Contract - Home - The Australian Fisheries Management ... · Web viewSlope RAG noted that the catch...

Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark

FisherySlope Resource Assessment Group

(SLOPERAG)

MINUTESCHAIR: SANDY MORISON

7-9 November 2012

Mercure Hadley’s Hotel

34 Murray Street

HOBART TAS 7000

2

Table of ContentsSLOPE RESOURCE ASSESSMENT GROUP (SLOPERAG) MINUTES..................................2

Preliminaries..............................................................................................................................4Welcome and Introductions/Apologies...................................................................................4

Declarations of Interest..........................................................................................................4Adoption of Agenda................................................................................................................5

Adoption of minutes from Slope RAG meeting October 2011................................................5Results of action Items arising from SlopeRAG October 2012..............................................5

Stock Assessments....................................................................................................................8TIER 4 - OREOS SMOOTH- CASCADE PLATEAU..............................................................8

TIER 4 - OREOS SMOOTH NON – CASCADE PLATEAU...................................................9TIER 4 - OREOS MIXED BASKET (WARTY; SPIKEY; ROUGH; BLACK & OREO DORY). 9

TIER 4 - WESTERN DEEPWATER SHARKS.....................................................................11Proposal to amend the deepwater closure to allow for access to deepwater shark in waters adjacent to western king island/western tasmania...............................................11Western Deepwater Sharks – Recommendation.............................................................12

TIER 3/4 - RIBALDO............................................................................................................12TIER 3/4 - BLUE EYE TREVALLA.......................................................................................13

TIER 3 - ALFONSINO..........................................................................................................15TIER 1 - BLUE GRENADIER...............................................................................................17

Blue Grenadier Recommendation....................................................................................18TIER 1 - SILVER WAREHOU..............................................................................................18

Preliminary results of the model under the low recruitment case.....................................19TIER 1 - PINK LING.............................................................................................................20

Habitat based CPUE weightings for the disaggregated Pink Ling model........................20Revised Pink Ling presented by Athol..............................................................................21

TIER 1 – ORANGE ROUGHY..............................................................................................23ORANGE ROUGHY – EAST...............................................................................................23

Biomass estimation of the 2012 Eastern Zone Orange Roughy spawning stock............23Orange Roughy spawning ground index..........................................................................24

MINUTES – SLOPERAG 7-9 November 2012

3

Other Business.........................................................................................................................25

Draft results of ABARES fishery survey...................................................................................25Close........................................................................................................................................26

SLOPE RESOURCE ASSESSMENT GROUP (SLOPERAG) MINUTES

Chair: Mr Sandy Morison

Date and Location: 7-9 November 2012, Mercury Hadley’s Hobart

Attendance

Members Mr Sandy Morison SlopeRAG ChairDr Malcolm Haddon CSIRODr Jeremy Prince Biospherics Pty LtdMr Ross Bromley AFMAMr Kyne Krusic Golub FASDr Geoff Tuck CSIRO Mr Tom Bibby IndustryMr John Jarvis IndustryMr Andrew Penney ABARES

Observers and invited participantsDr Neil Klaer CSIRODr Jemery Day CSIRODr Judy Upston CSIROMr Brad Milic AFMADr Nigel Abery AFMA A/Executive OfficerMr Rob New ABARESMr Simon Boag SETFIADr Kevin Rowling DPI NSWMr Bruce Taylor Consultant (Modelling and Data Solutions) Mr Patrick Cordue at the request of SETFIA and Australian longline


4

Mr Michael Tudman Industry (Petuna Sealord deepwater fishing)Dr Athol Whitten Mezo ResearchDr Tim Ryan CSIRODr Rudy Kloser CSIRODr Caroline Sutton CSIRODr Anders Goncalves da Silva CSIRO (currently at Monash University)

Apologies from members

Mr Les Scott Industry Mr Norm Brinkman Industry

Preliminaries

Welcome and Introductions/Apologies

1. The Chair welcomed all Slope RAG members and observers to the meeting and advised the RAG of the objectives of the meeting. All in attendance introduced themselves and declared any interests.

2. The RAG accepted apologies from Mr Les Scott and Mr Norm Brinkman.

Declarations of Interest

Participant Interest Declared

Mr Sandy Morison Slope RAG Chair and consultant with an interest in funding for research purposes.

Mr Brad Milic No pecuniary interestMr Ross Bromley No pecuniary interestDr Geoff Tuck Acquiring funding for research purposes


5

Dr Malcolm Haddon Acquiring funding for research purposes (new project on meaningfulness of catch rates)

Mr John Jarvis South East Trawl boat and quota SFR holderMr Tom Bibby Chair of SETFIA and South East Trawl boat and quota SFR

holderDr Neil Klaer Acquiring funding for research purposesDr Jeremy Prince Acquiring funding for research purposes, consultingMr Kyne Krusic Golub Acquiring funding for research purposes (supplies age data to

RAGs)Dr Athol Whitten Acquiring funding for research purposesDr Kevin Rowling No pecuniary interestDr Jemery Day Acquiring funding for research purposesDr Nigel Abery No pecuniary interestMr Michael Tudman Auto longline quota holder representativeMs Stephanie Johnson No pecuniary interestMr Chris Burns No pecuniary interestMr Andrew Penney No pecuniary interestMr Rob New No pecuniary interestMr Simon Boag CEO of SETFIA, Director of a fishing company that owns

South East Trawl boat and quota SFRsDr Judy Upston Acquiring funding for research purposesMr Bruce Taylor ConsultantMr Patrick Cordue Consultant for industry (funded by industry)Dr Anders Goncalves da Silva

Acquiring funding for research purposes

Adoption of Agenda

3. Athol Whitten could not attend the meeting until the Friday, so the Pink Ling discussion will be deferred until Friday and will be swapped with the deepwater shark discussion.

4. The weighting approach for the Pink Ling assessment done by ABARES may be discussed on Thursday after Deepwater Sharks provided that time permits.

5. The draft agenda was accepted with alterations to rearrange the timings of items so that they corresponded to the times that the relevant people were available.


6

Adoption of minutes from Slope RAG meeting October 2011

6. Ribaldo – use of proposed revised target of B40 was questioned. There was concern that the Commission may not accept the revised target so it was considered better to provide results for both B40 and B48 targets.

7. Question about the revision of the targets for Alfonsino and Oreo basket.

8. Paragraph 100 on Blue eye Trevalla change to: there is dome selectivity, and a Tier 3 assessment would not be appropriate.

9. Para 101 change to: We know there was seamount fishing going on but the inclusion of that data made it difficult to analyse.

10. Para 106 change to: due to the fact that the prime fishing areas for are effectively closed to fishing. Locking out of some of the main fishing ground etc.

11. Comments to be received from Andre Punt on the weekend.

12. Slope RAG agreed to the minutes with the amendments.

Results of action Items arising from SlopeRAG October 2012

13. Slope RAG reviewed the action items from the October 2012 Slope RAG meeting and noted the progress as follows:

Action number

Action Responsibility Timeline / Due

Status

1 Alfonsino - Check why 2011 age data are missing from the Tier 3 assessment and include if possible.

Neil Klaer Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Completed

2 Alfonsino - Examine data from New Zealand to assess whether the East Coast Deep Water Alfonsino assessment needs to account for them.


Completed

3 Blue Eye Trevalla - Investigate the impact of closures on CPUE before finalising the RBC.

Malcom Haddon

Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

To be dealt with during meeting


7

Action number


Status

4 Blue Grenadier - Check the discard rates and amount (600t), this rate should not be used until/unless it has been checked and confirmed/revised.



5 Deepwater Sharks - Related to the proposed reopening of a section of the Deepwater sharks closure. Collate information on deepwater shark and Orange Roughy catches within the proposed section of the Deepwater Sharks closure on the west coast of Tasmania. Check amount of historic catch that would remain in closed areas if that section is re-opened (see Ian Knuckey report).

Malcolm Haddonand Neil Klaer



6 Ribaldo - Standardise non trawl CPUE from 2001 onwards.


Completed

7 Ribaldo - Kyne Krusic Golub to provide breakdown of age samples by gear type.

Kyne Krusic Golub


Completed

8 Ribaldo- Text in species summaries to be amended by removal of reference to likely misreporting of catches prior to the introduction of quota

Chair Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Will be done after meeting when species summaries are revised

9 Ribaldo - Investigate potential missing catches of Ribaldo (reported as ghost cod) e.g. industry reports that the Terra Star caught 20-30 tonne (per year?) in the period 1997-2000.

AFMA Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Completed

10 Orange Roughy - Discuss with Rudy Kloser and Tim Ryan about the results from this year’s Orange


Completed


8

Action number


Status

Roughy survey and request that they present to the November Slope RAG meeting.

11 Orange Roughy - Circulate to Slope RAG reports on rock fish in the USA relevant to the Orange Roughy assessment

Jeremy Prince Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Chair to follow up with Jeremy Prince

12 Orange Roughy – Request information on results of latest genetics work on stock structure for November Slope RAG meeting

SETFIA Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Completed

13 Orange Roughy – Circulate copy of recent NZ assessment document

Andrew Penney Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Completed

14 Pink Ling - Progress assessment as per list of RAG requests following consultation between CSIRO and AFMA.

Andre Punt and Athol Whitten


Friday

15 Silver Warehou - Follow up on number of shots used in the discards estimation. Process needs to be checked for other fisheries/species.

Judy Upston and Neil Klaer


Completed

16 Silver Warehou - Add project to determine stock structure to research wish list.


Completed

17 Silver Warehou - Revise the Tier 1 assessment.No cohort dependent growth – all three models2012d (age λ = 0.25) – base case tuned - with sensitivities (natural mortalities and increase and decrease weight)2012d + λ 0.1 on length - tuned2012d + λ 0.25 on length - tuned2012d + Sensitivity of only 1992 onwards

Jemery Day Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Completed

18 Silver Warehou – Review how Chair Prior to Ongoing


9

Action number


Status

BWAG had decided on appropriate species splits for early catches of warehous

Nov 2012 RAG

19 Slope RAG to receive a copy of SESSFRAG minutes/action items. A table of action items that have been and need to be actioned to be added to the back of documents.

Brad Milic Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Ongoing.Got data meeting but not environment meeting minutes. Will send once obtained.

20 Put DeepRAG species and SlopeRAG species Tier 4 assessments into the same document

CSIRO Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Completed

22 Provide email list to AFMA observer team to include Shelf, Slope RAGs in the circulation of the monthly observer reports.

Brad Milic Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

CompletedNo reports received yet

22 Circulate the research projects list and priorities to the RAG and gain input from other RAGs on these research priorities


Completed

23 Include words “Draft” on title page and the foot of each page in documents submitted to RAGs

CSIRO or other document authors

Ongoing Ongoing

24 Discard estimates paper – Investigate reformatting tables (or including an additional table) to show information by species

Judy Upston, Neil Klaer

Prior to Oct 2013 RAG

Ongoing

25 Circulate recent publication on the estimation of cohort specific growth and its impact on assessments

Athol Whitten Prior to Nov 2012 RAG

Ongoing

Action item – Judy Upston - due out of session 2012-13


10

Provide the revised formatting of discards to Slope RAG for comments

Stock Assessments

TIER 4 - OREOS SMOOTH- CASCADE PLATEAU

14. Slope RAG discussed the data on catches of Smooth Oreos from the Cascade Plateau.

15. Slope RAG noted that the catch (1.3t) and effort in this fishery was very low and due to this lack of data the Tier 4 estimate of CPUE is uncertain.

16. The RAG noted, although there is little data, there is no indication that catch rate is declining suggesting that there is a low risk of overfishing and the risk at current levels is not significantly greater than if no fishing was occurring.

17. Consistent with the previous year the RAG recommended that the TAC of 150t be continued for the next fishing year.

18. Slope RAG recommended that overcatch and undercatch be set at 10%.

19. Slope RAG recommended that a discount factor does not apply as last year’s TAC is being rolled over.

OREOS SMOOTH CASCADE – RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes

TAC 2012/13tonnes

Research Catch Allowance tonnes

Under and Over Catch

Discount Factor

4 NA 150 NA 10% NA

TIER 4 - OREOS SMOOTH NON – CASCADE PLATEAU

20. Malcolm Haddon presented the Tier 4 assessment of Smooth Oreos - non-Cascade Plateau. Currently there have been very low levels of catch and effort in this fishery. Last year’s catch was 4.7 tonnes with 7 vessels recording landings of Smooth Oreos non-Cascade due to the majority of grounds being closed. The RAG acknowledged there are limited catch records in the last five years. It was noted the Tier 4 assessment is currently unreliable due to the low catches. The RAG noted that this species has the added


11

precaution of closures and Commonwealth marine parks. Therefore, the RAG recommended continuing with the ongoing TAC of 23t; and not considering running the assessment again until catches get above a 10t trigger. The RAG expressed concerns that once this trigger is reached the available catch information may still not be extensive enough to give an accepted Tier 4 assessment.

21. Slope RAG recommended that last year’s TAC of 23 t be rolled over.


23. Slope RAG recommended that the discount factor was not applicable due to the deepwater closures.

24. Slope RAG recommended no research catch allowance (0 tonnes).

OREOS SMOOTH CASCADE – RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes

TAC 2012/13tonnes



Discount Factor

4 NA 23 0 10% NA

TIER 4 - OREOS MIXED BASKET (WARTY; SPIKEY; ROUGH; BLACK & OREO DORY)

25. Malcolm Haddon presented the Tier 4 assessment of Oreos (mixed basket). 77 tonnes of Oreos were caught in areas open to fishing. However, there is also what appears to be 7.7 tonnes caught in areas that are closed. This is thought to be due a ‘rounding’ error in catch location reporting when fishing along the margins of the closures. Catches have remained low and stable since 2005.

26. Industry members advised that fishing for Oreo mixed basket was good last year but not as good this year. However, most of the good fishing grounds are now closed so it is difficult to compare catch rates.

27. Slope RAG noted that Warty Oreos were moved into the Oreo Dory category and have not been reported separately after 1992. Because of the price premium on Spiky Oreos they are often reported separately. Warty Oreos are typically caught at 700-800 m deep and Spiky Oreos caught at 600-700m. Because of the >700m closure, the catch of Warty Oreos is expected to be less than prior to the closures being implemented. There have


12

been many interventions: quota and closures etc. this has impacted fishing behaviour and catches.

28. Slope RAG noted that during 2012, SESSFRAG recommended using gross value production and estimates of targeting intensity as a basis for identifying species that are key economic drivers in the SESSF and secondary species that could be managed using alternative reference points. SESSFRAG recommended setting the target reference point at MSY, as it is still a sustainable target.

29. Slope RAG noted that Mixed Oreos make up a small proportion of the total SESSF catch and the data suggests that 64% of Mixed Oreos catches are from targeted fishing. However, Slope RAG noted that 7 Oreo shots caught the majority of the catch and many other shots only caught small amounts Mixed Oreos.

30. Simon Boag stated that he believes that 100 or more tonnes of catch make the species an economic driver. This is not the case for mixed oreos where currently there are only 7 targeted shots and low catches. He also believes that the industry’s economic efficiency would be increased if a lower target biomass was used (B40).

31. The RAG advised that mixed Oreos were a potential candidate for a lower target reference point and there was little biological risk to the stock in lowering the target to B40. The RAG also noted that they should be cautious on changing the target proxy without a very good reason and that target proxies should be applied consistently.

32. The RBCs for the two targets are as follows:

a. B48 target = RBC 132.213t.

b. B40 target = RBC 183.10t.

33. Slope RAG recommended B40 as the target resulting in an RBC of 183t.

OREOS MIXED BASKET – B48 RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes, B48

TAC 2012/13tonnes



Discount Factor

4 132 0 10% 0%

OREOS MIXED BASKET – B40 RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14TAC 2012/13tonnes

Research Catch Allowance


Discount Factor


13

tonnes, B48 tonnes4 183 0 10% 0%

Action item – Neil Klaer Identify where the 7 apparently targeted shots for Oreos mixed were taken to determine if they were from the Cascade Plateau or not.

Action item – AFMA & Judy UpstonOreos mixed – provide information on observed shots of Oreos mixed in the west since 2007.

TIER 4 - WESTERN DEEPWATER SHARKS

Proposal to amend the deepwater closure to allow for access to deepwater shark in waters adjacent to western king island/western tasmania

34. Malcolm Haddon gave an overview of the data related to the proposed amending of part of the deepwater trawl closure. The data from 1995 – 2006 and only shots inside the proposed “DWS area” from 700m and deeper and longer than 2h in duration was used in the analysis. It was noted that currently there are a lot of shots that are right on the edge of the closure.

35. Catch by depth stratum showed that the peak catches of Orange Roughy and Deepwater sharks – total were between 850m – 900m depth. It was noted that fishing in a depth of 900m compared to 850m gave a much higher percentage of Orange Roughy catch. The data showed that when fishing from 700m to 1000m is totalled then a ratio of 1.8 to 1 Deepwater Sharks to Orange Roughy was caught. It was noted that there is a seamount in the middle of the area and that Orange Roughy had been targeted on this seamount.

36. An industry representative (Simon Boag) stated that it would only be worth opening the area if 700m to 1000m was opened because these depths would allow targeting of


14

deepwater shark. He noted that the historic catches of Orange Roughy are quite small in that area.

37. Simon Boag informed Slope RAG that SETFIA had written to the 7 member and non-member operators most likely to fish in the potential open area about the need to avoid the seamount and to not target Orange Roughy. He relayed that there was overwhelming support from industry to do this and that industry has suggested that there would be minimal Orange Roughy caught whilst they targeted Deepwater Sharks if the section was opened. He also stated that the DWS area is outside any habitat of upper slope dogfish that contributed to the required closures under the most recent rebuilding strategy for that species. He noted that, in additional to management under quota, the deepwater closure was introduced to protect Orange Roughy stocks from overfishing and that the reduction in area available to fish for Deepwater Sharks is one of the many unintentional consequences of the deepwater closure.

38. Slope RAG discussed the data presented and noted that some of the longer tows (greater than 2 hours) may have been mixed bag shots that also targeted Orange Roughy on the seamount and thus increased the estimate of Orange Roughy seen in those shots.

39. Chair stated that if the Deepwater Sharks area was re-opened there is expected to be more catch of Deepwater Sharks than Orange Roughy in that area. However, there should be some arrangements so that catches of Orange Roughy are managed.

40. AFMA Senior Manager (Brad Milic) stated that the incidental TAC for Orange Roughy is 60t, so if the catch is within in that TAC then it is acceptable to AFMA. Slope RAG noted that the incidental Orange Roughy catch is currently about 30 tonnes, this leaves the potential for an additional 30t of incidental Orange Roughy catch from within the re-opened section before TAC would be reached.

41. Slope RAG noted that if the section was re-opened then an Orange Roughy trigger limit to reclose the area should be considered.

Action item – Brad Milic Send Ian Knuckey’s closure report to Slope RAG

Action item – Malcolm Haddon Circulate a copy of his analysis of catches in the proposed re-opening of an area of the >700m closure.


15

Western Deepwater Sharks – Recommendation

42. SlopeRAG noted the low levels off catch and effort in this fishery and it is questionable if catch rates are reliable indicators of abundance. Catches are small because the effect of deepwater closures has reduced the amount of fishing area available where these species occur. Because catches were small it was not valid to update the Tier 4 assessment.

43. SlopeRAG recommended rolling over the TAC.

44. SlopeRAG recommended a research allowance of 1t from within the total TAC amount.

45. Slope RAG recommended that undercatch and overcatch be set at 10% and that a discount factor is not applicable as the TAC is being rolled over.

Western Deepwater Shark – RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes

TAC 2012/13Tonnes



Discount Factor

4 215 1 10% NA

TIER 3/4 - RIBALDO

46. Malcolm Haddon presented the Tier 4 assessment of Ribaldo. The majority of trawl caught Ribaldo has been taken in deep water. Trawlers catch only small amounts of Ribaldo in shallow waters and longliners catch more in shallow waters. The data suggest that there was a difference in age structure between fishing methods and years but it was suggested that there may be larger differences by area/depth. Catches in depths less than 400m should be removed as they only contribute error in the results. Recent trawl catches are relatively stable. Autoline data does not go back as far as trawl data and has been stable in more recent years.

47. Slope RAG noted that there could be potential issues about gear and area differences if a Tier 3 assessment were to be used for Ribaldo.


16

48. In response to queries from the October meeting, AFMA stated that there were no records of ghost cod (which would have been misreported Ribaldo) in the database. However, there is no way to identify if the ‘mixed fish’ category contained any Ribaldo.

49. AFMA senior manager (Brad Milic) informed the RAG that there may be some difficulties in comparing auto longline CPUEs from the present with older data. Some catches were recorded daily as opposed to catches recorded by shot per day.

50. As Ribaldo may be considered a species that is ‘not a key economic driver’, two targets B48 & B40 have been used to produce RBCs.

51. Slope RAG noted the two RBCs using B48 and B40 as the target as follows:

a. B48 = RBC 134t

b. B40 = RBC 185t

52. Slope RAG recommended using the B40 target and an RBC of 185t. Subsequent to this meeting (out of session) an error was found in the Ribaldo RBC calculations. Malcolm Haddon revised the Tier 4 assessment and the RAG endorsed the revised RBCs of:

B40 = RBC 321t

B48 = RBC 232t

53. Slope RAG recommended the research allocation be based on the previous Winter Fisheries Independent Survey (FIS) catch of 1 tonne to be taken off the TAC.


55. Slope RAG recommended a discount factor of 15%.

Ribaldo – B 40 RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes B40

TAC 2012/13tonnes



Discount Factor

4 321 1 10% 15%

Ribaldo – B 48 RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes B48

TAC 2012/13tonnes

Research Catch Allowance


Discount Factor


17

tonnes4 232 1 10% 15%

TIER 3/4 - BLUE EYE TREVALLA

56. Slope RAG noted the letter from Les Scott (Slope RAG Industry member who was absent from both the October and November 2012 Slope RAG meetings). The letter stated:

a. That the CPUE analysis used for the 2013-14 season TAC discussion is invalid;

b. The decline in RBC over the past 3 years is rejected as a reasonable reflection of abundance of the species but more as a result of a number of compounding failures of the CPUE analysis notably:

a. Closure of the grounds where high catch rates have been obtained;b. Catches near the closed grounds are less;c. Data from catches now taken on the productive Tasmantid Seamounts

are not included in the standardisation of catch rates which lowers the perceived catch rates;

d. Although autolongliners may be fishing in areas where Blue Eye Trevalla are caught, the vessel may be targeting another species using different fishing technique such as setting lines hard to the bottom to target Pink Ling instead of floating the line off the bottom to target Blue Eye Trevalla. The CPUE from fishing for other target species should not be used in the Blue Eye Trevalla assessment

e. Increased predation of the species by whales has a significant effect on CPUE.

f. It is recommended to roll over the TAC for 2013-14 until the issues are dealt with.

57. Malcolm Haddon presented the Tier 4 Blue eye Trevalla assessment and informed the RAG that, if current catch rates are not an indicator of stock dynamics, then the current Tier 4 assessment is not a reliable measure of abundance.

58. Malcolm Haddon informed the RAG that the following factors were not included in the CPUE standardisation and this meant it was difficult to get accurate results from the Tier 4 assessment:

a) The impact of whales on catches i.e. loss and avoidance;b) Closure of prime Blue Eye Trevalla grounds would lower the CPUE because the

remaining grounds open to fishing may be less suitable;


18

c) Movement of boats to the east coast seamounts (data from this area is excluded from the standardisation of catch rates); and

d) Total hook catch rate cannot be used in the CPUE standardisation as auto longline catch is recorded as kg per shot with the number of hooks not being recorded.

59. Slope RAG noted that, based on the limited data (about one year of data) available, catch rates decline by about 1/3 due to whale depredation and area avoidance while whales are present. Furthermore, there are many areas closed to longline fishing. Although previous studies found that closures made very little impact on CPUE, the studies did not account for edge effects and locational rounding errors (error that put some shots from outside the closures inside and possibly confounded the analysis). Geoff Tuck has started analysing the impacts of closures.

60. An industry observer stated that new closures (Marine Protected Areas) will impact on the longline fishing industry by keeping them out of the fishing grounds that they use for 3 months of the year. Furthermore, the decline in CPUE seen in the data is not consistent with industry on board observations of catch rates.

61. Andrew Penney described the Blue Eye Trevalla fishery in New Zealand. Stock assessments indicate that New Zealand Blue Eye Trevalla biomass (B) declined steadily and continuously over the entire period of the fishery from 1980 onwards, with estimated B declining to below 20%B0 by about 2008 (assuming mid-M = 0.08). This is despite the fact that New Zealand CPUE was considered by the working group to have remained stable (fluctuating without trend) over the period 1995 to at least 2003. This indicates that blue eye trevalla CPUE shows strong hyper-stability, remaining relatively stable over long periods despite continual declines in biomass. This is particularly relevant for feature-based (seamount and pinnacle) blue eye trevalla fisheries where steady replenishment of fish on fished features by fish from adjacent unfished surrounding areas can maintain localised CPUE, despite steady decline in overall abundance. Up until at least 2005, the New Zealand scientific working group concluded that CPUE may not be a reliable index of bluenose abundance, and that observed CPUE declines did not indicate declines in stocks status. This resulted partially from the fact that numerous separate CPUE indices were developed for different methods in five different fishing areas, with most of these indices being highly variable. Steep declines observed across all CPUE indices over 2005 – 2007 prompted efforts to re-define individual CPUE indices to better reflect bluenose targeted fishing, and to investigate combined CPUE indices across areas. The results confirmed that CPUE declines were evident and similar across all areas, resulting in the first attempt to assess bluenose using a combined CPUE index in 2008. This assessment resulted in an average 28% reduction in bluenose TACs (ranging between fisheries management areas from 14% to 57% reduction) for 2008-09.

62. Slope RAG recommended that the reliability of CPUE as an index of abundance for Blue Eye Trevalla be investigated and further resources put in to the analysis. CSIRO


19

representatives believe that a catch based and weight of evidence assessment may be possible in the future and this will be further investigated in the coming year.

63. Slope RAG does not recommend the use of the current Tier 4 assessment because:c. it combines different gear methods;d. it is not able to use catch rates by hook;e. the shift in the area of the fishery;f. unsure if there is a change in the impact of whales depredation over time;g. the impacts of closures on CPUE standardisation; andh. the number of records is decreasing.

64. Slope RAG recommended that the TAC be rolled over until impact of closures and other issues in the assessment are further investigated and alternative assessment is undertaken.

65. Slope RAG recommended that undercatch and overcatch be set at 10%.

66. Slope RAG recommended that the research catch be set at 1 tonne from within the TAC.

BLUE EYE TREVALLA – RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14Tonnes

TAC 2012/13tonnes



Discount Factor

4 388 1 10% NA

TIER 3 - ALFONSINO

67. Neil Klaer presented the Tier 3 Alfonsino assessment.

68. Slope RAG noted maximum age of Alfonsino is about 20 years and that the addition of more age data did not make any difference to the assessment. The assessment indicated that the fishing mortality (F) on the stock was low and there has been little impact from fishing. Last year’s discard estimate was 5% of catches; this is already dealt with in the Tier 3 calculation as the assessment uses actual catch plus discards.

69. Slope RAG accepted the RBC from the Tier 3 assessment of 1,196 tonnes.

70. Slope RAG noted that the stock structure of the East Coast Deep Water (ECDW) stock has not yet been fully established. Most Australian catches are taken on the Lord Howe Rise and these stocks may extend outside the AFZ and may be part of a larger high seas


20

population. Slope RAG noted that Alfonsino is a bycatch/by-product of the New Zealand Orange Roughy fishery and the New Zealand high-seas (SPRFMO Area) catch has ranged widely between 2 t to 455 t (average 78 t) of Alfonsino per year between 1992 and 2010. New Zealand high seas Alfonsino catches averaged 13 t over 2005 – 2009, but increased to 244 t in 2010. It was noted that catches outside the ECDW are insignificant and not included in the assessment. Brad Milic, AFMA, stated that the TAC is only for Alfonsino catches from the ECDW area should not include catches from elsewhere. However, the catches from outside this area are very small anyway.

71. Slope RAG discussed the potential international management aspects of the Alfonsino stock noting that the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO) came into force this year. If SPRFMO agrees that Alfonsino is a straddling stock then management that is compatible with the high seas is desirable. Slope RAG noted that that New Zealand have provided data on their catches and encouraged further collection of Australian and high seas data.

72. Slope RAG noted that there is a symposium this year with a special session on high seas fishing and it could be the right time to start the assessment of the sustainability of Alfonsino and Orange Roughy stocks on the high seas. Slope RAG encouraged DAFF and AFMA to progress international collaboration on Alfonsino at SPRFMO.

73. Simon Boag stated that the major Alfonsino quota holder would most likely encourage Australia to take the lead on high seas Alfonsino assessment and management.

74. Slope RAG recommended that the potential for a change in tier assessment level should be investigated at a future meeting.

75. Slope RAG recommended an RBC of 1,196 tonnes.

76. Slope RAG recommended undercatch and overcatch be set at 10%.

77. Slope RAG recommended no research allowance (0 tonnes)

78. Slope RAG recommended a discount factor of 5%.

Alfonsino – RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes

TAC 2012/13tonnes



Discount Factor

3 1196 0 10% 5%


21

Action item – Neil KlaerAlfonsino - Examine data from New Zealand / high seas. Compare age structure of inside and outside AFZ to assess whether the ECDW Alfonsino assessment needs to account for them.

TIER 1 - BLUE GRENADIER79. Slope RAG discussed the Blue Grenadier MYTAC breakout rules and noted that the

fishery did not breach the breakout rules. However, the RAG investigated whether the fishing mortality was higher than the model predicted. It was thought that this may be because the model had no data on the most recent recruitment (discards of small fish have not yet appeared in the data).

80. Industry participants questioned the substantial increased estimate of discards for 2011. Most grenadier is caught by a single large freezer trawler that is likely to take 80% or more of the TAC and because it has a meal plant on board has nil discards. This vessel has 100% observer coverage. All freezer vessel catches are counted against quota holdings and landed. Therefore, industry members contended that the remaining “fresh” vessels would need to be discarding at a 1:1 ratio and stated that this was impossible. Judy Upston described the discard calculations for Blue Grenadier noting that there is a large Coefficient of Variation (CV) (161.8%) for the 2011 estimate. Industry members explained that this huge CV fitted with the simple maths applied above. She indicated that the sample coverage was inadequate as the high level of discarding was confined to one stratum and that the high CV meant that the estimate of discard tonnage was unreliable. It was also noted that if this discards estimate was used in the assessment model the high CV would mean that it would be down-weighted so that it was not influential. Judy noted that the method of calculation of discards is based on the recommendations in a report by Mike Bergh et al (2009)1.

81. Andrew Penney suggested that, given the substantial increases in estimates of discards for many species using the new ISMP discard estimation procedure, the procedure and 2011 results should be reviewed.

Action item – Sandy Morison Add the review of the Bergh et. al. (2009) report and ISMP discard estimation procedure to the list of research needs

1 Bergh, M., Knuckey, I., Gaylard, J., Martens, K., and Koopman, M. (2009). A revised sampling regime for the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery- Final Report. AFMA Project F2008/0627. OLRAC and Fishwell Consulting, 235pp.http://www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ismp_sessf.pdf


http://www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ismp_sessf.pdf

22

82. Several other options for improving the discard estimation and acceptance of the discard rate were also suggested such as an initial examination of the logbook data and closer investigation of the strata/locations that had the shots with the discards.

83. Slope RAG noted that, as discussed at the October meeting, continuing with the multi-year TAC would not be a high risk strategy given the indications that there is a high level of recruitment occurring.

Blue Grenadier Recommendation

84. Slope RAG recommended:

a. To not break out of the multi-year TAC;b. To maintain the second year of the multi-year TAC of 5208t;c. To set a research catch allowance of 210t composed of 10t for the Fisheries

Independent Survey & 200t for the acoustic survey; andd. To apply overcatch and undercatch of 10%.

BLUE GRENADIER – RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes

MYTAC 2013/14tonnes



Discount Factor

1 NA 5,208 210t 10% NA

TIER 1 - SILVER WAREHOU

85. Jemery Day presented a revised Tier 1 assessment that included the changes suggested at the October 2012 Slope RAG meeting.

86. Slope RAG noted that the sensitivities with length λ of less than 1 (0.25 & 0.1) appear to be giving worse fit to CPUE data, which appears to be a result of conflict between the age data and the CPUE data showing different trends and that the sensitivity of using only data from 1992 onwards only did not make substantial changes to the rest of the CPUE and spawning depletion models.


23

87. Slope RAG noted that the landings data shows that the catches declined dramatically after 2005 when the structural adjustment occurred.

88. The Chair questioned whether the larger vessels that limit their catches to a certain amount should be included in the CPUE. Malcolm Haddon stated that the CPUE standardisation can account for the differences between larger and smaller vessels.

Action item – Malcolm Haddon due Oct 2013 Undertake sensitivity of removing the larger vessels data from the Silver Warehou assessment model.

89. Jemery Day described the results of the Silver Warehou assessment to Slope RAG as follows: the model did not fit well with the length frequency data. However, it was a better fit to

the age frequency data; the last couple of years of recruitment are estimated at slightly below average. Years

prior to this have also had low levels of recruitment (Recruits are considered 0+ fish); alternative weighting of the length data did not improve the fit to the CPUE data; projected 2013 spawning stock biomass was 46.6% of virgin stock biomass; and the RBC from the base case model for 2013 was 2544t for the 20:35:48 harvest

control rule, with a long term RBC of 2,618t.

90. Slope RAG noted the difficulty of estimating recruitment levels in the current year because 0+ fish are not selected/caught by the fishery.

91. Slope RAG discussed the types of fishing (such as targeting the spawning run) and other factors/parameters in the model and the possible implications on the model assessment. Slope RAG noted that CSIRO could explore these effects with more time.

92. Slope RAG noted the model has a poor fit to the last CPUE data points and that the reason for this is that the model assumes average recruitment and if below average recruitment occurs this could result in a break out again in a relatively short time period. Poor recruitment has occurred over the last years. The data from the current year will show if initial signs of strong recruitment seen by industry are confirmed.

93. Slope RAG noted that the CPUE break out appeared to be giving a false indication that something was wrong with the stock, when compared with the updated assessment results. The RAG also noted that the assessment again departed from the CPUE abundance index in the recent few years, showing a slight upward trend whereas CPUE declines.

94. Slope RAG noted that the model cannot know what level of recruitment will happen in the future. Projections are therefore dependent on the assumed level of future recruitment. If


24

the model used the most precautionary approach and assumes the lowest historic level of recruitment to set the TAC then the long-term predicted RBC levels would be much lower. If an average recruitment is used to set the TAC then RBC estimates would be higher. If actual recruitment is then lower than average (as has happened in recent years), then actual catches could remain below the TAC, as a result of it being based on an optimistic recruitment assumption. However, these lower catches do not mean that the fishing mortality has been low, and that the stock biomass would have increased; only that the recommended RBC was optimistic compared with actual recruitment.

95. Slope RAG noted that under the current re-assessment it appears that Silver Warehou is close to breaking out again due to observed CPUE still being near the lower 95% confidence limit of CPUE estimates within the model. Slope RAG expressed the view that it is undesirable to have an assessment trend that already shows the recent CPUE near breakout. Break out rules may need to be re-considered under such circumstances.

96. Slope RAG noted that SESSFRAG has discussed about how to set MYTACs but has not come to an agreed conclusion.

Preliminary results of the model under the low recruitment case.

97. Patrick Cordue stated that the information on Silver Warehou suggests that the stock is in good shape, but that the RAG should use some low level future recruitment scenarios to estimate what would happen to projections in a worst case scenario. The RAG will then know if the MYTAC has acceptable risk without the need for breakout rules.

98. Jemery Day presented some preliminary results from the low recruitment model scenario using the average recruitment over 2002 – 2005, which has been a recent period of low recruitment. The low recruitment scenario’s projected spawning depletion comes down to about B30 in 2015 and the RBC to about 1098t, although this assumes that RBCs would be reset each year and reduce over the years in response to assumption of lower recruitment and the resulting declining spawning biomass. If RBCs and catches are maintained at constant levels, the stock decline would be greater.

99. Slope RAG noted that the scenarios need to be run again assuming that a multi-year TAC that remains at 2,544t and assuming that last year’s catch rate as the future years catch rate (1,629t). Slope RAG agreed to provide low recruitment scenarios as part of the advice to show the range of risk.

Action item – Jemery Day due 1 Dec 2012Deterministic projections be done under 3 years of low recruitment scenarios (low recruitment defined as the average of 2002 – 2005) to inform a projection of the next 3


25

years of the stock estimates for a 3 year MYTAC with catch levels set to 2544t (the 2013 RBC) for 3 years and with catches set to 1629t (the 2011 catch).

100. Slope RAG recommended a RBC of 2,544t for the 2013 season.

101. Slope RAG agreed that Silver Warehou was suitable for a three year multi-year TAC.

102. Slope RAG recommended a research allowance of 25 tonnes as part of the TAC.

103. Slope RAG recommended undercatch and overcatch be set at 10%.

Silver Warehou – RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14Tonnes

TAC 2012/13tonnes



Discount Factor

1 2544 25 10% 0%

TIER 1 - PINK LING

Habitat based CPUE weightings for the disaggregated Pink Ling model 104. Andrew Penney gave a presentation about the habitat area weighting for the

disaggregated CPUE Pink Ling assessment. This was in response to the discussions at the October 2012 Slope RAG meeting about how to relatively weight or combine Pink Ling CPUE indices for separate zones, and Patrick Cordue’s recommendation that CPUE index weighting be based on the habitat area that each index represents.

105. Andrew Penney described the methodology that was used to develop Pink Ling habitat area proxies and potential CPUE weighting factors based on these. The weightings were derived using a variety of data including: seabed area by depth range and CPUE of Pink Ling at different depths.

106. Results showed that various alternative approaches to habitat area-based weighting factors differed only slightly from the implied weighting by sample size used by the assessment model. The RAG decided that habitat area weighting approaches were not likely to make any significant difference to assessment results.


26

Revised Pink Ling

107. Slope RAG noted that there had been an out of session discussion about the assessments between the assessment scientists and AFMA after the October 2012 Slope RAG meeting. It was agreed to use the aggregated model as the base case and to use the zone based / disaggregated model as the sensitivity.

108. Slope RAG agreed that the aggregated model would be used as the base case.

109. Athol Whitten presented the revised Pink Ling assessment base case (aggregated model). No changes have been made to the underlying model, only sensitivities had changed. The 2012 base case model has changed from the 2010 model by: a) allowing the inclusion of cohort-specific time-varying growth; b) removal of a split in the catch rate series for the eastern stock in 2000-01; andc) addition of data from the Kapala surveys.

110. The model is robust to the removal/addition of the Kapala data and the fit to data is greatly improved by the addition of parameters to describe time-varying growth. Changes in growth between cohorts are subtle (not much difference compared to those seen in the Blue Grenadier assessment). There was consistency among estimated selectivity parameters between the east and west which also suggests the model is quite robust. Likelihood profile analyses reveal the current model estimates natural mortality quite well in both the east and west. Steepness of the stock recruitment curve is not well estimated well by the model, and as such, is fixed. The pre-exploitation equilibrium recruitment level (R0) is reasonably well estimated by the model, more so in the west than in the east, but due to uncertainty about estimates of R0, calculated depletion levels are also important to consider. It was noted that age and length data provide similar (very weak) information on R0 in the east.

111. Slope RAG discussed the growth data and if the differences/trends were due to sampling bias. It was noted that the model needs to see consistent trends in growth differences between cohorts before it will give better model fits. Slope RAG accepted estimated cohort-specific and time-varying growth parameters for the current assessment.

112. Slope RAG discussed estimates of recruitment in the model. The model was unable to estimate steepness so is unable to predict the level of recruitment from stock biomass.

113. Slope RAG noted the estimates of biomass under base case model as follows:a) 2013 East = B26b) 2013 West = B43

114. Slope RAG noted the base case RBCs as follows:a) East zone RBC = 223t


27

b) West zone RBC = 490tc) Total RBC = 713t

115. Slope RAG also discussed alternative TAC and catch scenarios: a) 2013:1000t, 2014:1000tb) 2013:1000t, 2014: 700tc) 2013: 700t, 2015: 700td) 2013: 700t, 2014: 500t

116. Under these alternative catch scenarios there is little difference in the recovery of the stock (only differing substantially in the first two years of recovery). However, Andrew Penney noted that previous assessments also predicted quick recovery as the model shows now, but that such recovery has not occurred.

117. Industry members stated that this year’s catch rates of Pink Ling are better than last year and a reduction in the TAC would result: in economic impacts on the industry; impact on catches of Silver Warehou, Inshore Ocean Perch and Blue Grenadier; and result in higher levels of discarding of Pink Ling since a low TAC would mean that Pink Ling would in practice increasingly become a bycatch species.

118. Simon Boag stated that industry has consistently stated that it believes that the Pink Ling TAC should be set at or around 1,000t.

119. Slope RAG discussed why the assessment suggested a reduced RBC. Slope RAG noted that the selectivity in the model appears to be driving the decrease in the biomass estimate in the East as the CPUE is rising and the length and age data are down-weighted so as not to have a large influence on the overall model fit. The model is suggesting that recruitment is poor and thus the biomass is decreasing. Slope RAG again noted that the only real factor changed in the current agreed Pink Ling assessment is the cohort-specific and time-varying growth, which are minor.

120. Slope RAG discussed the process of developing and applying new assessment models. It was noted that if there are changes to model design or specification, they are considered at the first RAG of the year only. The second RAG meeting is to recommend the RBC from agreed models. Jeremy Prince suggested the RAG look at how the USA phases in new models for their assessments. Slope RAG agreed that the process for phasing in new assessment models would apply to both cases where it suggested an increase or a decrease in the RBC.

121. Slope RAG discussed the observer and port sampling in terms of time and space coverage. Industry members stated additional sampling could have picked up the recruitment in the fishery. It was noted that there was on-board sampling but no port sampling in NSW.


28

122. Slope RAG accept the RBC noting the concerns about the assessment and the implications. Primarily that a decreased TAC may result in increased discarding across the fleet particularly in the east.

123. Slope RAG recommended that an RBC of 713t.


125. Slope RAG noted that as Pink Ling is assessed as a Tier 1 species the discount factor was not applicable.

126. Slope RAG recommended a research catch allowance of 4t.

Pink Ling – RecommendationsTier RBC

2013/14tonnes

TAC 2012/13tonnes



Discount Factor

1 713 4 10 NA

TIER 1 – ORANGE ROUGHY

Population genomics of Orange Roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus): selection, population structure, and movement.

127. Anders Gonçalves da Silva gave a presentation to Slope RAG entitled Population genomics of Orange Roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus): selection, population structure, and movement.

128. The presentation described his research on determining stock structure focusing on using genetic loci outliers as markers. Sampled fish were all adults taken from spawning aggregations.

129. Anders stated that new genetic technologies are now cheaper, quicker, and have increased power to detect low levels of genetic differentiation and may allow investigation of adaptive genetic variation. The project was to investigate if genomics could be used to identify recent adaptation and any stock differentiation. Population genetic structure may be used to inform management decisions of Orange Roughy.

130. The amount of exchange needed to have genetic homogeneity is much less than the amount needed to have demographic homogeneity. The study concluded that Australian


29

Orange Roughy form a single genetic stock but loci found to have signatures of natural selection suggest three separate areas; Albany/Esperance, Hamburger Hill and S.E. Australia. There appears to be no genetic differentiation between stocks in S.E. Australia. However, they may be demographically separate. Malcolm Haddon stated that there is significant evidence already that the St Helens and Cascade stocks should be assessed and managed separately.

131. Patrick Cordue stated that in New Zealand it was found that there were different genetic signatures over time from the population on the same seamount. Anders Gonçalves da Silva responded that is the current study there is the same structure within spatial locations that suggested that this is not an issue with the methods used for this study.

ORANGE ROUGHY – EAST

Biomass estimation of the 2012 Eastern Zone Orange Roughy spawning stock

132. Tim Ryan gave a presentation entitled Biomass estimation of the 2012 Eastern Zone Orange Roughy spawning stock.

133. Tim Ryan stated that the project is still ongoing and that results (Biomass estimates) are due in March/April 2013.

134. The project is based on vessel acoustic surveys since 1990, carried out at two locations St Helens Hill and St Patricks Head and complimented with trawls.

135. The project used a multiple line of evidence approach using: Different frequencies and the difference between the two frequencies – in acoustic

data; Trawl catch; and Depth and location of acoustic marks.

136. It was noted that the Orange Roughy appeared to have shifted from St Helens Hill to St Patrick’s Head. This is uncommon and not seen since the mid 1990’s. It was previously thought that fishing activity caused Orange Roughy to move from St Helen’s to St Patricks. However, this hypothesis is now considered unlikely as there has been no fishing at St Helen’s and yet the fish moved.

137. It was suggested that fishing on the edge of aggregations (such is done in some research catches to avoid catching a large amount of fish) does not provide a


30

representative sample of age structure. It was also noted that work is continuing on getting representative samples.

Orange Roughy spawning ground index

138. Rudy Kloser gave a presentation on the interim results of the acoustic optical survey conducted during the winter of 2012.

139. The presentation described the historic data on Orange Roughy collated by the project. Data reported included: lengths, ages (including some data of age/length by sex) and acoustic survey biomass estimates at St Helens and St Patrick Head. The data indicated that there were differences in mean length between St Helens and St Patrick Head in both males and females.

140. Results of the survey are: Extent and density of Orange Roughy marks in 2012 at St. Patricks Head appear to be

much higher than 2010. Quantitative analysis will combine St Helens Hill and St Patrick’s biomass enabling

comparison with 2006 and 2010 results. In 2012 compared to 2010, there are less Orange Roughy at St Helens Hill, more at St

Patricks. 2012 seems similar to 1999, there is a shift back to St Patricks Head and behaviour

appears to be similar – e.g. localised dense aggregations at St Helens, extensive aggregations in the water column at St Patricks Head.

141. The project has concluded that: age and length data have not been similarly collected over time, could be biased and

should be used with caution in stock assessment models; acoustic data has varied in methodology over time and prior to 2006 only broad trends

can be drawn due to the high level of variation (C.V.’s); and given the conflict between the acoustic and model (age/stock structure driven)

interpretation of the stock size and recovery rate that repeat acoustic surveys and appropriate biological sampling for age, length, weight and reproductive potential need to be done to provide sustained evidence of the recovery rate and stock size.

142. Simon Boag on behalf of SETFIA thanked CSIRO for their project performance, which was on time and on budget despite several challenges. He also stated that SETFIA’s proposal was for 2 year project and that SETFIA remains committed to continuing the research to assess stocks with a view to re-bulding the Orange Roughy Stock.

143. Slope RAG agreed that any recommendation to continue the age data collection would need to be done when all of the other species / stocks age data requirements are discussed and prioritised. Kyne Krusic Golub agreed to submit an aging plan for the RAG to prioritise.


31

144. Slope RAG discussed the risk to the stock of taking the 165 tonne research catch. The RAG noted the estimated recovery rate after allocation of the research quota whilst virgin recruitment is still entering the fishery is either ~530 tonnes or ~1900 tonnes for the low and high recruitment scenarios. Virgin recruitment is expected to still be entering the fishery till 2018, assuming 50% of fish are mature at ~29 years and substantial fishing commenced in 1989. This alters to ~ 2013 for 10% mature at ~24 years assuming constant recruitment.

145. Slope RAG noted that under both the low and high recovery rate scenarios the impact is 24% or 8% respectively, in the years of the surveys. This further reduces depending on future monitoring programs for a generation recovery time. The impact of monitoring the fishery to monitor the recovery rate will be done over 8 years 2006 to 2013. Assuming Orange Roughy have a generation time greater than 32 years when 90% of fish are mature. This would limit the impact on future recovery over a generation time to less than 8% and 3% for the low and high recovery scenarios respectively.

146. Slope RAG noted that although there is no agreed biomass estimate, the eastern Orange Roughy stock shows indications of recovery. The RAG noted that recovery will be faster when catches are smaller but without monitoring there isn’t any data to assess the rate of recovery.

147. Slope RAG recommended Research Catch Allowance of 165 tonnes to continue the Acoustic Optical Survey during 2013.

Other Business148. The industry observer Simon Boag informed the RAG that he had received information

from the World Wildlife Fund that they had been told by a RAG member that there were dissenting views on the Pink Ling assessment and that due to this they had recommended to Coles supermarkets that Australian ling was not sustainable. This had allegedly led to Coles supermarkets refusing to stock Australian ling. The cost to industry is reduced demand and lowered price is significant.

149. The Chair reminded members of their roles and responsibilities as stated in AFMA’s Fisheries Administration paper #12. The AFMA A/g senior manager, Brad Milic reiterated that if members have dissenting views they should be documented in the RAG reports which are public but not communicated verbally to other entities.

Draft results of ABARES fishery survey


32

150. Rob New presented the ABARES fishery economics survey including draft results. The surveys have been run in Commonwealth fisheries since early 1990s alternating between fisheries, covering each fishery every two years. The surveys collect financial performance (operating profit for each boat in all fisheries) & net economic returns for individual fisheries aggregated over the fishery (including opportunity cost).

151. Rob New described the survey methodology. The weighting of surveyed operators is based on size of catch as not all of the industry is surveyed. The survey tries to take account of all of the biases. However, the survey uses operator’s profit and loss statement and this is a big step for fishers to trust ABARES with this information. There were 13 vessels included in the current survey.

152. Financial results reflect the average vessel cost and revenue of vessels operating from 2007-08 to 2010-11. However, there was a change in the sampling method between years 2008-09 and 2009-2010 so that years 2007-08 and 2008-09 cannot be compared to 2009-10 and 2010-11. Economic results at the fishery level help monitor the economic performance of the sector.

Close

153. The next Slope RAG meetings are scheduled for 25-27 September and 30/31 October and 1 November 2013.

154. The Chair closed the meeting at 12:00 and thanked all the participants for attending.


Date post:	08-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ngocong
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

Contract - Home - The Australian Fisheries Management ... · Web viewSlope RAG noted that the catch...

Documents