Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery

Transcription

1 Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery Resource Assessment Group (SESSF RAG) Environment Meeting MINUTES CHAIR: MR SANDY MORISON 2 August 2011 Freycinet Room CSIRO Marine Research Laboratories Hobart

2 Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery Resource Assessment Group (SESSF RAG) Minutes 2 August 2011 Chair: Mr Sandy Morison Agenda Item 1 Preliminaries 1.1 Welcome and Introductions/Apologies Mr Morison (SESSF RAG Chair) opened the meeting at 9:30 am and welcomed members and observers to the Environment Meeting. The RAG Chair noted that the RAG had agreed to convene the day before the regular Data Meeting to examine the broader environmental issues facing the fishery. The Chair noted apologies from Mr Brian Bailey (SSFI), Dr Gavin Begg (ABARES), Mr Simon Boag (SETFIA), Mr Nate Meulenberg () and Mr Jeff Moore (GABIA). The Chair acknowledged the assistance of CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research (CMAR) in providing a suitable venue for the meeting and SESSF RAG s subsequent Data Meeting. 1.2 Declarations of Interest Members and observers reviewed standing declarations and updated these as required. The Chair also accepted declarations from observers who had joined the RAG for the Environment Meeting. Members Mr Sandy Morison Dr Ian Knuckey Dr Colin Simpfendorfer Dr Ilona Stobutzki Dr Rik Buckworth Dr Lianos Triantafillos Dr Geoff Tuck Declared interest Director of Morison Aquatic Sciences SESSF RAG and Slope RAG Chair Interest in sources of funding for research purposes Director Fishwell Consulting Pty Ltd Principal Investigator Fishery Independent Survey (FIS) SESSF Shelf RAG Chair Industry Liaison Officer South East MAC Principal Investigator GAB Shelf FIS Research Consultant South East Trawl Fishery Industry Association / Great Australian Bight Trawl Fishery Industry Association (GABIA) Director Australian Seafood Co-products Australian Agent Olfish electronic logbook Shark RAG Chair Director Fishing and Fisheries Research Centre, James Cook University Interest in sources of funding for research purposes Employed by ABARES, interest in sources of funding for research purposes GAB RAG Chair Employed by CSIRO, interested in sources of funding for research purposes Director, Aquatic Remote Biopsy Pty Ltd a company which holds patents Squid RAG Chair Employed by PIRSA Principal Investigator FRDC Social Indicators Project Employed by CSIRO, interest in sources of funding for research purposes Interest in seabird fishery interaction models Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 2 of 16

3 Dr Neil Klaer Ms Beth Gibson Mr Anthony de Fries Observers Mr Mike Gerner Mr Neil Hughes Mr Brad Milic Dr Kevin Rowling Dr Robin Thomson Dr Judy Upston Observers (parts of the meeting) Dr James Findlay Dr Malcolm Haddon Dr Alan Williams Employed by CSIRO, interest in sources of funding for research purposes Engaged in data processing and stock assessment work for these species Employed by Executive Officer, Industry Liaison Officer Tropical Tuna MAC Employed by (Bycatch Program) Employed by Employed by Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre NSW DPI. No pecuniary interests Employed by CSIRO, interest in sources of funding for research purposes Scientific member on SharkRAG, Engaged in stock assessments (sharks) Employed by CSIRO, interest in sources of funding for research purposes CEO Employed by CSIRO Employed by CSIRO Table 1. Members and observers declarations of interest as of the 2 nd August Adoption of Agenda The draft agenda was accepted with the addition of a briefing on s MAC and RAG Workshop at Agenda Item 1.6. The MAC Chair advised that Dr Findlay ( s CEO) would be joining the RAG to provide an update on s initiative to improve the function and relationships between its RAGs and MACs and to enhance the quality of the advice these groups provide to the Commission. The RAG dropped Agenda Item 4.1 Utility of FIS, ISMP and Logbook data for monitoring trends over time for high risk species noting that the issue had been covered during discussions of other agenda items. The RAG considered the need for an updated shark and ray identification guide for at-sea use under Agenda Item Acceptance of minutes from the SESSF RAG Chair s Meeting on the 23 and 24 February 2011 The RAG agreed to adopt the draft minutes from the SESSF RAG Chair s Meeting held on the 23 rd and 24 th February 2011 at the Riverview Hotel in Hamilton (Brisbane) including amendments proposed following electronic circulation of the draft minutes inter-sessionally. 1.5 Status of actions arising from the SESSF RAG Chair s Meeting on 23 and 24 February 2011 The RAG noted progress against action items agreed at SESSF RAG 2011 Chair s Meeting (Table 2). Table 2. Status of action arising items from SESSF RAG Chair s Meeting 23 and 24 February 2011 # Action Member/s Outcome 1 Circulate a draft version which elaborated upon the weight of evidence summaries in the Fishery Status Reports for the SESSF. 2 ABARES to provide with a timeline for preparation of the Fishery Status Reports. 3 ABARES to provide with a list of species under consideration for inclusion /exclusion in the Fishery Status Reports. ABARES ABARES ABARES Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 3 of 16

4 4 Prepare a paper examining whether a review of the approaches used for closures in other jurisdictions should be prioritised for next year s research program. 5 to clarify with CSIRO whether the recent road test of the GAB ERA had been formally adopted. 6 to check ISMP Report Format to ensure east west sampling performance are reported against targets including east / west stock splits. 7 Circulate ISMP reports so that CSIRO/RAG Chairs can get back to with any issues of concern. 8 Provide CSIRO with a list (by species) of data issues to look out for. 9 SharkRAG to develop its schedule and investigate if its Data Meeting could be brought forward to August SESSF RAG to consider its role in providing advice to and the RAGs on priorities at its next meeting. 11 to write to SETFIA (cc to GABIA) to explain the rationale behind the transfer of responsibility for the Western Gemfish stock assessment to GABRAG and mechanisms for facilitating cross-sector participation at respective RAG meetings. 12 Further develop the concurrent model for consideration by the RAGs for possible adoption in Investigate if observer reports could be reinstituted and quarterly summaries made available to the RAGs and/or observer participation at RAG meetings could be supported. 14 Include a better description (standardised as much as possible) of the stock assessment in the assessment abstracts 15 Review and streamline the catch data tables in the Species Summaries. 16 Paper to inform assessment processes and SESSF RAG s policy input to the Harvest Strategy Policy Review in regard to: moving management target to B MEY for certain Tier 1 species reviewing assessment guidelines for Byproduct species in the context of the B Provide an explanation to assist RAG and MAC members understand why Tier 3 assessments can sometimes generate RBCs that are inconsistent with recent RBCs and catch history 18 Update the paper on Harvest Strategies to reflect removal of Cmax from Tier 4 19 RAGs to incorporate discards in Tier 4 assessments and in RBC calculations. RAGs to decide the best way of determining a historic discard rate for the reference periods and use it to scale CPUE and catches. RAGs to document the reasons why understanding the discard rate is important for some species but not for others. Executive Officer /CSIRO Executive Officer Executive Officer RAG Chairs SharkRAG Executive Officer RAG Chair/ /RAG Chairs CSIRO RAG Chairs SESSF RAG Chair RAG Scientific members CSIRO RAG noted there is a ComFRAB research proposal for 2011 on effects of closures on assessments Revised ERA anticipated in late 2011 From July 2011 reports will have separated data collection for some species east and west splits (Data Meeting 2011) Achieved Overtaken by s Review of Scientific and Economic Information Adopted TBC may develop templates subject to resourcing Adopted Adopted Ongoing Adopted RAGs Progressed in the 2011 assessments 20 CSIRO to present results of MSE testing of Production Models CSIRO Presentation made at Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 4 of 16

5 and the Average Length Method in the context of the SESSF at the 2011 Data Meeting. 21 SETFIA to provide its position on the CPUE Multiplier Rule to SESSF RAG. 22 Seek preliminary feedback from shark industry associations in relation to the CPUE Multiplier Rule. 21 SETFIA to provide its position on the CPUE Multiplier Rule to SESSF RAG. 23 That SETFIA and the Shark Industry Associations consult their members on the views about the current form of the small and large change rule 24 Review the text in the Harvest Strategy Framework Harvest Strategy Framework for the SESSF to ensure consistency with the TAC Setting Meta-Rules document. 25 Provide advice on the MSE testing of Discount Factors for Tier 3 and 4 assessments. 26 RAGs to advise SESSF RAG of those species for which they consider the recreational catch is significant enough to justify being taken into account in the stock assessment process. 27 Amend the document Criteria and principles for assessing whether a species in the SESSF is suitable for consideration for multi-year TACs to allow for consideration of Tier 3 and Tier 4 species for MYTACs. SETFIA SETFIA SETFIA, Shark Industry Associations the 2011 Data Meeting Not done yet SETFIA provided formal advice to. SETFIA provided formal advice to. CSIRO Dr Fay provided a presentation to the 2011 Data Meeting. ShelfRAG, SlopeRAG, Shark RAG and SPF RAG Ongoing SEMAC recommended that the MYTACs criteria be included in the SESSF HSF. This has been done, with Tier 3 and 4 species included. 28 Compile current information on MYTACs into one document. SESSF RAG Chair Provided to the 2011 Data Meeting 29 Seek Dr Punt s advice on the suitability of his rebuilding analysis for SESSF species under rebuilding strategies. 30 Provide an extract of the CTS Trawl Logbook Database for Arrow Squid to the Squid RAG Chair 31 Check with FAS regarding the transfer of shark vertebrae samples. Cross check ISMP sampling versus FAS holdings with respect to western zone Jackass Morwong and Ocean Perch. 32 Develop a draft timetable for external review of SESSF Tier 1 assessments. 33 to contact SEWPaC in regard to submission timelines for the TSSC. 34 Subject to 2, to schedule a SlopeRAG assessment meeting for Orange Roughy in June or July Mr Moore to advise CSIRO of data available for a possible Tier 3 assessment of GAB Orange Roughy at the June/July meeting. 36 CSIRO to advise of the capacity to undertake additional assessment work in June Canvass members for their availability to attend a one day SESSF RAG meeting the day before the Data meetings in Hobart commence. /CSIRO Assessment Team Squid RAG Chair Dr Haddon SESSF RAG Ongoing Not done yet TBA Noted that the Orange Roughy Assessment meeting had taken place and that the ORCP was not going to the TSSC this year. GABIA to be discussed at the Data Meeting CSIRO Executive Officer Environment meeting convened. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 5 of 16

6 Agenda Item 1.6 Improvements to MACs and RAGs The RAG Chair introduced Dr James Findlay ( CEO) and thanked him for travelling down to brief the RAG on s initiative to improve the quality of advice coming from its RAGs and MACs. Dr Findlay emphasised that the Commission placed a high value on advice from both the RAGs and MACs and noted that the Commission s habit was to refer to the scientific advice first. Dr Findlay emphasised that the central message was that the Commission wanted the advice from MACs particularly but also from RAGs to be articulated in the context of s legislative objectives. The RAG noted that the Commissioners were still interested in various positions/views but it was also important to convey to the Commission how these alternative options or opposing views etc were tested against the legislative objectives. Dr Findlay clarified the role of the member in terms of the agency s position. Dr Findlay advised that reserved the ability to vary its position and noted that this can happen at any stage. Dr Knuckey noted that there was a substantial process and paper trail backing up the RAG s science advice and suggested that the flow back of information in regard to decisions was not always delivered with full reasoning. Dr Knuckey acknowledged the sensitivities associated with providing feedback from Commission meetings but emphasised that a RAG s confidence was influenced by how its advice was taken up. Dr Findlay responded noting that while he understood the RAG s position advised that the Commission would not come back with a full explanation as in most cases decisions are arrived at after weighing up a number of streams of advice. The RAG noted that Manager was usually present during Commission deliberations and was best placed to verbally report back to RAGs and MACs on the outcomes. The member noted that the detailed letter which accompanied the TAC decisions pretty much mirrored the Commission s rationale. Dr Findlay then addressed s guidelines for setting TACs and noted the would endeavour to clarify the Government s position for stocks which fall under international management arrangements. Dr Findlay noted that was looking to the RAGs for scientific advice and also wanted to see the MAC s explain clearly how they had taken that advice into account in making their TAC recommendations. Dr Findlay added that it would assist the Commission s deliberations if the RAG was able to condense its advice into one document rather than present a series of papers and attachments. The RAG discussed the importance of conveying risks associated with its recommendations and agreed that while it was relatively easy to articulate risk in qualitative ways that it was difficult to be more quantitative. Dr Stobutzki observed that Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) testing provided more certainty in some cases. Dr Findlay accepted that risk varied with the Tier levels but noted that even Tier 1 assessment outputs needed at times to be considered alongside expert judgement. Dr Findlay encouraged RAGs to provide additional advice about risks like the downside risk to the stock but also the economic risk to industry associated with a more precautionary approach. Dr Knuckey observed that RAGs were less certain about the economic legislative objective. Dr Findlay noted that presently RAG memberships included more scientists with biological and ecological expertise. Dr Knuckey raised concerns about applying a B MEY target in a multi-species fishery and considered there was no chance of meeting this for a suite of species if we continued to deal with them individually. Dr Knuckey declared a conflict of interest in regard to this issue and advised that he had undertaken research proposals addressing harvest strategy settings and economic targets. Dr Findlay acknowledged these concerns but indicated that the RAGs needed to operate in a manner consistent with the Harvest Strategy Policy and if there were concerns about B MEY for a single species or in a broader fishery context then the RAG should indicate that they were uncertain about the economic settings. Dr Findlay noted that MAC s were well placed to provide additional advice on how outcomes from a mixed fishery setting might be optimised. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 6 of 16

7 The RAG Chair sought advice on the status of observers with regard to confidentiality. Dr Findlay confirmed that RAG Chairs had the capacity to run closed sessions when matters of commercial in confidence formed part of the briefing or discussion. The RAG Chair thanked Dr Findlay for making the trip down to Hobart brief SESSF RAG on s initiative to improve the functioning of its MACs and RAGs and to better align their advice with s legislative objectives. Agenda Item 2 Status of protected species interactions The RAG Chair advised that these agenda items did not extend to those fish or shark species under quota management which were listed as conservation dependent and were under rebuilding strategies. Agenda Item 2.1 Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA) update (multiple sectors) Dr Alan Williams (CSIRO) provided the RAG with a presentation on the work being done to assess cumulative fishery impacts under the ecological risk assessment and risk management framework. Dr Williams noted that the investigation of impacts on habitats and communities had lagged the original species specific work but advised that a FRDC supported project was helping to bridge this gap and bring habitats and communities up to the same status as the Species ERAEF. The RAG noted that the assessment was based around a consolidation of like habitats which after completion of Level 2 were reorganised into fewer categories. Dr Williams advised that at this stage other projects and relevant literature were considered including information on any species with specific habitat dependency. Dr Williams referred to the GAB mapping exercise where habitats were classified using a set of criteria. Vulnerable benthic habitats and important fishing habitats were two of the categories. A Level 2 assessment was conducted using the ERA process and information from other projects and information sources. The RAG noted that the next stage was to identify how much of these habitats exist. Dr Williams noted that the Level 2 had identified potential risks and a residual risk analysis could be applied once we had quantitative data on the areas of the habitats and could estimate the level of exposure to fishing gears. The RAG noted that the ERA work was ongoing and that the RAGs and the MACs would be consulted when the cumulative analysis were completed. The RAG Chair thanked Dr Williams for his presentation. Agenda Item 2.2 TEP Species interactions Mr Milic () provided the RAG with an updated version of the protected species interactions presentation provided to South East MAC in late April Mr Milic also briefed the RAG on the status of observer coverage for the various sectors. The RAG accepted that Management, due to priorities, had not been able to fully revise the format of protected analysis in line with advice from South East MAC 6. Members noted that: it was hard to interpret interaction data if it was aggregated too broadly the inclusion of interaction rates would help correlate numbers with fishing intensity (common units needed) the data needed to separate interactions by severity (various intensities and mortalities) that observer data needed to be presented with reference to fleet coverage rates. RAG members emphasised that needed to be careful when presenting interaction summaries particularly in chart formats. A number of members noted that new reporting requirements or changes to observing protocols had the potential to deliver new data or significantly increase the frequency of data above existing levels. Two examples were noted: The listing of the Short-fin Mako Shark as a migratory species under the EPBC Act now meant that it was a protected species and captures/discards needed to be recorded as a wildlife interaction rather than as by-product or discard in the routine section of the GN01A logbook. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 7 of 16

8 The recent implementation of observer protocols requiring specific monitoring from near the stern of trawl vessels to record any seabird interactions had basically created a new data set for a variety of contacts with trawl gear. In both cases the RAG recognised that the sudden increase in the frequency of reports was hard to reconcile unless readers were familiar with the corresponding change in circumstances. The RAG agreed that in these cases data extracts for a number of years did not represent a true time series as there was not a reasonable basis for comparison. The RAG recommended that avoid presenting this data in charts and in particular to avoid joining the data points with a line which implied there was a continuum in the relationship. Similarly members noted that the implementation of mitigation measures or strategies needed to be taken into account so that data could be interpreted with regard to their influence. The RAG then identified a generic checklist for regarding the analysis and reporting of wildlife interactions. 1. Data needed to be reported in the relevant categories: Logbooks Observer data Camera data 2. Summaries of interactions needed to include a rate based on an agreed unit of fishing effort. 3. The data sources need to be calibrated with respect to each other; i.e. what was the fleet effort, what level of observer coverage was achieved, what proportion of operations had cameras and what proportion of the digital video footage was then sampled. 4. Any potential for double counting needed to be taken into account. 5. An indication of the variability in the data should be conveyed (Coefficients of Variance (CVs)) 6. Changes that might affect the data streams should be referenced, examples include: Changes in fishing effort (including management measures and mitigation strategies); Changes in observing protocols (introduction of specific wildlife observation protocols) Implementation of cameras (new data and impact on vessel reporting rates). The RAG recognised that wildlife interactions were generally rare events but that for some species the cumulative impacts could still be significant. Members anticipated that there would usually be large amount of uncertainty around estimates of fleet wide interactions if industry were under reporting and validated observations constituted only a small sample of overall fleet effort. The RAG noted that ultimately the impact of mortalities on the wildlife populations was the main science question. Members noted that more clarity about the intended analysis would assist in the design of monitoring programs. It was noted that more precise estimates of the overall fishing mortality of Australian Sea Lions would assist the management of the gillnet sector in South Australia. The RAG agreed that it was important for industry to recognise that improved self reporting would deliver the best statistical outcomes for these rare events. Agenda Item 2.3 Seabird Interactions with trawling operations update on management responses Mr Mike Gerner () provided a presentation on seabird trawl issues in the SESSF. The RAG Chair noted that the presentation included some information and video footage which identified individual vessels and reminded members that they were obliged to keep this information in confidence. Mr Gerner, requested through the Chair, that if observers were not comfortable with the obligation to treat this information as in confidence that they should leave the room during the presentation. The RAG noted that seabird interactions with trawl vessels were usually attributed to operations using net sonde cables however members noted the video and data provided by Mr Gerner demonstrated that Shy Albatross were at risk from trawl cables under certain conditions. Mr Gerner noted that dedicated observations were required to reliably monitor seabird interactions with trawl gear as they usually could not be seen from wheelhouses or by crew or observers Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 8 of 16

9 stationed on the work deck. RAG members noted that this meant that the timeline for an accurate time series for trawl interaction data corresponds with the implementation of dedicated observer protocols. The RAG recognised similar caveats may also apply to the analysis and reporting of information on interactions with other protected species and discussed this in more detail under Agenda Item 2.7. The RAG noted that and SETFIA were in the final stages of implementing Seabird Management Plans and that these would be mandatory requirements for vessels as of 1 November Mr Gerner explained that these plans would be tailored to each vessel s operations and that managing offal discharge was an important aspect in reducing provisioning by seabirds around trawl vessels. Mr Gerner added that the plans also extended to active mitigation measures like the towing of buoys and other physical deterrents to discourage birds from going near where the trawl warps entered the water etc. The MAC noted that it was difficult for observers to determine what happened to seabirds that were pushed under by trawl warps. The RAG noted that impacts might be less serious for compact species but more severe for larger albatross and giant petrels. Mr Gerner indicated that had considered the use of underwater cameras to improve information on the impact of these interactions. The RAG Chair thanked Mr Gerner for briefing the RAG on this emerging issue. The RAG then considered what impacts these interactions might be having on the seabird populations. Dr Tuck advised that CSIRO had being involved in a number of population model assessments on seabirds since the 1990s including: Atlantic Ocean Seabirds (including productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) as used in domestic Ecological Risk Assessments (ERAs). (in collaboration with British Antarctic Survey and Birdlife International). Lord Howe Island Flesh-footed Shearwater assessment. The RAG noted that the South Atlantic work had focused on Black browed Albatross, Tristan Albatross, Wandering Albatross and Yellow-nosed Albatross. Dr Tuck advised that the amount of historic date available for some of these species was considerable (banding, censuses, foraging distributions, banding (ageing) enabled the use of age structured models which were then overlayed with fishing effort and estimates of interaction rates (from observer data). The RAG noted that these assessments were analogous to the Tier 1 SESSF stock assessments. Dr Klaer noted that there were issues with the New Zealand approach (Potential Biological Removals) PBRs with statistical complications typically associated with rare events (CVs usually are quiet big). Dr Thomson indicated that, in some circumstances, the collection of good observer data coincided with the implementation of mitigation measures which may mean there are no reliable estimates of background rates. 2.4 Is monitoring adequate to detect changes in TEP interactions over time (observer protocols) The RAG noted that the ability of an observer program (ISMP) to provide reliable data to assist stock assessments and our understanding of wildlife interactions required an appropriate balance of observing tasking. Members noted that experience had shown that in some cases observers needed to operate from different parts of the boat (to where the catch was landed and sorted) in order to see if seabirds were interacting with trawl or longline gear and if seals were tangled in gillnets etc. RAG members expressed an interest in how this balance was managed and the accompanying observer protocols. The Manager indicated that would welcome feedback on the observer protocols and agreed to circulate the protocols out of session. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 9 of 16

10 Dr Upston drew member s attention to the CSIRO s annual ISMP Report and noted that it included a review of a number of observer matters including areas for improvements, species identification, code issues and life status. Action to circulate observer protocols to SESSF RAG members out of session and seek comments 2.5 Update on the independent review of s Upper Slope Dogfish Management Strategy The RAG noted advice from that after feedback from SEWPaC and consultation with DAFF that consideration be given to aligning the targets in the Upper Slope Dogfish Management Strategy (Strategy) with the limit reference points in the Commonwealth Harvest Strategy Policy. Dr Rowling suggested this implied we knew where the stock(s) were sitting at. Dr Rowling wasn t confident that a model could be developed in order to identify the current biomass proportion noting that the times series data was unreliable and was further compromised by poor species identification. Members recognised that if a limit reference point was adopted it would probably have to be given effect by way of a spatial proxy. The RAG noted strong concerns about applying a harvest strategy reference point (B 20 ) to a bycatch species and noted views that it also represented a significant step up from removing the risk of these species going extinct. Further concerns were raised regarding possible expectations of a target rebuilding point and the RAG noted that had sought advice from SharkRAG on a rebuild reference point for these dogfish species. The RAG noted that the revised Strategy was scheduled to be considered by SEWPaC s Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) in December Review of status and trends in broader environmental impacts of fishing 3.1 Update on fishery-wide indicators The RAG noted that the draft report A Review of demersal trawling on the marine ecosystem in the SESSF had been submitted in March 2011 and was still under review. Members noted that the report had been developed in response to trawling being nominated as a Key Threatening Process (KTP) under the EPBC Act but wasn t intended to be a rebuttal of the nomination. The RAG noted that the project s objective had being to demonstrate that the fishery was heading in the right direction, that being towards Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM). Dr Knuckey (one of the co-authors) noted that the project had found that the Great Australian Bight Trawl Fishery (GABTF) was a low impact trawl fishery whereas the older and historically much larger South East Trawl Fishery (SETF) had had a much larger impact on species and habitats. Dr Knuckey added that there had been a consistent turnaround in almost all of the indicators for the SETF since 2005 which was largely attributable to the introduction of a range of management measures including the Government s Securing Our Fishing Future restructure. Dr Rowling noting the improvements in indicators in recent years reminded the RAG that there were longer term impacts and that some species were still depleted. Dr Williams (another co-author) explained that they had mapped out trawl activity (1 km grid cells that experienced any effort in any of the years) to gain a better understanding of the trawl footprint. The RAG noted that the rate of expansion had declined. Members noted that expansion in relatively recent times been driven by technological capacity which allowed the deployment of gear into spots previously considered too risky. Members also noted that vessels had been shut out of certain areas under fisheries regulations and due to the gazettal of marine reserves in the south east. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 10 of 16

11 The RAG acknowledged that it was a condition of both the 2007 and 2009 Wildlife Trade Orders (WTOs) that the fishery shouldn t grow bigger but with some acceptance that it would continue to shift around. Dr Williams observed that under EBFM it would be sensible to constrain growth and to have a process to allow expansion but under strict requirements. The RAG noted there was uncertainty around habitat recovery time from the habitat types associated with commercial species. Dr Stobutzki provided a summary of fishery wide indicators that ABARES used in preparing the fishery status reports. These included: Quota species /non quota species breakdown (test the general assumption that quota on the main species controls effort on other species) Level of discards versus retained catch Fishing footprint (count of 1 o grid squares) Dr Klaer noted that there was potential to gain some insight into some fine scale characteristics without having to descend into too much detail. Dr Klaer noted that tabular data could be presented for the fishery as whole in a similar manner to the species tables where some of processes were automated. The RAG then considered sources of economic data. Dr Stobutzki advised that ABARES continued to collect annual fish statistics and update history tables but noted that the RAGs also have a role in maintaining history. Dr Haddon noted that a record of management changes was also important from an assessment point of view including permanent closures (MPAs) and temporary closures (Pink Ling) etc. Members also noted that changes in fishing power were important and that the rapid development of electronic aids had a significant influence on fishing effort. Dr Haddon noted that a fishing power analysis had been conducted for the Northern Prawn Fishery (NPF) and Dr Rowling advised that the Queensland DPI had also done some work in this area. The RAG discussed how a record of changes in the fishery (possibly in species specific terms) might be maintained. Dr Klaer offered to prepare a template suitable for a Tier 1 species in consultation with for consideration by SESSF RAG. Action CSIRO to develop a draft template for recording species specific histories (events relevant to Tier 1 stock assessments). Agenda Item 3.2 Examination of catch trends for non-quota species Mr Milic () made a presentation on possible options identified by s for monitoring byproduct species and noted that their basic analysis was limited to the top ten byproduct species (Squid to Guitarfish). The RAG Chair suggested the key question was where we do cut off routine enquiry. Dr Haddon recalled that most species were not subject to the Harvest Strategy Framework and were dealt with through risk assessments. Members noted that these species were unlikely to be categorised as high risk species under the ERAs and as such could experience significant changes in catch or catch rates without being subject to management scrutiny or response. The RAG considered possible trigger limits which might be based on catch volume thresholds or the rate of increase etc. The RAG also considered that discarding may need to be factored in noting advice that for some species, like Frostfish and Barracouta, discards generally exceeded retained catch. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 11 of 16

12 The RAG noted that was now reasonable time-series data on discarding for most of the fishery and that the Fishery Independent Surveys (FIS) were now establishing a reasonable time series for some of the major bycatch species. The RAG noted that shark species had generally been assessed as having higher relative risk rankings than teleosts in the ERAs following Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA). Dr Rowling advised that there was also likely to be significant state catches for quite a few byproduct species. The RAG recognised that if closer monitoring of byproduct/bycatch becomes a priority across the SESSF that it could generate a significant additional workload. The RAG noted a suggestion that preliminary work (on select species) might be usefully progressed through post-graduate scholarships administered through a university or perhaps the Australian Society for Fish Biology (ASFB). agreed to do a bit more work on byproduct species and indicated that they would draw on similar work undertaken by s Tuna Section, on work from the GABTF and with reference to triggers (derived from the ERA) that had been adopted by SharkRAG. Agenda Item 3.3 High risk species identified in the Ecological Risk Assessments The member addressed a paper summarising species identified as high risk in the SESSF and SPF ERAs. The RAG noted that there were no high risk species identified in the Squid Jig Fishery ERA. The RAG noted that Australian Fur Seals, Bight Skate, a number of dolphin species, Harrisson s Dogfish, Longsnout Dogfish and Southern Dogfish were assessed as high risk species occurring across one or more of the assessed fisheries. The SharkRAG Chair suggested cross check the ERA tables against the second edition of Shark and Rays of Australia (Last and Stevens 2009) as the names of a number of Elasmobranchs have changed recently. The member advised that was currently investigating a number of dolphin mortalities in the SESSF. Agenda Item 3.4 Species under rebuilding strategies Dr Haddon (CSIRO) provided a brief rundown on the project underway on rebuilding strategy development. Dr Haddon noted that it appeared that three species which were below the limit reference point (Blue Warehou, Eastern Gemfish and School Shark) were not responding and because the Bycatch TACs were so low that the information flow on these species was greatly reduced. The member emphasised that the Commission was seeking confidence that the Bycatch TACs reflected genuine bycatch levels. Dr Haddon cautioned that reducing TACs did not necessarily reduce fishing mortality to the same extent. The RAG noted advice from Dr Klaer that there are approaches used elsewhere to calculate the time needed to recover within a certain probability. The RAG noted that it would be helpful if the process for conducting these calculations (projections) could be standardised. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 12 of 16

13 4 Measuring environmental impacts Agenda Item 4.1 Update on the Fishery Independent Survey (FIS) workshop Dr Knuckey advised that there was now two years of FIS data for the SESSF and six years for the GABTF. The RAG noted that experience from the GAB FIS was that the FIS delivered good abundance indices (low CVs) for the two quota species and 15 byproduct and bycatch species. Dr Knuckey reported that the SESSF FIS had, to date, delivered abundance indices with CVs less than 30% for 8 of the 11 major quota species as well as for 15 to 18 byproduct and bycatch species. The RAG noted that the survey had collected quite good data on shark species (Sawshark and Elephantfish) however catches of School Shark were quite low and were not characterised by good CVs so far. The RAG considered that the FIS provided valuable information which could support assessments at a time when the catch rate information for a number of species continues to lose its utility due to changes in behaviour which often had nothing to do with underlying abundance. 5 Research 5.1 Schedule of upcoming RAG and assessment meetings The RAG members noted an update on the progress of s review of arrangements for obtaining scientific and economic information. The member expected that the Commission would consider the final report including the recommendations made by the Expert Panel at its October 2011 meeting. 5.2 Research needs for environmental issues The RAG noted that oceanic modelling suggested that the south-east region was a hotspot for change. Members noted that a range of factors for marine organisms were altered by rising temperatures including distribution, growth rates and reproduction. The RAG noted that several programs were underway under the South-east Australia Fisheries and Climate Change Program (SEAP) to assist agencies to better understand potential impacts of climate change on fisheries in south-east Australia. Members noted that mechanisms were identified for some of these factors and if we know the linkages then they could be factored into the assessments. The RAG also noted that there were time lags between oceanic events and when changes would show up in the catch data. The RAG agreed it would be useful to collate a summary of current research. Action Prepare a summary of recent and current research on climate change impacts for the South-east region. /Executive officer 6 - Other business Agenda Item 6.1 Review of tabled documents for website posting The RAG recommended that s Protected Species Presentation (Agenda Item 2.2) be edited before being posted on the website. The RAG recommended removing the graphs as they implied changes in interaction rates were event driven across the time period whereas a number of significant changes to the frequency and rate of TEP interactions were due, in large part, to new observer wildlife observation protocols being implemented. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 13 of 16

14 The RAG agreed that Mr Gerner s PowerPoint presentation (Agenda Item 2.3) should not form part of the meeting record because it contained information which identified individual vessel s operations. Agenda Item 6.2 Shark ID Guide The RAG noted a range of advice about the need for an updated at-sea shark identification guide for observers, scientists and interested fishers. Members agreed that given recent changes in taxonomy it might be timely to develop a contemporary guide for Commonwealth fisheries. The RAG noted that there was an existing guide and other guides (Queensland) that could be referred to. Members noted that it was important to consult the RAGs and the shark taxonomists at CSIRO. The RAG discussed the importance of identifying sharks and rays accurately given a number of them are currently listed as high risk species in the ERAs. Members accepted that distinguishing some species, particularly those encountered infrequently, would still be difficult for non-experts even with a guide and keys. Noting this, the RAG recognised that efforts to improve identification also needed to considered in tandem with data codes because it was likely that generic group codes for some genus would need to be retained. The RAG noted specific suggestions that flat sharks like Angel Sharks encountered off NSW and southern Australia be included as well as the suite of Stingaree species commonly seen in SESSF operations. The RAG agreed to consider this issue in depth at a future meeting as it was important to encourage a broad range of input on the need, scope and format of such an ID guide. Action SESSF RAG to consider possible formats for a contemporarily onboard Shark Guide for the SESSF. 7 - Next meeting The RAG Chair thanked members and observers for their input to the inaugural Environment Meeting and advised that a decision about scheduling another one in 2012 would be considered at the SESSF RAG Chairs Meeting in early The Chair noted that most present would reconvene tomorrow for SESSF RAG s Data Meeting. The RAG Chair then closed the meeting at 5:37 pm. Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 14 of 16

15 Attendance - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Chairman Mr Sandy Morison SESSF RAG Members Dr Rik Buckworth Ms Beth Gibson Dr Malcolm Haddon Dr Neil Klaer Dr Ian Knuckey Mr Kyne Krusic-Golub Dr Colin Simpfendorfer Dr Ilona Stobutzki Dr Lianos Triantafillos Dr Geoff Tuck Participating scientists Dr Kevin Rowling Dr Robin Thomson Dr Judy Upston (Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre) (CSIRO) (CSIRO) SESSF RAG Observers and Invited Guests Mr Mike Gerner Mr Neil Hughes Mr Brad Milic () () () Presenters (attended for one agenda item) Dr James Findlay Dr Alan Williams ( CEO) (CSIRO) SESSF RAG Executive Officer Anthony de Fries Apologies Mr Brian Bailey Dr Gavin Begg Mr Simon Boag Mr Nate Meulenberg Mr Jeff Moore (SSFI) (SPF RAG Chair) (SETFIA) () (GABIA) Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 15 of 16

16 Action Arising Action items shading indicates an ongoing item Member to action 1 Provide an explanation to assist RAG and MAC members understand why Tier 3 assessments can sometimes generate RBCs that are inconsistent with recent RBCs and catch history 2 Seek preliminary feedback from shark industry associations in relation to the CPUE Multiplier Rule. CSIRO 3 Develop a draft timetable for external review of SESSF Tier 1 assessments. SESSF RAG 4 Circulate observer protocols to SESSF RAG members out of session and seek comments. 5 CSIRO to develop a draft template for recording species specific histories (events relevant to Tier 1 stock assessments). 6 Prepare a summary of recent and current research on climate change impacts for the South-east region. CSIRO Executive officer 7 SESSF RAG to consider possible formats for a contemporary onboard Shark Guide for the SESSF. SESSF RAG Minutes - SESSF RAG Environment Meeting 2 August 2011 Page 16 of 16