandeachyeartherewillbeatwo-monthclosuretofishingforthosespeciesfromOctober15toDecember 15.

External drivers

Climatechangeimpactingthestrengthofcurrentsmaybeinfluencinglarvaldistributionofthesedemersalspecies.Forinstance,thereisastrongrelationshipbetweenthestrengthoftheLeeuwinCurrentandlevelsofpuerulussettlement.ThisrelationshipmayalsobeimpactedbyotherfactorsincludingstormeventsandtheIndianOceanDipole.Increasesinwatertemperaturesalsoappeartobeaffectingsomeofthebiologicalparameterssuchassizeatmaturityandthesizeofmigratinglobsters.

Captured fish species – Offshore demersal (250m - EEZ)

Description

General:Theoffshoredemersalmanagementareaextendsfrom250mdepthtotheEEZandmayincluderegionsoffthecontinentalshelf.Habitatsincludedintheoffshoreareaarerockyreef,spongegardensandsand.Similarlytotheinshoredemersalareathespeciesintheoffshoredemersalmanagementareaareassociatedwiththebenthos.

Theindicatorspeciesforthisgrouparethebassgroper,eightbargroper(greybandedcod),hapukuandrubysnapper.Otherspeciesinthiscategoryincludeblue-eyetrevallaandbightredfish.Thesedeep-waterdemersalspeciesarelarge,slowgrowing,longlived,havevariablejuvenilephasesandthereislimitedinformationontheirlifehistory.Theyareverysusceptibletooverfishingandincursignificantbarotraumamortality.

Offshore demersal captured species – Scalefish (High)

Indicator Species:Bassgroper,eightbargroper,hapukuandrubysnapper.

ThesespecieshavebeencommerciallyfishedintheWestCoastsincetheearly1990swiththecatchpeakingandthendeclininginmorerecentyears(5species;2004/0590t,2007/0824t).ThesespeciesarealsocaughtintheCommonwealthWesternDeepwaterTrawlFishery(200m-EEZ)withanecdotalevidencesuggestingthattherapiddeclineofsomeofthesetrawlspecieswasaresultoffishingdownthespawningaggregations.


TheCharterfisheryhasrecordedsomecatchesofthisspecies(e.g.greybandedcod),however,anecdotalevidencesuggeststhatthereisagreaterfocusfromtherecreationalsectorfortheselargedeep-waterspecies.

Thesedeepwaterspeciesareparticularlyvulnerabletooverfishing,astheirbiologyindicatesthattheyarelong-livedandwouldthereforehavelowratesofnaturalmortalityandproductivity.Inaddition,someaggregatetospawnandmostsufferhighratesofbarotraumafollowingcaptureduetothegreatdepthsinwhichtheyarefished(>250m).


TheDepartmentofFisherieshasclearlegislativeresponsibilityundertheFishResourcesManagementAct1994,forallretainedfishspeciescaughtinStatewatersandformostofthefishspeciestothe200nmAustralianFishingZone(AFZ)orEconomicExclusionZone(EEZ)aspartoftheOffshoreConstitutionalSettlement(OSC).

ThosespeciesretainedinFisheriesunderCommonwealthlegislationandmanagedbytheAustralianFisheriesManagementAuthority(AFMA)includethedeepwatertrawlspecies(mostlybugs)andWesterntunaandbillfishfishery(bigeyeandyellowfintuna,broadbillswordfish).Thesespeciesarenototherwisetobetaken.TheIndianOceanTunaCommission(IOTC)providesaforumformanagingtunaandbillfishstocksintheIndianOcean.


Current:

Commercialcatchandeffortdatacollection,creelandboatrampsurveys.

Proposed:

Preliminaryriskassessmentprovidedtomanagers.

Informationfromnewrecreationallicensingrequirements.


Current:

Significantclosuresandrestrictionsforboththecommercialandrecreationalsector.

External drivers

TheCommonwealthWesternDeepwaterTrawlFisheryfishesinwatersalongthewestcoastofAustraliainwatersfromthe200misobathtotheboundaryoftheAFZandbetweenapproximatelyExmouthandAugusta.ThisfisheryoverlapstheWCDSFandhasobtainedsubstantialcatches.

TheCommonwealth’sSouth-westMarineBioregionalPlanincorporatestheaimofintroducingmarinereserves,whicharelikelytocontainareasclosedtofishing.ThishasthepotentialtorestrictaccesstofishinginpartsoftheWestCoastBioregiontoallsectors,i.e.commercial,recreational and charter.

Captured fish species – Pelagic

Description

General:Thepelagicmanagementareaconsistsoftheopenwaterfrom20mdepthtotheEEZ.Pelagicspeciesarenotgenerallyassociatedwiththebenthosoroceanfloor,theyareassociated


withmidtoupperlayersofthewatercolumn.Severalstocksareexploitedincludingmackerel,pilchards,samsonfish.Catchesarerelativelysmallandnosustainabilityconcernshavebeenidentifiedatpresent.

Commercial Fisheries: West Coast Purse Seine Fishery captures pilchards, sardines, Perth herring,yellowtailscad,Australiananchovyandmaray.

Recreational Fisheries:ThereisanincreasingrecreationalfisheryforpelagicspeciessuchasSamsonfishpossiblyduetolocaliseddepletionoftraditionallymorepopulardemersalfishspecies.

Pelagic captured species – Finfish (Low)

Indicatorspecies-arestillbeingfinalisedforthissuiteofspecies.Atpresentthespeciesinthismanagementsuiteincludemackerel,pilchardandsamsonfish.Thecurrentfishinglevelhasbeen assessed as acceptable.


TheDepartmentofFisherieshasclearlegislativeresponsibilityundertheFishResourceManagementAct1994,forallretainedfishspeciescaughtinStatewatersandformostofthefishspeciestothe200nmAustralianFishingZone(AFZ)orEconomicExclusionZone(EEZ)aspartoftheOffshoreConstitutionalSettlement(OSC).

ThosespeciesretainedinFisheriesunderCommonwealthlegislationandmanagedbytheAustralianFisheriesManagementAuthority(AFMA)includethedeepwatertrawlspecies(mostlybugs)andWesterntunaandbillfishfishery(bigeyeandyellowfintuna,broadbillswordfish).Thesespeciesarenototherwisetobetaken.

TheIndianOceanTunaCommission(IOTC)providesaforumformanagingtunaandbillfishstocksintheIndianOcean(ABAREpg.156).

Monitoring and Research Programs

Current:

SeecurrentStateofFisheriesforcurrentresearchandmonitoring.Boatrampandcreelsurveys,RAP data.

Proposed:

Noadditionalactivityinthisarea.

Management Actions (DoF)

Current:

SeethecurrentStateoftheFisheriesformanagementcontrolsforeachgroupofspecies.

External Drivers

Fewidentifiedforthisareaandgroupofspecies.


Protected species

Background

Theprotectedspeciescomponenttreehasbeendividedintoprotected‘fish’speciesundertheFRMAsuchasteleosts,crustaceansandmolluscsaswellas;protectednon‘fish’speciessuchasbirds,reptilesandmammalsthatareprotected,butnotdefinedas‘fish’undertheFRMA (Figure20).IntheWestCoastBioregiontherearesomemammals,fewreptilesandonlyasmallnumberofotherprotectedspeciesthatinteractwithfishingactivities.TherearealsominimalfisheriesintheWestCoastthatproducebycatch(R.Campbell,pers.comm.).

Objectives:

Minimiseanydirectandindirectinteractionswithprotectedspecies.

AllWAfisheriesareconductedinamannerthatavoidsmortalityof,orinjuriesto,endangered,threatened or protected species.

Figure 20: West Coast Region: Protected species; consolidated risk.

Protected species - Protected non ‘fish’ species

Description

Thiscategoryreferstothosespeciessuchasbirds,reptilesandmammalsthatareprotected,butnotdefinedas‘fish’undertheFRMA.

Althoughmostlyassessedaslowriskthereareanumberofissuesthathaveratedamediumrisk.Thesearelikelylow–medium.

Protected non ‘fish’ species risk status - Little Penguins (Medium)

Thelargestcolonyoflittlepenguins,Eudyptula minorinWAisPenguinIsland(Perthmetropolitanarea)thatrepresentsthenorthwesterlylimitoftheirdistribution.Anumberofpotentialthreatshavebeenidentifiedandincludeareductioninfoodavailabilityduetoincreasedfishinganddestructionoffishhabitat,collisionswithwatercraftincludingfishingvessels,oilspillsandchemicalcontaminantssuchasTributyltin(TBT)(B.Cannell,perscomm.).Althoughastronglinkhasbeenshownbetweenwhitebaitandthedietsoflittlepenguins(Lenantonetal,2003),itisunlikelythatfishingiscausingareductioninthewhitebaitabundanceasthereisonlyverylimitedfishingofthisspeciesinthePerthregion(FletcherandSantoro,2009).TherehasalsobeenareductionofcommercialfishingvesselsintheareaascrabfishinghasbeenbannedinCockburnSoundandthereareseasonalclosuresinplaceforsnapperfishing.


Protected non ‘fish’ mammals species risk status - Australian Sea Lion (Medium)

The Australian sea lion, Neophoca cinereaisAustralia’sonlyendemicaswellastheleastnumeroussealspecies.Itisuniqueamongpinnipedsinbeingtheonlyspeciesthathasanon-annualbreedingcycle(Galesetal,1994),italsohasthelongestgestationperiodofallpinnipedsandaprotractedbreedingandlactationperiod.

Althoughhistoricalpopulationsizeandrangeforthisspeciesisunknown,itappearsthatuncontrolledsealingoperationsreducedtheirnumbersconsiderably(Gales,1994).PopulationviabilityanalysesofAustraliansealion(ASL)subpopulationshaveindicatedthatevenlow-levelchronicincidentalmortalityinfisheriescouldleadtotheirextinction.ThecommercialfisheriesidentifiedinwhichbycatchofAustraliansealionsmaybesignificantwerepotortrapfisheriesforrocklobster(WesternrocklobsterandSouthernrocklobster),anddemersalgillnetfisheriesforsharksofftheWesternAustralianandSouthAustraliancoasts.

SeaLionExclusionDevices(SLEDs)arenowmandatoryonallWARockLobsterpotsinusewithina25kmradiusfrombreedingcolonies.Itisbelievedthatthisactionhassolvedanydirectcaptureissuesofjuvenilesealionsinrocklobsterpots(R.Campbell,pers.comm.).Extensive,independent(research)coverageofgillnetdeploymentsindicatedthatmarinemammalcapturewasatarateofjustover1per10,000kmgillnethours(McAuleyandSimpfendorfer,2003).Asaresult,in2002theESDriskassessmentratedPinnipedcaptureaslowtonegligibleintheWCDGLF.

ThereisnowlimitedgillnetfishingeffortonthewestcoastofWA(WCDGLF).Managementrestrictions incorporate seasonal closures (2 months inshore of the 200m isobath) and closed areasincludingatotalexclusioninthemetropolitanregion.Thefisherynowoperatesatapproximately40%ofpeaklevel(1988).

Therelativenumberofsealionsfoundintrapsorrelatedfishinggear(perpotlift)andotherfisheryinteractionsisusedasanindicatorofimpactsonsealionsfromtherocklobsterfishery.

Performance Measure: No increase in the rate of sea lion capture occurs. The historical incident rangeapprox3sealioncapturesperseason.

Evaluation:Duringthe2005/06WRLseason,nosealioncaptureswerereportedthereforetheperformancemeasurewasmetin2005/06.

Therelativenumberofsealionsfoundingillnetsandotherfisheryinteractionsisusedasanindicatorofimpactsonsealionsfromthedemersalgillnetfishery.

Performance Measure: No increase in the rate of sea lion capture.

Evaluation:TheecologicalsustainabilityassessmentundertheEPBCisvaliduntil26February2009andwillbereassessedatthistime.


ThesespeciesareprotectedunderamixofStatelegislation(WildlifeConservationActandRegulations1950,ConservationandLandManagementAct1984)andCommonwealthlegislation(EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999knownastheEPBCActandtheWildlifeProtectionAct1982).UnderCommonwealthlegislation(generallyappliedtowatersoutsideStatewatersor3nm)itisanoffencetokill,take,tradeormoveprotectedspeciesunlessyouhaveapermit.Theprotectedorlistedspeciesgroupincludesalarge


numberofmarineanimalsincludingseabirds,turtles,seasnakesandmammals.Deliberatelycausinginterferencetocetaceanscarriesadditionalpenalties.Asfishingcanoccasionallyresultinunavoidableaccidentsorincidents,allinteractionswithprotectedspeciesundertheEPBCAct must be reported.


Current:

y PotentialimpactofBycatchintheWAsharkgillnetfishery(FRDCprojectNo.2007/059.PIR. Campbell).

y InteractionbetweenAustraliansealionsandthedemersalgillnetfisheriesinWesternAustraliaR. Campbell DoF for the Centre for Applied Marine Mammal Science. In press.

y WAMSI Node 4, Project 4.4 Captured Species Assessments.

Proposed:

y Continuecurrentactivities,noadditionalactivitiesproposedatthisstage.


Current:

y MandatorySLEDsinallRockLobsterpotswithina25kmradiusofsealionbreedingcolonies.

y MandatoryreportingtoDEWHAofanyinteractionswithsealionsbycommercialfishery.

y DoFCAESlogbookreportingofsealionsinteractions.

ProposedNewActions-

y WCDGDLFwillbereassessedin2009againsttheESDconditionsforthefishery.

PossiblemanagementactionsbyotherDepartments-

SARDIhasinplaceanumberofspatialmanagementmeasures(includingfishingclosuresandMPAs)andiscurrentlydevelopingmitigationmeasurestoreducepossiblesealionbycatch(FRDCresearchproject2007/041)forthesouthernrocklobsterfisheryandgillnetfisheriesinSA.

MaintainingstronglinkswithresearchersattheSARDIisparticularlyimportant.

External drivers

As themajorityof theAustraliansea lionpopulationoccurs inSouthAustralia (86%),withonly14%inWesternAustralia(Goldsworthyetal.2008),itisimportantthatthereisstrongandeffectiveprotectionmeasuresinbothStatejurisdictions.ASARDIriskanalysisidentifiedfisheriesbycatchandclimatechangeasthegreatestriskfactorstotheconservationandmanagementofAustraliansealions(Goldsworthyetal,2008).The‘uncertainty’inthisassessmentwasconsideredhighforclimatechangebecausetheextentandimplicationsofclimatechangeimpactsonAustraliansealionpopulationsareunknown.Lossofsomekeybreedingsitestosealevelriseislikely(Goldsworthyetal,2008).

Review period

5 years


Protected species - Protected ‘fish’ species

Description

UnderStatelegislation(FishResourcesManagementAct1994)andCommonwealthlegislation(EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999)thereareanumberof‘fish’speciesprotectedincludingallpipefish,seahorsesandseadragons,manysharkspecies,somefinfishspeciesandasmallnumberofcrustaceansandmolluscs.InWesternAustralia,mostoftheprotectedspeciesarefoundinthesouthernornorthernwaterswithfewspeciesoccurringintheWestCoastBioregion.Thisgrouphasbeenratedaslowandwillnotbedescribed.

Benthic habitat

Benthichabitatsinestuariesandembaymentsweretheonlyhabitatcategorytobegivenariskgreaterthanlow(Figure21).Asaresult,onlythiscategorywillbedescribedindetail.

Background

OperationalObjectives

Tomanagefisheriesimpactssuchthatonlyacceptableimpactsoccurtobenthichabitats (Figure21).

Estauries &Embayments

Nearshore Inshore demersal(algae dominated)

Offshore demersal

Benthic Habitat Categories

Figure 21: West Coast Region: Benthic Habitat; consolidated risk of unacceptable change in the short term (5 years).

Benthic habitat - Estuaries and embayments

Description

Estuariesandembaymentsareoftensomeofthemosthighlyimpactedaquatic(marineandfreshwater)areasintheworldduetocoastaldevelopmentandnutrientrun-off.TheestuarineandembaymentareasoftheWestCoast,includingtheSwanandPeelHarveyestuaries,havebeenratedasahighrisk(Figure9).ThelargestpopulationareasanddevelopmentintheStatesurroundtheseareas.Nutrient,pollutionanddrainageinputs,foreshoredegradation,dredgingforboatingchannelsandshellsandmining,appeartohaveresultedinsignificantbenthicimpacts,particularlyonseagrassandsandhabitats.

ThereissomechanceforchangetooccurasaresultoftrawlfisheriesforscallopsintheAbrolhos,however,workinSharkBayindicatesthattheimpactonsandybottomsfromthistypeoffishingisthoughttobenegligible(Kangasetal,2006).ThereislimitedtrawlingintheWestCoastecosystemandnotrawlingintheestuariesandembayments.

Benthic habitat risk status- Estuarine and embayment (High)

Twoofthehabitatcategories(sandandseagrass)bothratedhighinstakeholderassessmentduetosandmininginembaymentsandnutrientloadsandsedimentationthatsmotherseagrassbeds.


Theriskwasmeasuredagainstunacceptablechangeintheshortterm(5years).Anyimpactfromfishingislikelytobelowornegligible.

Legislative responsibility and other relevant management authorities

UndertheFRMA,DoFhaslegislativeresponsibilityforseagrass,howevertheDepartmentofEnvironmentandConservation(formallyDEP)takesmanagementresponsibilitythroughtheEnvironmentProtectionAuthority(EPA)foranyimpactsonseagrassresultingfromexistingactivitiesandwhennewdevelopmentsareproposed.UndertheBenthicPrimaryProducerHabitatProtectionforWA’sMarineEnvironment(EPAReportNo.292004)onlyacumulativelossofseagrasslessthan5%outsideMarineParksorsimilarisconsideredacceptable.IntheSwanRivertheSwanRiverTrust(SwanandCanningRiversManagementAct2006)hasresponsibilityfortheecologicalhealthoftheRiversystem,asdoestheCockburnSoundManagementCouncilforCockburnSound.


Current:

y NospecificDepartmentofFisheriesprojectsintheSwanRiverorCockburnSoundrelatingto benthic habitat.

y Nospecificmanagementactions.

External drivers

Issuesaffectingbenthichabitatsinclude,dredging,mining,coastaldevelopment,nutrientrun-off and pollution inputs.

Social outcomes

Background

Socialoutcomes(directstakeholders,Figure22),Finfishobjective:

y Maintainorimprovethelifestyleforcommercialfishersandaccesstoqualityrecreational(andcharter)fishingexperiencesbycreatingsustainableinshoredemersalfisheries.

y Maintainorimprovethelifestyleforcommercialfishersandaccesstoqualityrecreational(andcharter)fishingexperiencesinnearshoreareasbycreatingsustainablefisheries.

Thereisoftenconflictbetweencommercialandrecreationalfishersandoccasionallythegeneralpublicthatdeterminesthatcommercialfishersmaybeforcedoutofareasbylocalgovernments(e.g.beachbaitfishers).Thiswouldchangetheirlifestyleandalsoincreasestressandcausethelossoftraditionalfishingvaluesintheregion.

Finfish

Crustaceans

Molluscs

Direct stakeholders(see previous)

Indigenous Communities Regional Communities Statewide Communities

General Social Outcomes

Figure 22. Social Outcomes consolidated risks.


Social outcomes - Finfish

Description

Demersal:Themanagementthathasbeenimplementedtoaddressthesustainabilityconcernsanumberofdemersalspeciescapturedinthecommercialwetlinefisheryandtherecreationalsector.Thecommercialmanagementchangesmayhaveaffectedthesmallercommercialoperatorsthathavebeenlong-termfishersfromtraditionalfishingfamilies.Managementchangesthatforcethesepeopletoleavetheindustrycancauseaveryhighlevelofstress.Forthoseremaininginthefisherythereisstilltheuncertaintyassociatedwiththeoutcomesofmanagement,particularlythefinalisedpackageforrecreationalsector,includinglicencesandseasonal closures.

Nearshore:Giventhechangestothedemersalfishery,itislikelythatanumberofrecreationalfishersmayrefocustheireffortfromdemersaltonearshoreareas.Thisislikelytoreduceaccesstoandqualityofrecreationalfishinginthenearshoreareasofthemetropolitanzone.ThereisalsoconcernthatconflictbetweencommercialsalmonandrecreationalfishersintheLeeuwin-Naturalisteregionmaymeanthatthecommercialfishersareeventuallyexcludedfromsomenearshoreareas(e.g.EagleBay).Thiscreatesstressforcommercialfishersandmayalsoreducethequalityofexperienceforrecreationalfishers.

Estuaries and Embayments:Recreationalfishingpressureinestuariesandembaymentsisgenerallyveryhigh,particularlyclosetothemetropolitanzone(i.e.SwanCanningandPeelHarveyestuaries).InsomeareasoftheWestCoastecosystemthereisconsiderablelobbyingpressurefromtherecreationalsectortoforcethecommercialfisheriestoleaveestuariesandembayments.Asaresult,thereisbothconflictbetweenindividualrecreationalfishersandpotentialissueswithlocaliseddepletionsofrecreationallyimportantspecies.Forinstance,CockburnSoundhasbeenclosedtobothcommercialandrecreationalcrabfishingsince2007.Bothissuesmayreducethequalityofrecreationalfishingexperiences.

West Coast social outcomes risk status – Finfish (Severe)

Thecurrentrisklevelforsocialoutcomesgeneratedbyfinfishfishinginthewestcoastforbothcommercialandtherecreationalsectorissevere.


Current:

Creelandboatrampsurveysarecurrentlybeingundertakentoobtaininformationonrecreationalfishingincludingthespecies,numberandsizeoffishcaptured,fishingmethodandarea,andtimespentfishing.Inaddition,thenumberofcustomersandspeciescapturedarerecordeddailybyallcharteroperators.Thisinformationcouldbeusedtoprovideanindicationofaccesstofishingactivitiesandqualityoffishingexperiences.

TheDoFCommunitySurveyisrunannuallyandsurveysapproximately500membersofthepublicfromthePerthmetropolitanarea(444in2007,Baharthah2008).Informationregardingrecreationalfishingparticipationrates,satisfactionwithfishingexperiences,awarenessandopinionoffishingregulationsareanumberoftopicscoveredinthesurveys.

Apilotstudytodevelopasocio-economicassessmentoffisheries(commercialandrecreational)intheWestCoastBioregionhasrecentlybeencompleted(seeWAMSINode4Project4.5.3report).Inaddition,anassessmentofrecreationalshore-basedeffortiscurrentlyunderwayatthe Department of Fisheries.



Current:

AseasonalclosureimplementedintheWestCoastregioninordertoprotectdemersalfishspeciessuchasdhufish,pinksnapperandbreakseacod.Inaddition,newrecreationallicences,increasedlicencefeesforexistinglicencesanddecreasedsizeandbag(recreationalfishery)limitshavebeenappliedtoasuiteofdemersalfishspecies.Itisunknownhowthesemanagementstrategiesimpactthesocialoutcomesforfisherstargetinginshoredemersalfishstocks.

–Fisherstargetingfishinthenearshoreareaareoftenlimitedbybagandsizelimitsforparticularspecies(e.g.pinksnapper).AseasonalclosurealsolimitsthecaptureofasuiteofdemersalfishspeciesbetweenOctober15thandDecember15th.

–Thecaptureofmanyspeciesthatresidewithinestuariesandembayments,suchasblackbream,arerestrictedbybagandsizelimits.Inaddition,somespeciesareprotectedbyseasonalclosures,suchasblueswimmercrabs.

–Themetropolitanzonehasbeenclosedtothecommercialwetlinefisherysince2007.Thisfisheryissubjecttoinputcontrols,suchasrestrictionsonthenumberofboats,sizeofgearandspatialclosures.Inaddition,sizeandbag(recreationalfishery)limitsapplytoalargenumberofdemersalfishspecies.Theseasonalclosuremayalsodeterminethatfishersoncharterboatsmaynolongercapturetheprotectedsuiteofspeciesduringtheclosedperiod.Thishasunknownconsequencesontheeconomicviabilityofthefisheries.

External drivers

PossiblemanagementactionsbyotherDepartments.Pollutionthroughagriculturalandstorm-waterrun-offhasthecapacitytoalterestuarineecosystemsbyincreasingnutrientloads.SeasonalfreshwaterflushingisalsoveryimportantintheSwanCanningandPeelHarveyestuariesasthisfreshwaterinputcanleadtoalgalblooms,whichinturn,deoxygenatethewaterandshadetheenvironmentbelow.Embaymentsmayalsobeimpactedbypollutionthroughindustrialdischargeandrubbish(generalandfishery-related).Agriculturalandstorm-waterrun-offareunderthecontroloftheDepartmentsofWater,AgricultureandPrimaryIndustries.Collaborationwiththesedepartmentswouldbenecessaryforanychangetooccurtobenefitfishstocksandfisheries.TheDepartmentofFisheriesisproactiveinitsendeavourstoreducefisheries-relatedrubbish,however,collaborationwithotherdepartmentsandagencieswouldbenecessarytoreduceindustrydischargeandgeneralrubbish.

Review period

3-5years.

Social outcomes - Crustaceans

Description

Thereareconcernsforthesustainabilityofwesternrocklobsterpopulationsthathaveledtoreductionsinefforttoreducethecatch.Suchreductionsinthefishingeffortintheregionhashadsubstantialimplicationsforemploymentinthefishingindustryandwouldbeexpectedtohavesignificantlyincreasedstresslevelsforcommercialrocklobsterfishers.

Thedailybagandboatlimitsaswellasthepossessionlimitsforrecreationallycaughtwesternrocklobsterhavealsobeenreduced(www.fish.wa.gov.au).Theblueswimmercrabandprawn

http://www.fish.wa.gov.au


fisheriesarebothcurrentlysubjecttosustainabilityconcerns.TheSwanandPeelHarveyprawnfisheriesandtheblueswimmercrabfisheryinCockburnSoundhavebeenclosedtofishing(commercialandrecreational)withtheaimofallowingthebreedingstocklevelstoincrease.Suchreductionsmayreducethequalityoftherecreationalfishingexperience.

Crustaceanswithintheestuariesandembaymentsarealsosubjecttorelativelyhighrecreationalfishingeffortinandnearthemetropolitanzone.TherecreationalcatchofprawnsusedtobehighintheSwanandPeelHarvey,however,thenumbersofprawnssignificantlyreducedovertime(e.g.drasticreductioninschoolprawns).SincetheinstigationofFishingClosurestherecreationalcatchofcrustaceans(prawnsandcrabs)hasbeensubstantiallyreduced.

Socialoutcomes(directstakeholders),Crustaceans:estuariesandembaymentsobjective;

Maintainorimprovethelifestyleforcommercialfishersandaccesstoqualityrecreational(andcharter)fishingexperiencesinestuariesandembaymentsbycreatingsustainablefisheries.

Social outcomes risk status – Crustaceans (High)

LowpuerulussettlementandchangestomanagementplacethesocialriskwithregardtocrustaceansintheWestCoastBioregionatahighriskofchange.


Current:

Asaboveforsocialoutcomesforfinfish.


Current:

Effort,licenceusage,complianceandthemonetaryvalueofeachfisheryaremonitoredbytheDoF.A50%effortreductionwasplacedonthecommercialfisheryintheWestCoastRegionin2008.CoursesandskillsworkshopsaremadeavailablebyDoFforpeopleinthefishingindustryandprovidetheseemployeeswithadditionaloralternativeskillsthatmayenablethemtoaccessother employment.

Current:

Thesouthwesttrawlfishery(includesthecaptureofprawns)ismanagedusinginputcontrolssuchasboatnumbers,gearsizesandfishingareas.Thecommercialandrecreationalcaptureofblueswimmercrabsisgovernedbyaseriesofseparatemanagementarrangements,suchasinputcontrols(vesselsnumbers,trapnumbers),sizelimitsandseasonalrestrictions.Asstatedpreviously,theSwanCanningandPeelHarveyareclosedtoprawnfishing,whileCockburnSoundisclosedtofishingforblueswimmercrabs.

ProposedNewActions:

TheCockburnSoundclosureandstatusof thePeelHarveyblueswimmercrabfishery(recreational)willbereviewedfollowingthecompletionofresearchprogramsintheseareas.

External Drivers

EnvironmentalfluctuationsarethoughttoplayanimportantroleintherecruitmentofpuerulustoWesternAustralia(PearceandPhillips1988,Caputietal.2001).Inaddition,fluctuationsinwater


temperaturearethoughttoimpactgrowthandthereforerecruitmentofsizedindividualsintothefishery.InvestigationintorelationshipsbetweenrocklobsterrecruitmentandenvironmentalfactorsarecurrentlyunderwayattheDepartmentofFisheries.

Fluctuationsinrecruitmentmayoccurduetoenvironmentalchanges,whichmayaffectspawningandlarvalsurvival.Therelationshipbetweenrecruitmentandcatchandenvironmentalfactorsarebeingevaluatedprogressivelyasdatabecomesavailable.

Review period

5 years.

Social outcomes - Statewide communities

Description

WesternAustraliancommunitieshavetheexpectationofaccesstofreshlocalfishaswellashealthymarineecosystemsandtheirassociatedresources.Changesinthesustainabilityofstocksandfisheries(e.g.westernrocklobsterandwetlinefisheries)arelikelytoalterperceptionsofthecommunitieswithregardtofishingandfisheriesmanagement(DoF)intheWestCoastBioregion.Forexample,areductionintherocklobsterfleetoperatingoutofJurienBaymaycreatenegativeperceptionsoffisheriesmanagement.Changestothesustainabilityoffishstocksandfisheriesaswellasalterationstothemanagementoffisheriesmaydeterminethattheavailabilityoflocalseafooddeclines.Inaddition,theremaybelittleavailablelocalseafoodduetocostsofprocessing,thevalueoftheAustraliandollarandincentivestoexportfishratherthan sell locally.

Changestothesustainabilityoffishstocksandfisheriesaswellasalterationstothemanagementoffisheriesmaydeterminethatthecatchoflocalseafooddeclines.Lowavailabilitycoupledwithhighdemandtendstoresultinincreasedprices.Inaddition,whentheAustraliandollarislowthereisanincentivetoexportfishratherthanselllocallyasexportersreceiveagreaterprofit.ItonlybecomesprofitabletosellseafoodlocallywhentheAustraliandollarisveryhighagainsttheUSdollar.Asaresult,inordertocompetewiththeprofitsgainedbyexportingseafood,localconsumerswouldgenerallyneedtopayhighlyinflatedprices.

Culturalandheritagevaluesarethequalitiesthatmakeaspecificanddefinableplace,areaorassetimportanttothecommunity.Heritagevaluesderivefrommanysources,includinghistoricalassociations,architecturalfeaturesandthenaturalecosystemswithinwhichthecommunityreside.Culturalandheritagevaluesmaybelostormodifiedthroughouttimeduetochangingperceptionsandattitudes,changeintheuseofnaturalresourcesonwhichthecommunityreliesaswellastheuseofnewtechnologies.

Commercialandrecreationalfishingisundervaluedinsocietyand,asaresult,thelossofatleastsomeculturalandheritagevaluesislikelyduetoincreasedmanagementregulationsandsustainabilityissues.Forinstance,thelossoflocalfishingfleets(e.g.inFremantle)andlocallycaughtseafoodmaydeterminethatthecommunityvaluesassociatedwithfishingareeventuallyforgotten.

TheeconomicdownturnaswellassustainabilityissuesforanumberoffishpopulationsandincreasedmanagementregulationsintheWestCoastregionhaveslowedboatsales.Ifthesetrendscontinueforasubstantialperiodoftime,thenumberofboatsalesmaynotbeenoughtoensurebusinessesremaineconomicallyviable.


Social outcomes risk status – Statewide communities (Moderate)

Theriskofchangetosocialoutcomeswithregardtostatewidecommunitiesismoderate.


Current:

AstakeholdersurveyisundertakenbytheDepartmentofFisheriesonaregularbasis.Thissurveycollectsinformationfromallfishingsectors(commercial,recreationalandcharter)aswellasotherstakeholders,suchasmembersofthetouristindustry,universities,aquacultureandpearling.

Current:

QualitativemodellingiscurrentlybeingundertakenbytheDoFtoinvestigatelinksbetweensocial,economicandecological(includingfishing)values.Thisworkmayhelptoidentifyareasthatareparticularlyimportantinordertoretainculturalandheritagevaluesintheregion.

Proposed:

Perthandregionalmarketsalesfigureswouldindicatetheproportionoffishbeingsoldlocallyversusinternationally.Inaddition,thenumberoflocalretailerssellinglocallycaughtfishislistedonthe‘fishlovers’website(WAFIC,www.fishlovers.com.au).Thenumberofretailersonthislistcouldalsobeusedasanindicationoftheavailabilityoflocalseafood.


Seeaboveformanagementactionsforfinfish.

External drivers

Anincreasein‘green’orconservationthinkingmaychangecommunityexpectationswithregardtofishingactivitiesandthemanagementofmarineresources.Inaddition,themediaplaysalargeroleininfluencingcommunityperceptions,whichmaychangeinresponsetothemediaasopposedtodirectchangesinfisheriesormanagement.

Changesinstockandfisheriessustainabilityduetoclimatechangemayforcetheclosureoffisheriesormakefishingeconomicallyunviable.Asaresult,fishingfleetsmaybelostfromcommunitiesandtraditionalfishingfamiliesmaybeforcedtofindalternativeemployment.Ifsuchchangesinenvironmentalfactorsweretooccur,nochangetofisheriesmanagementwouldbeabletoretainallculturalandheritagevalesassociatedwithfishingthroughoutthestate.

Duringarecessionboatsalesarelikelytoslow,asrecreationalfishingwouldnolongerbeapriorityformanyfamilies.Ifarecessionoccursinconjunctionwithdecliningstockabundance(duetofishing,climatechangeornaturalvariation)andincreasedmanagementregulations,afurtherreductioninboatsalesmayoccuraspeoplemaynolongerseethebenefitsofgoingfishing.Similarly,commercialfishersmaynothavethefundstoputintobuyingnewboatsduringarecessionorfollowingstockdeclineandmanagementchanges.Asaresult,theprofitsofboatsellingbusinessesmaybesignificantlyreduced.

Review period

5 years.

http://www.fishlovers.com.au


Social outcomes - Regional communities

Description

Theflowoneffectsfromsustainabilityissuesforspeciesincludingrocklobsteranddemersalscalefish,whichhaveleadtotheincreasedmanagementrestrictionsmayhaveflow-onimpactstofisheries-relatedareasandthegeneralcommunitiesinsomeregionalareas.ApaucityoflocalseafoodmaybeanissueintheLeeuwin-Naturalisteasthereissomelevelofexpectationthatlocallycaughtseafoodwillbeavailabletotouristsvisitingthearea.Peoplebuyingfishforsaleinfishshopswouldthenbeforcedtopayhigherpricesandeithermakeasmallerprofitorincreasethesalepriceforconsumers.Whenpricesincrease,fewerpeoplewillbewillingtopurchasefishandprofitswillbereduced.Similarly,truckdrivers,touristaccommodationbusinessesandtackleshopsmayexperiencereducedprofits.

BoatbuildersintheWestCoastRegionmaybefacedwitheconomicdeclineduetothedeclineinanumberoflargecommercialfisheries(i.e.wetlineandrocklobsterfishery)intheregion.Inaddition,therecentglobaleconomicdeclinehasreducedrecreationalboatsalesand,likely,boatbuildinginthemetropolitanzone.Theeconomicdeclineisthoughttohavehad(andwillcontinuetohave)asevereimpactontheeconomicviabilityofboatbuildersintheregion.

TheuseofaseasonalclosuretoprotectabroadsuiteofdemersalfishspeciesmayreducethenumberoffishingtouriststravellingtotheWestCoastBioregion.Fishingintheregionmaynolongerbeperceivedasworthwhilewithclosuresandadditionalrestrictionsinplace.

Social outcomes risk status – Regional communities (High)

Thesocialoutcomestoregionalcommunitieshavebeenidentifiedasahighriskofchangemainlyduetoimpactsonboatbuilding,tourismandlocalsalesoffish.


Current:

TheDepartmentofFisheriesregularlycollectsinformationregardingthenumberandlocationoffishprocessorsinthestate.Changeinthenumberofprocessorscouldbeusedtoindicatetheeconomicviabilityoffishery-relatedindustries.

Indicators:

Trends in the number of charter clients could be used as an indication of the impact of managementchangesonfishingtourism.


Current:

The number of clients, catch (species and number) and location of charter trips are documented and collected by the Department of Fisheries.


Seeactionsforfinfishabove.


External Drivers

Changesinstockandfisheriessustainabilityduetoclimatechangemayforcetheclosureoffisheriesormakefishingeconomicallyunviable.Reducedprofitsmaythenflow-ontofishery-related businesses.

Review period

5 years.

Economic outcomes

Economic outcomes – Finfish

Description

Thesustainabilityofanumberofcommerciallyimportantdemersalfishspeciesisofconcernandifrecruitmentcontinuestodeclinetheprofitabilityofthewetlinefisherywouldbereduced.Similarly,ifmanagementregulations,suchaseffortrestrictions,increaseinordertoaidthesustainabilityofthedemersalfishstocks,fisheryprofitabilitywillalsodecline.Thesustainabilityofdemersalfishstocksandchangesinmanagementregulationsalsoimpactontheprofitabilityoftheeconomicviabilityofthecharterfishingindustryintheregion.

Figure 23: West Coast Region: Consolidated tree; Economic outcomes for Direct Stakeholders.

Economic outcomes risk status – Finfish (High)

Theeconomicoutcomesassociatedwithfinfishweredeemedtobeathighriskofchangefollowingstakeholderconsultation.


Current:

Thenumberofcommercialandcharterboatsoperatingaswellasthenumberofpeopleemployed(licence-holders,crewetc.)isrecordedbytheDepartmentofFisherieseachyear.Inaddition,


catchratesarealsocollectedfromthesevesselsthroughouttheyear.ThisinformationcouldprovideanindicationoftheeconomicwellbeingofthefisheriesintheWestCoastBioregion.


Current:

None.

External drivers

Thepriceoffishisdrivenbydemandandmaybesomewhatremovedfromtheavailabilityoftheproductinthemarket.Forinstance,demandmayfluctuatedependingontrendsinpublicopinion.Thesefluctuationsindemandandpricemaythereforeimpacttheeconomicoutcomeoffisheries.

Review period

5 years.

Economic outcomes – Crustaceans

Description

Adeclineinthesustainabilityofwesternrocklobsterstockswouldbeexpectedtoreducefisheryprofitsthroughreducedcatchrates.Inaddition,thealterationofmanagementstrategies,throughincreasedrestrictions,mayimpactfisheryprofits.However,ifthemanagementregulationssimplyremovethelatenteffortfromthefisheryandthetonnescapturedremainstable,adeclineinprofitsmaynotoccur.Alteredmanagementregulationsmayalsobenefitfisherswithalargenumberofpotspreferentiallytothosewithasmallernumberofpots.Thismayforcethesmallerbusinessestoleavethefishery.

Economic outcomes risk status – Crustaceans (High)

Theriskofchangeintheeconomicoutcomesforcrustaceanswasassessedashighfollowingdiscussionwithstakeholders.


Current:

None.


Current:

Effort,licenceusage,complianceandthemonetaryvalueofeachfisheryaremonitoredbytheDepartmentofFisheries.A50%effortreductionwasplacedonthecommercialfisheryintheWestCoastRegionin2008.CoursesandskillsworkshopsaremadeavailablebyDoFforpeopleinthefishingindustryandprovidetheseemployeeswithadditionaloralternativeskillsthatmayenable them to access other employment.

External drivers

Thepriceoffish(includingcrustaceansandshellfish)isdrivenbydemandandmaybesomewhatremovedfromtheavailabilityoftheproductinthemarket.Forinstance,demandmayfluctuate


dependingontrendsinpublicopinion.Thesefluctuationsindemandandpricemaythereforeimpacttheeconomicoutcomeoffisheries.

EnvironmentalfluctuationsarethoughttoplayanimportantroleintherecruitmentofpuerulustoWesternAustralia(PearceandPhillips1988,Caputietal.2001).Inaddition,fluctuationsinwatertemperaturearethoughttoimpactgrowthandthereforerecruitmentofsizedindividualsintothefishery.InvestigationintorelationshipsbetweenrocklobsterrecruitmentandenvironmentalfactorsarecurrentlyunderwayattheDepartmentofFisheries.

Review period

5 years.

Institutional governance

Background

TheinstitutionalgovernancetreecoverssomeofthemostimportantissueswhenconsideringEBFM.Itconsidersallthelegislative,administrativeandbureaucraticprocessestoenabletheissuesintheprevioustreestobedealtwitheffectively.Verylittleinformationisavailableregardingtheinstitutionalgovernancetreeandthereportingisthereforebrief.

ThecomponentsweredividedintoDepartmentofFisheriesmanagementprocessesandexternallinkagesandconsultationprocesses(Figure24),andwereassessedashavingahighriskofchange.

Internal processes(DoF)

External linkages

InstitutionalGovernance

Figure 24. Consolidated risks- Institutional Governance arrangements.

TheDepartmentofFisheriesiscurrentlyundergoingconsiderablechangeinfinancialresourcing,staffstructureandstrategicdirection.Theexternalcommunicationprocessesarealsounderreview.

Asthesechangeswillsignificantlyimpactontheinstitutionalgovernanceandassociatedrisks,it is not appropriate to consider these issues at present.

TheInstitutionalGovernanceriskswillbereviewedin12months.


Appendix referencesBarharthah,T.2008.DepartmentofFisheriesCommunitySurvey2007.FisheriesOccasionalPublication

No.47.DepartmentofFisheries,GovernmentofWesternAustralia,Perth,Australia,48pp.

Bellchambers,L.M.2010.TheeffectofwesternrocklobsterfishingonthedeepwaterecosystemsofthewestcoastofWesternAustraliaFinalFRDCReport–ProjectNo.2004/049.FisheriesResearchReport,199,DepartmentofFisheries,GovernmentofWesternAustralia.96pp.Bellchambers,L.M.,Bridgwood,S.,How,J.,Lewis,P.,deLestang,S.,Mackie,M.,

Coutts,T.2009.Developmentofalong-termprogramtomonitorcoastalcommunitieswithintheSwanregion.FisheriesResearchReportNo.183,DepartmentofFisheries,GovernmentofWesternAustralia. 130pp.

Bellchambers,L.M.,Evans,S.andMeeuwig,J.2010.Abundanceandsizeofwesternrocklobster(Panulirus cygnus)asafunctionofbenthichabitat:implicationsforecosystem-basedfisheriesmanagement.MarineandFreshwaterResearch, 61:279-287.

Brearley,A.(2005)ErnestHodgkin’sSwanland:theestuariesandcoastallagoonsofsouth-westernAustralia.UniversityofWesternAustraliaPress,Perth,550pp.

Caputi,N.,Chubb,C.andPearce,A.(2001)Environmentaleffectsonrecruitmentofthewesternrocklobster,PanulirusCygnus.MarineandFreshwaterResearch,52(8):1164-1174.

CockburnSoundManagementCouncil(2007)StateofCockburnSound.WesternAustralia,DepartmentofEnvironmentandconservation,Perth.

Cresswell,G.R.(1991)TheLeeuwinCurrent—observationsandrecentmodels.JournaloftheRoyalSocietyofWesternAustralia,74:1–14.

DepartmentofFisheries,WesternAustralia(2007)ManagementoftheHoutmanAbrolhossystem:adraftreview2007-2017.Perth,W.A.FisheriesmanagementpaperNo.220,88pp.

Edgar,G.P.(1990)PredatorpreyinteractionsinseagrassbedsI.TheinfluenceofmacrofaunalabundanceandsizestructureonthedietandgrowthofthewesternrocklobsterPanuliruscygnusGeorge.Journalofexperimentalmarinebiologyandecology,139(1-2):1-22.

EdgarG,ShawC(1995)Theproductionandtrophicecologyofshallow-waterfishassemblagesinsouthernAustralia.II.DietsoffishesandtrophicrelationshipsbetweenfishesandbenthosatWesternPort,Victoria.Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 194,83-106.

Fletcher,W.J.,andSantoro,K.(eds)2009.Stateofthefisheriesreport2007/2008.DepartmentofFisheries,GovernmentofWesternAustralia,Perth,Australia,308pp.

Gales,N.J.,Shaughnessy,P.D.andDennis,T.E.(1994)Distribution,abundanceandbreedingcycleoftheAustraliansealionNeophocacinerea(Mammalia:Pinnipedia).JournalofZoology,London234:353–370.

Hall,N.G.andWise,B.S.(2011)DevelopmentofanecosystemapproachtothemonitoringandmanagementofWesternAustralianfisheries.FRDCReport–Project2005/063,FisheriesResearchReportNo.215,DepartmentofFisheries,GovernmentofWesternAustralia.112pp.

Hodgkin,E.P.andMajer,J. (1976)Anindextoecological informationonestuariesandmarineembaymentsinWesternAustralia.CSIRODivisionofFisheriesandOceanographyReportNo.70.

Hutchins, B. (1979) A guide to the marine fishes of Rottnest Island. Perth,WA,CreativeResearch,103p.

Hutchins,J.B.andSmith,K.N.(1991)AcatalogueoftypespecimensoffishesintheWesternAustralianMuseum. Records of the Western Australian Museum; Supp, no. 38, 56 pp.

Jernakoff,P.,Phillips,B.F.andFitzpatrick,J.J.(1993)Thedietofpost-pueruluswesternrocklobster,Panulirus cygnus,atSevenMileBeach,WesternAustralia.MarineandFreshwaterResearch,44(4):649-655.


Johannes,R.E.,Pearce,A.F.,Wiebe,W.J.,Crossland,C.J.,Rimmer,D.W.,Smith,D.F.andManning,C.(1994)Nutrientcharacteristicsofwell-mixedcoastalwatersoffPerth,WesternAustralia.Estuarine,Coastalandshelfscience,39:273-285.

Joll,L.M.andPhillips,B.F.(1984)NaturaldietandgrowthofjuvenilewesternrocklobsterPanuliruscygnusGeorge.Journalofexperimentalmarinebiologyandecology,75:145-169.

Kangas,M.I.,Weir,V.S.,Fletcher,W.J.andSporer,E.(2006)SharkBayscallopfishery.ESDreportseries No. 2, Western Australia. Department of Fisheries, 104 pp.

Keesing,J.K.andHeine,J.N.(2005)StrategicResearchFundfortheMarineEnvironment(SRFME):draftSRFMEinterimreport(conciseversion).StrategicResearchFundfortheMarineEnvironment(WesternAustralia);CSIROMarineandAtmosphericResearch,21pp.

Kendrick,G.A.,Lavery,P.S.andPhillips,J.C.(1999)InfluenceofEckloniaradiatakelpcanopyonstructureofmacro-algalassemblagesinMarmionLagoon,WesternAustralia.Hydrobiologia,398/399:275-283.

Kirkman,H.andKuo,J.(1990)PatternandprocessinsouthernWesternAustralianseagrass.AquaticBotany,37(4):367-382.

Laurenson,L.J.B.,Unsworth,P.,Penn,J.W.andLenanton,R.C.J.(1993)Theimpactoftrawlingforsaucerscallopsandwesternkingprawnsonthebenthiccommunitiesincoastalwatersoffsouth-westernAustralia.FisheriesReportNo.101.Perth,WesternAustralia.93pp.

Lenanton,R.C.J.,Robertson,A.I.andHansen,A.(1982)NearshoreaccumulationsofDetachedmacrophytesasnurseryareasforfish.MarineEcologyProgressSeries,9:51–57.

Lenanton,R.C.J.,Valesini,F.Bastow,T.P.,Nowara,G.B.,Edmonds,J.S.andConnard,M.N.(2003)TheuseofstableisotoperatiosinwhitebaitotolithcarbonatetoidentifythesourceofpreyforwesternAustralianpenguins.JournalofExperimentalMarineBiologyandEcology,291(1):17-27.

Limbourn,A.J.andWestera,M.B.(2006)Areview,gapanalysisandassessmentofcurrentinformationrelatingtomarineandcoastalenvironmentsintheSWregion.ProjectC1-G1:AcoastalandmarinemanagementplanningframeworkfortheSouthWestCatchmentsCouncil,UniversityofWesternAustralia, Perth.

McAuley, R.B. and Simpfendorfer, C.A. (2003) Catch composition of the Western Australian temperate demersalgillnetanddemersallonglinefisheries,1994to1999.FisheriesresearchreportNo146,Western Australia, Department of Fisheries, 78 pp.

Metcalf,S.J.,Moyle,K.andGaughan,D.J.2010.Qualitativeanalysisofrecreationalfisherresponseandtheecosystemimpactsofmanagementstrategiesinadata-limitedsituation.FisheriesResearch,106:289-297.

Metcalf,S.J.,Pember,M.B.andBellchambersL.M.(2011)Identifyingindicatorsoftheeffectsoffishingusingalternativemodels,uncertainty,andaggregationerror.ICESJournalofMarineScience,doi: 10.1093/icesjms/fsr050.

Nardi,K.,Jones,G.P.,Moran,M.J.andCheng,Y.W.(2004)Contrastingeffectsofmarineprotectedareasontheabundanceoftwoexploitedreeffishesatthesub-tropicalHoutmanAbrolhosIslands,WesternAustralia.Environmentalconservation,31(2):160-168.

Pearce,A.F.andPhillips,B.F.(1988)ENSOevents,theLeeuwinCurrent,andlarvalrecruitmentofthewesternrocklobster.ICESjournalofmarinescience,45(1):13-21.

Pearce,A.F.andWalker,D.I.(Eds.),1991.TheLeeuwinCurrent:aninfluenceonthecoastalclimateandfisheriesofWesternAustralia.ProceedingsoftheLeeuwinCurrentSymposium,Perth,March,Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 74, 140pp.

Playford,P.E.(1988)GuidebooktothegeologyofRottnestIsland.Perth,WAGeologicalSociety,W.A.Division,GeologicalSurveyofWesternAustralia,67pp.


PhillipsJC,KendrickGA,LaveryPS(1997)Atestofafunctionalgroupapproachtodetectingshiftsinmacroalgalcommunitiesalongadisturbancegradient.MarineEcologyProgressSeries,153:125–138.

Radford,B.,VanNiel,K.P.andHolmesK.2008.WAMarineFutures:Benthicmodelingandmappingfinalreport,UniversityofWesternAustralia,51pp.

Robertson,A.I.andLucas,J.S.(1983)Foodchoice,feedingratesandtheturnoverofmacrophytebiomassbyasurf-zoneinhabitingamphipod.JournalofExperimentalMarineBiologyandEcology,72(2):99-124.

RottnestIslandAuthority(2003)RottnestIslandmanagementplan2003-2008.Fremantle,W.A.RottnestIsland Authority, 129p.

Seddon,G.(1972)Senseofplace:aresponsetoanenvironment,theSwanCoastalPlain,WesternAustralia.UniversityofWesternAustraliaPress,Perth,274pp.

Semeniuk,V.andSearle,D.J.(1986)TheWhitfordsCusp-itsgeomorphology,strategraphyandagestructure.JournaloftheRoyalSocietyofWesternAustralia;Vol.68,Part2,Perth.

Shaw,D.J.(1988)Rankingofwatersforfisheriesvalues.Freshwatercatch,38:19-21.Smallwood,C.B.,Beckley,L.E.,andSumner,N.R.(2006)Shore-basedrecreationalanglingintheRottnestIslandReserve,WesternAustralia:spatialandtemporaldistributionofcatchandfishingeffort.Pacificconservationbiology,12:238-251.

Steinberg,P.andKendrick,G.(1999).Kelpforests.In:Under Southern Seas: the ecology of Australia’s rocky reefs.Andrew,N.(ed.).UniversityofNewSouthWalesPressLtd,Sydney,pp60-77.

Vanderklift,M.A.andKendrick,G.A.(2004)Variationinabundancesofherbivorousinvertebratesintemperatesubtidalrockyreefhabitats.MarineandFreshwaterResearch,55(1):93-103.

Waddington,K.I.,JessicaJ.Meeuwig,ScottN.Evans,LyndaM.Bellchambers(2010)Assessmentofthe benthic biota of a deep coastal ecosystem by remote and in situsamplingtechniques.MarineandFreshwaterResearch,61(10):1164-1170.

Wernberg,T.,Coleman,M.,Fairhead,A.Miller,S.andThomsen,M.(2003)MorphologyofEcklonia radiata(Phaeophyta:Laminarales)alongitsgeographicdistributioninsouth-westernAustraliaandAustralasia.MarineBiology,143(1):47-55.


Appendix 2 Consequence and likelihood tables used for risk analysis of individual ecological assets.

ModifiedfromFletcher(2005,2010).

Target species

Table A1 Consequence categories for the Major Target/Vulnerable species. The default objective was - maintain spawning biomass at least above the level where it is likely not to result in recruitment overfishing

Level Ecological (Target/Vulnerable Species)Minor (1) Either not detectable against background variability for this population; or if

detectable, minimal impact on population size and none on dynamics.Spawning biomass 100% - 70% unfished levels

Moderate (2) Fishery operating at, or close to, full exploitation rate but the long-term recruitment/dynamics are not being adversely impacted. Spawning Biomass < 70% but > Brec

Major (3) Stock has been reduced to levels that are now directly affecting future recruitment levels or severely affecting their capacity to increase from a depleted state (i.e. recruitment overfishing).Spawning Biomass < Brec but > Brec * 0.5

Extreme (4) Stock size and recruitment levels reduced to an extent that local extinctions or significant species range contraction > 50% have occurred. If it continues it would require listing in an appropriate endangered IUCN category and extinctions could result.Spawning Biomass < Brec * 0.5

Bycatch

Table A2 Consequence categories for the Bycatch of Protected species. The default objective was - To maintain levels of catch of these species at acceptable levels

Level Ecological (Protected Species Bycatch)Minor (1) Essentially no protected species are impacted

Moderate (2) The fishery catches or impacts these species at the maximum level that is accepted

Major (3) The catch or impact by the fishery on the protected species is above that accepted but there are few additional stock implications

Extreme (4) The catch or impact is well above the acceptable level and this is having significant additional impacts on the already threatened status.


Ecosystem

Table A3 Consequence levels for the impact of a fishery on the general ecosystem /trophic levels. The default objective was - To maintain any impact on the wider ecosystem by fishing to be within acceptable levels’

Level Ecological (ECOSYSTEM)Minor (1) Some relatively minor shifts in relative abundance may be occurring but it is

unlikely that there would be any measurable changes at whole of trophic levels outside of natural variation.

Moderate (2) Measurable changes to the ecosystem components without there being a major change in function. (i.e. no loss of components or real biodiversity), these changes are acceptable. None of the main captured species play a ‘true’ keystone role

Major (3) Ecosystem function altered measurably and some function or components are locally missing/declining/increasing &/or allowed new species to appear. The level of change is not acceptable to enable one or more high level objective to be achieved.Recovery measured in many years to decadal.

Extreme (4) An extreme change to ecosystem structure and function. Very different dynamics now occur with different species/groups now the major targets of capture and/or dominating the ecosystem. Could lead to a total collapse of ecosystem processes.Long-term recovery period may be greater than decades

Habitat

Table A4 Suggested consequence levels for the impacts on habitats. (Three levels – standard, fragile, critical). The default objective was – To maintain the spatial extent of habitat impacts from the fishing activity to a comparatively small percentage of the habitat/community’

Level Ecological (HABITAT)Minor (1) Insignificant or barely measurable impacts on habitat(s) which are very localised

compared to total habitat area. (Suggestion – these impacts could be < 5%; < 3%; <2%) of the original area of habitat)

Moderate (2) There are likely to be more widespread impacts on the habitat but the levels are still considerable acceptable given the % of area affected, the types of impact occurring and the recovery capacity of the habitat (Suggestion – for impact on non-fragile habitats this may be up to 50% [similar to population dynamics theory] - but for more fragile habitats, to stay in this category the percentage area affected may need to be smaller, e.g. 20% and for critical habitats less than 5%)

Major (3) The level of impact on habitats may be larger than is sensible to ensure that the habitat will not be able to recover adequately, or it will cause strong downstream effects from loss of function.(Suggestion - Where the activity makes a significant impact in the area affected and the area > 25 - 50% [based on recovery rates] of habitat is being removed; whilst for critical habitats this would be < 10%)

Extreme (4) Too much of the habitat is being affected, which may endanger its long-term survival and result in severe changes to ecosystem function and the entire habitat is in danger of being affected in a major way/removed.(Suggestion this may equate to 70 - 90% of the habitat being affected or removed by the activity; for more fragile habitats this would be > 30% and for critical habitats 10-20%)


Social

Table A5 Suggested consequence levels for social disruptions. The default objective was Maintenance or enhancement of appropriate social structures and outcomes.

Level Social ImplicationsMinor (1) None, or not measurable. Includes situations where there is no direct

involvement by a community in the fishery.

Moderate (2) Some direct impacts on social structures but not to the point where local communities are threatened or social dislocations will occur

Major (3) Severe impacts on social structures, at least at a local level.

Extreme (4) Changes will cause a complete alteration to some social structures that are present within a region of a country

Economic

Table A6 Suggested consequence levels for economic outcomes. The default objective was - Maintenance or enhancement of economic activity

Level EconomicMinor (1) Possible detectable, but no real impact on the economic pathways for the

industry or the community.

Moderate (2) Some level of reduction for a major fishery or a large reduction in a small fishery that the community is not dependent upon.

Major (3) Fishery/industry has declined significantly in economic generation and this will have clear flow on effects to other parts of the community. May result in some level of political intervention.

Extreme (4) Total collapse of any economic activity coming from what was an industry that the community derived a significant level of their income or employment (resource dependency), including possible debts. High levels of political intervention likely.

Likelihood

Table A7 Likelihood Definitions – these were defined for the likelihood of a particular consequence level actually occurring within the assessment period (5 years was used).

Level DescriptorLikely (4) A particular consequence level is expected to occur in the timeframe

(Probability of 40 - 100%)Possible (3) Evidence to suggest this consequence level is possible and may occur in

some circumstances within the timeframe(Probability of 10 - 39%)

Unlikely (2) The consequence is not expected to occur in the timeframe but it has been known to occur elsewhere under special circumstances (Probability of 2 - 9%)

Remote (1) The consequence has never been heard of in these circumstances, but it is not impossible within the time frame (Probability < 2%)

ecosystem based fisheries management case study report ... · based on ecosystem boundaries rather...

Documents