Status Report for Re-assessment for Export Approval Under the EPBC Act

North West Slope and Western Deepwater

Trawl Fisheries

February 2012

This report has been prepared by AFMA for consideration by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities in relation to the exemption of the Western Trawl Fisheries from export controls under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i. List of attachments.................................................................................................................................3 1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................4 2. Description of the Fishery .....................................................................................................................4

2.3. Target and by-product species.........................................................................................................6 2.3.1. Target species of the North West Slope Trawl Fishery....................................................................6 2.3.2. Target species of the North West Slope Trawl Fishery....................................................................6 2.4. Bycatch species ...............................................................................................................................7 2.5. Management Arrangements.............................................................................................................7 2.6. Fishing methods ...............................................................................................................................8 2.7. Closures ...........................................................................................................................................8 2.8. Allocation between sectors...............................................................................................................8 2.9. Governing legislation/fishing authority .............................................................................................8 2.10. Status of export approval under the EPBC Act ................................................................................8

3. Socio-economic environment ...............................................................................................................9 3.1. Value of the fishery...........................................................................................................................9 3.2. Economic assessment .....................................................................................................................9 3.3. Downstream employment resulting from fishing activity ..................................................................9 3.4. Quality assurance and control..........................................................................................................9

4. Management............................................................................................................................................9 4.1. Changes to management .................................................................................................................9 4.2. Performance of the fishery against objectives, performance indicators and performance measures

........................................................................................................................................................10 4.3. Compliance risks present in the fishery and actions taken to reduce these risks..........................10 4.4. Consultation processes ..................................................................................................................10 4.5. Description of cross jurisdictional management arrangements .....................................................10 4.5.1. Commonwealth fisheries ................................................................................................................10 4.5.2. State fisheries.................................................................................................................................11 4.6. Compliance with threat abatement plans, recovery plans and domestic and international agreements

........................................................................................................................................................11 5. Research and Monitoring ....................................................................................................................11

5.1. Research completed relevant to the NWSTF or WDTF.................................................................11 5.2. Monitoring Programs used to gather information on the NWSTF and WDTF ...............................11 5.3. Bycatch reduction...........................................................................................................................12

6. Catch Data.............................................................................................................................................12 6.1. Total catch of target species ..........................................................................................................12 6.1.1. North West Slope Trawl Fishery ....................................................................................................13 6.1.2. Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery.................................................................................................13 6.2. Logbook Effort Data .......................................................................................................................14 6.2.1. North West Slope Trawl Fishery ....................................................................................................14 6.2.2. Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery.................................................................................................14 6.3. Total catch of by-product................................................................................................................14 6.4. Total catch of bycatch species .......................................................................................................15

7. Status of target stock...........................................................................................................................15 7.1. Resource concerns ........................................................................................................................15 7.2. Stock assessments ........................................................................................................................16 7.3. Results of stock recovery strategies ..............................................................................................16

8. Protected species.................................................................................................................................16 8.1. Frequency and nature of interactions.............................................................................................16 8.2. Management action to reduce interactions with TEP species .......................................................16

9. Impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem...........................................................................................17 9.1. Results of any Ecological Risk Assessments.................................................................................17 9.2. Deepwater dogfish .........................................................................................................................18 9.3. Nature of impacts on the ecosystem..............................................................................................18 9.4. Management action taken to reduce impacts, and results.............................................................19 9.5. Future Management arrangements for the NWSTF and WDTF....................................................19

10. References ............................................................................................................................................20

i. List of attachments

Attachment 1 – Final conditions to the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) for the North West Slope Trawl Fishery and the Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery Attachment 2 – Harvest Strategy for the North West Slope and Western Deepwater Trawl Fisheries

4

1. Introduction

This re-assessment covers the method of trawling in two relatively small-scale fisheries, the North West Slope Trawl Fishery (NWSTF) and the Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery (WDTF). The trawl fisheries run adjacent to one another at longitude 114ºE and both operate in waters off the continental slope of Western Australia.

The fisheries were first assessed in November 2004 under parts 10, 13 and 13A of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) in accordance with the Australian Government Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries. The NWSTF and WDTF were declared an approved Wildlife Trade Operation (WTO), under Part 13A of the EPBC ACT. This declaration allowed the export of product from the NWSTF and WDTF for three years. In January 2009 AFMA submitted the Status Report for Re-assessment for Export Approval under the EPBC Act – Commonwealth Western Trawl Fisheries. In response, the NWSTF and WDTF were declared an approved WTO for a further period expiring on 15 November 2010. This WTO was subsequently extended until 26 April 2012 to ensure the 2011 NWSTF and WDTF Harvest Strategy was finalised and included in the re-assessment.

2. Description of the Fishery

2.1. North West Slope Trawl Fishery

The NWSTF extends from 114°E to about 125°E off the Western Australian coast between the line approximating the 200 metre isobath and the outer limit of the Australian Fishing Zone (AFZ), but taking into account Australian-Indonesian maritime boundaries. Fishing is primarily conducted with demersal crustacean trawls along bathometric contours depending upon the target species sought.

Figure 1. Area of the North West Slope Trawl Fishery

2.2. Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery

The WDTF is located in deepwater off Western Australia, from the line approximating the 200 metre isobath to the edge of the AFZ. Its northern most point is the boundary of the AFZ to longitude 114° E and southern most point at the boundary of the AFZ to longitude 115° 08’E.

Figure 2. Area of the Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery

Under the terms of the OCS, AFMA has management responsibility for all marine species taken by trawl in waters seaward of a management line defined by a series of latitudes and longitudes which approximate the 200 metre isobath. The Western Australia Department of Fisheries has responsibility for species taken with non-trawl methods (except tunas) in these waters and for all species taken by all fishing methods landward of the Commonwealth fishery boundaries.

6

2.3. Target and by-product species

2.3.1. Target species of the North West Slope Trawl Fishery

The NWSTF has historically been based on commercial stocks of deepwater crustaceans, principally scampi and prawns, but has recently included some finfish species. There are three commercially important species of scampi (M. velutinus, M. australiensis, and M. boschmai) which are taken from different depth distributions between 260 to 500 metres (Wallner & Phillips, 1995). Historically, the fishery has also taken a combination of other scampi species (Wallner & Phillips, 1995, Moore et al. 2007a).

The biological characteristics of scampi are indicative of low sustainable yields and illustrate that they are susceptible to overexploitation if not managed appropriately. Furthermore, fishing for scampi and deepwater prawn stocks has been confined to relatively small areas within the NWSTF, principally the waters adjacent to Rowley Shoals and the Scott and Ashmore Reefs. The aggregation behaviour of crustaceans in these areas increases their susceptibility to local depletion by intense fishing (Staples et al. 1994).

The scampi stock was assessed in 2010 by the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) using a surplus production model. This assessment suggested that scampi biomass at the end of 2008 was probably between 65 per cent and 85 per cent of unfished biomass. Fishing mortality in recent years is estimated to have been well below the fishing mortality rate that achieves Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) (Woodhams et al. 2011).

In the NWSTF, Red Carid Prawns (Heterocarpus woodmasoni), Royal Red Prawns (Haliporoides sibogae), Red Prawns (Aristaeomorpha foliacea) and Red Striped Prawns (Aristeus virilise) comprise the majority of the total prawn catch. While deepwater prawns have previously been the primary target species of the fishery, they are currently only taken as a by-product. Little information or knowledge exists on the biology of deepwater prawn species. Compared with inshore relatives, deepwater prawns have a relatively low productivity. The annual take of deepwater prawn for the last five years has averaged three tonnes and has not exceeded five tonnes since 2003.

Recently, targeting practices have also included the take of finfish species including Goldband Snapper (Pristipomoides multidens) and Redspot Emperor (Lethrinus lentjan) in the shallower areas of the fishery. These species are also taken in the trap sector of the overlapping Western Australia managed Northern Demersal Scalefish Fishery. The most recent model-based assessment estimates (based on data up to 2007) indicated that there was a high probability that the spawning stocks of these species were both above their respective threshold levels and that catches were within the acceptable ranges. F-based assessments indicated that the fishing levels were either lower than the target level or between target and threshold levels (Western Australia Department of Fisheries, 2010). Catches of Goldband Snapper and Red Emperor taken in the NWSTF were not included in the assessments undertaken by the Western Australia Department of Fisheries. Until this is done and a revised assessment is undertaken (2013), an annual catch limit of 44 tonnes for Goldband Snapper and 12 tonnes for Red Emperor has been implemented for the NWSTF Kimberley Zone (see Section 9.4 below).

2.3.2. Target species of the North West Slope Trawl Fishery

The marine habitat of the WDTF ranges from temperate-subtropical in the south and tropical in the northern region of the fishery. It spans a large depth range from 200 metres to greater than 1,500 metres. Consequently, catch patterns are not clearly defined as a diverse range of species are captured across the fishery and targeting is opportunistic with few specific grounds identified (Evans, 1992, Moore et al. 2007b). The WDTF can be defined as a by-product or multispecies fishery due to the wide range of species taken in low volumes.

In the west region of the WDTF, commercially important species include Bugs (Ibacus spp), Deepwater Flathead (Platycephalus conatus), Boarfish (Pentacerotidae sp.) and Mirror Dory (Zenopsis nebulosus). Several other species, including Orange Roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus), have historically been taken in commercial quantities, but do not represent recent targeting practices in the fishery. In the Gascoyne region of

7

the WDTF (see Section 9.4 below) commercially important species also include Ruby Snapper (Etelis carbunculus), Tang’s Snapper (Lipocheilus carnolabrum) and Longtail Ruby Snapper (Etelis coruscans).

Dichmont et al. (2002) produced a stock assessment for Ruby Snapper inhabiting the grounds of the WDTF. Given a lack of information on the growth, natural mortality and length-weight relationship of Ruby Snapper in Western Australian waters, the assessment incorporated biological parameters from Ruby Snapper inhabiting other Indo-Pacific regions. However, since no vessels focussed on catching Ruby Snapper for more than three consecutive years and a clear lack of knowledge of the local biological parameters for Ruby Snapper existed, no meaningful advice on sustainable yields could be established and a high level of uncertainty shrouded results. This limited the ability of the stock assessment to provide robust management advice. It was noted that throughout the Pacific that Ruby Snapper abundance has shown rapid decline in response to high fishing pressure. Furthermore, Ruby Snapper has been known to form large spawning aggregations in the WDTF which increases the susceptibility of this species to trawling (Dichmont et al. 2002).

2.4. Bycatch species

Bycatch information is primarily collected through logbooks for the NWSTF and WDTF, with some augmenting observer coverage. Section 5.3 of this report gives a detailed account of bycatch taken in the NWSTF and WDTF.

2.5. Management Arrangements

AFMA has an adaptable management framework with the ability to amend permit conditions. In response to changing fishery dynamics and available knowledge, AFMA may implement amendments to improve management efficiency. For example, in 2011 AFMA implemented new permit conditions regulating compulsory observer requirements and move-on provisions for interactions with vulnerable marine ecosystems for shallow waters of the NWSTF.

The NWSTF is managed through limited entry, in addition to conditions imposed on the fishing permits. The fishery is restricted to seven fishing permits that are renewed every five years. Permit conditions impose codend mesh-size restrictions (maximum of 50 millimetres) and ensure that the North West Slope Daily Fish Log is completed for every day of trawl fishing. The use of an integrated computer vessel monitoring system (VMS) has been compulsory in all AFMA fisheries since 1 July 2004.

The WDTF is also managed through limited entry and conditions imposed on the fishing permits. The WDTF is restricted to 11 fishing permits that are renewed every five years. Permit conditions enforce the completion of a daily log for every day of trawl fishing within the fisheries boundaries. There are no output controls specific to either the NWSTF or the WDTF. Under the Fisheries Management Act 1991 the take of blue and black marlin (Makaira mazara, M. indica) and black cod (Epinephelus daemelii) is prohibited.

A key aspect of the management of the NWSTF and the WDTF is the harvest strategy, which establishes target and limit reference points, trigger limits and management responses for key commercial species. The first harvest strategy was first implemented in January 2008 and then comprehensively revised in 2011.

The 2011 Harvest Strategy (Attachment 2) focuses on managing the key commercial species captured in the fisheries as well as any species identified as high risk in the ecological risk assessment (ERA). In taking this approach, it is assumed that controls on the subset of key commercial species will indirectly control the level of fishing pressure on other low value by-product and bycatch species. Regular reviews of the catch composition from the fisheries will be undertaken to underpin this assumption.

For both fisheries catch and catch per unit effort reference points and indicators have been developed to monitor catches of key commercial species. Catch limits have also been prescribed for key species shared with Western Australia and species identified as conservation dependent. Catch controls are used in preference to effort controls because they can be more feasibly and directly monitored and enforced, and they are more appropriate for the spatial and temporal variability within the fishery. They also allow for the operator’s ability to target a range of different species.

8

2.6. Fishing methods

NWSTF vessels mostly access the fishery on a part time or opportunistic basis, or in response to consumer demand for specific products. The fleet are all-steel construction 20–25 metre prawn trawlers modified for deepwater trawling. Either demersal fish trawls or crustacean trawls are typically utilised. Permit conditions restrict the codend mesh size in the fishery to 50 millimetres. The nets are typically towed at three knots along relatively flat mud or silt substrates. Hard bottom areas or rocky outcrops are avoided as these areas are not ideal scampi habitat and also lead to snaring and damage of nets. Shot duration is typically 3–5 hours with a combined shoot-away and haul-up time of around one hour at 500 metres (Evans, 1992).

The WDTF is open to fishing the entire year however, operators have generally chosen to access the fishery on a part time or opportunistic basis. A wide variety of vessels, nets, targeting techniques and processing methods have also been employed. Either demersal fish trawls or crustacean trawls are typically utilised. No mesh size limits are currently regulated in the WDTF.

2.7. Closures

Spatial closures to meet conservation objectives under the EPBC Act are being implemented by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC) through the Marine Bioregional Planning process. Following final roll-out of the Marine Bioregional Planning process and establishment of the network of representative Commonwealth Marine Reserve networks, AFMA will consider the need for any further closures within of the NWSTF and WDTF to address any fisheries-related issues.

2.8. Allocation between sectors

Where target species form shared stocks between Western Australia and the Commonwealth, estimates of an acceptable catch range have been developed. An annual catch limit of 44 tonnes of Goldband Snapper and 12 tonnes of Red Emperor has been implemented for the NWSTF Kimberley Zone. These limits are loosely based on the relative geographic area of overlap (9.4%) between the NWSTF and Fishing Area 2 Zone B (the overlapping area) of the WA Northern Demersal Scalefish Fishery for which the assessment was conducted. Catches of Goldband Snapper and Red Emperor taken in Zone B during 2009 were 462 tonnes and 122 tonnes respectively, although the exact position of these catches within Fishing Area 2 Zone B is not clear.

2.9. Governing legislation/fishing authority

The NWSTF and the WDTF are managed by AFMA in accordance with the Fisheries Management Act 1991, the Fisheries Management Regulations 1992, and the Western Trawl Fisheries Statement of Management Arrangements 2004. The Statement of Management Arrangements is to be updated in 2012.

2.10. Status of export approval under the EPBC Act

The NWSTF and WDTF were granted WTO accreditation and exemption from export restrictions under the EPBC Act in 2004 for three years. In November 2007, the WTO approval was extended for 16 months expiring March 2009. In March 2009, the WTO approval was extended again for 20 months, expiring November 2010. This WTO was subsequently extended until 26 April 2012 to ensure the 2011 NWSTF and WDTF Harvest Strategy was finalised and included in the re-assessment.

3. Socio-economic environment

3.1. Value of the fishery

Fishing effort in both the NWSTF and WDTF is generally of a low level and often opportunistic; based around operators’ activities in other State and Commonwealth fisheries. As a result, these fisheries have a low gross value of production (GVP). Total GVP for the NWSTF has been low and relatively stable since 1997/98, with the peak GVP occurring in 2004/05 ($1,717,000) but dropping to $670,000 in 2005/06. More recent GVP information is confidential due to the small number of boats operating in the fishery. The GVP for the WDTF is highly variable based on the number of active vessels in the fishery. GVP rose steadily from 1997/98 financial year and peaked during the 2002/03 financial year at $2.5 million. Since 2003 it has declined dramatically and recent GVP information is confidential due to the small numbers of operators in the fishery.

3.2. Economic assessment

The ABARES Fishery Status Report brings together available indicators of the biological and economic performance of each of the diverse fisheries managed by AFMA. The most recent status report can be found at http://www.daff.gov.au/abares

3.3. Downstream employment resulting from fishing activity

The seafood industry is vital to the economy of rural and regional Australia, with direct employment in fisheries production and processing, and a substantial downstream employment effect in supporting industries including the transportation, storage, wholesaling and retailing sectors, and the catering and tourism industries. Operators in the NWSTF and WDTF use the significant ports between Darwin and Fremantle to land their catch and utilise the processing facilities. This generates employment for cold stores, the processing plant, provisioning for the vessels and aspects of repairs and maintenance. Key ports are located at: Darwin, Point Samson and Fremantle.

3.4. Quality assurance and control

Australian seafood destined for export is subject to Commonwealth regulation under the Export Control Act 1982 and Export Control (processed food) Orders to ensure compliance with food safety and trade description requirements. All land based processing establishments and vessels which process on board are required to be registered by the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service.

4. Management

4.1. Changes to management

The boundaries of the NWSTF and the WDTF are determined under OCS arrangements between the Commonwealth and Western Australia governments. Prior to the formal OCS arrangements, Commonwealth fishing operators kept to waters deeper than 200 metres. Following the gazettal of the agreements in 1995, it was discovered that the north east boundary of the NWSTF included areas of water shallower than 200 metres (the intended boundary for these fisheries) allowing Commonwealth fishers further inshore than initially intended by the OCS agreement. There are also areas of water adjacent to the south coast of the state that are deeper than 200 metres, from which Commonwealth operators in the WDTF are excluded. The Commonwealth has sought agreement from Western Australian Government to amending the formal boundaries of the Offshore Constitutional Settlement to be consistent with the 200 metre isobath, which would reflect the intention of the original agreement.

AFMA implemented a closure in October 2007 in the area of the NWSTF shallower than 200 metres which remained in place until December 2010. The last extension of the closure was made on the basis that if the OCS issue was not resolved, the area would open and sustainable catch levels set for key species. In late 2010 Commonwealth fishers, in the spirit of collaboration with Western Australia, voluntarily closed the area until 30 September 2011.

10

AFMA, in consultation with the Western Australia Department of Fisheries, has since reviewed the NWSTF and WDTF Harvest Strategy to ensure sustainable harvest of species within waters defined as Commonwealth jurisdiction in the current OCS arrangement. The AFMA Commission endorsed the revised harvest strategy in August 2011, which came into effect on 1 October 2011. From 1 October 2011, permit holders in the NWSTF have been able to operate in all waters in the fishery, including those shallower than 200 metres. Permit holders are required to operate in accordance with the revised harvest strategy and in line with the fishing permit conditions which specify mandatory observer coverage and move on provisions for interactions with vulnerable marine ecosystems in this area.

Management measures for a range of species including scampi, deepwater prawns and finfish species have been included in the harvest strategy. The harvest strategy has been designed to enable the sustainable utilisation of fishery resources and has applied an ERA and Ecological Risk Management response to potential negative fishing impacts including to habitats and communities. The target and limit reference points for key commercial species, management controls for Western Australian key indicator species and ERA high risk species are detailed in the harvest strategy.

4.2. Performance of the fishery against objectives, performance indicators and performance measures

A statement of the performance of the NWSTF and WDTF against their objectives, performance indicators and performance measures is made annually in AFMA’s annual report. A copy of the current statement can be found on AFMA’s website.

4.3. Compliance risks present in the fishery and actions taken to reduce these risks

The Fisheries Management Act 1991, the Fisheries Management Regulations 1992 and the Western Trawl Fisheries Statement of Management Arrangements 2004 outline the legislative measures taken to ensure there is a high level of compliance with the management arrangements for the fishery.

AFMA bases its fishery’s compliance budget on the expected level of activity in the NWSTF and the WDTF (which is currently relatively low in both fisheries). Vessel activity is also monitored in the fisheries through compulsory fitting of an ICVMS.

Compliance risk assessments have been initiated for those fisheries with a high level of activity and correspondingly higher levels of compliance risks but AFMA has determined that given the minimal effort and catches in the fisheries there is no immediate plan to conduct a compliance risk assessment for either fishery. AFMA will continue to monitor activity in the fishery via VMS, specifically with regard to the newly implemented NWSTF move-on provisions of interactions with vulnerable marine ecosystems. AFMA compliance will respond accordingly to intelligence that suggests any breach of these provisions.

4.4. Consultation processes

The Western Trawl Consultative Panel is the key consultative body for both the NWSTF and WDTF and consists of industry, research, state and Commonwealth government representatives. The panel meets on an as needs basis but remains actively involved in the development and implementation of management arrangements in the NWSTF and WDTF.

4.5. Description of cross jurisdictional management arrangements

4.5.1. Commonwealth fisheries

The Western Tuna and Billfish Fishery (WTBF) is the only Commonwealth fishery that has an operational area that overlaps with the NWSTF. The WTBF fishery operates pelagically using longlines, whereas the NWSTF operates demersally and thus there is no conflict over resource sharing. Interaction between gears is minimal and therefore has no economic impact on either fishery.

The WTBF overlaps the entire area of the WDTF; WTBF’s most productive fishing grounds and zones of medium and high relative fishing intensity fall within the area of the WDTF. While some demersal species such

11

as boarfish and dogfish species are occasionally captured on pelagic longlines, there has been no significant interaction recorded between the two fisheries. The capacity for demersal trawls to interact with and capture pelagic species is negligible and thus resource sharing is not an issue.

Zone B of the Small Pelagic Fishery overlaps with the southern region of the WDTF, south of latitude 31oS. As

there is no overlap in the principal species targeted and low levels of effort exerted by both fisheries, there are no known interactions or economic implications between the fisheries.

4.5.2. State fisheries

There are a number of Western Australia fisheries that overlap with the waters of the NWSTF. Under negotiated OCS agreements, Western Australia has responsibility for all fishing methods other than trawling and long lining out to the edge of the AFZ. Within the area of the NWSTF there are a number of state managed line and trap operators that target demersal finfish (Northern Demersal Scalefish Fishery, Pilbara Trap Fishery, Pilbara Line Fishery). These fisheries have a history of harvesting demersal finfish species. To date, fishing effort by these fisheries outside the 200 metre isobath has been minimal with little success in this zone (Fletcher & Santoro, 2011). Where the potential for interaction exists, AFMA has developed conservative catch limits via the harvest strategy to account for take of these species by trawlers in waters shallower than 200 metres.

The West Coast Deep Sea Crab Fishery (WCDSCF) is a state managed crustacean fishery that overlaps in jurisdiction with the NWSTF & WDTF. The WCDSCF primarily targets Crystal Crabs (Chaceon albus) and Champagne Crabs (Hypthalassia acerba). These species are targeted in depths between 500-800 metres with the fishery operating from the 150 metre isobath out to the edge of the AFZ between the WA/NT border) and Cape Leeuwin. There are seven licence holders that deploy up to 700 pots each, generally in strings of 50 to 100 pots attached to a mainline (Fletcher & Santoro, 2011).

The potential for interaction exists between for both the NWSTF and the WDTF due to the overlap in the grounds of the two fisheries and the fact that the target species are benthic and hence susceptible to capture by the trawl gear used by trawl operators. To date, interactions between these fisheries have been minimal. This is due to the inefficiency of targeting the crabs using trawl gear and the fact that the WCDSCF is a live market fishery. Specimens retained using trawl gear are typically damaged or dead due to their delicate nature and not economically valuable.

The Shark Bay Snapper Managed Fishery, managed by WA Fisheries, has the potential for future resource sharing conflict with the WDTF. The Snapper fishery has 48 licensed operators in the waters of the Indian Ocean between latitudes 23º34’S and 26º30’S (Fletcher & Santoro, 2011). Mechanised handlines form the main fishing method of the Snapper fishery. Western Australia Department of Fisheries manages the fishery through total allowable catches and individually transferable quotas. At this stage it has not been ascertained if the deepwater Snapper stocks targeted by the WDTF share the same stock origins as the inshore stocks managed by Western Australia Department of Fisheries.

4.6. Compliance with threat abatement plans, recovery plans and domestic and international agreements

There are currently no threat abatement plans, recovery plans or domestic or international agreements relating to the NWSTF or WDTF (barring a Memorandum of Understanding with Indonesia).

5. Research and Monitoring

5.1. Research completed relevant to the NWSTF or WDTF

As both the NWSTF and WDTF have very low GVPs and low activity levels, no new research has been undertaken in the fisheries.

5.2. Monitoring Programs used to gather information on the NWSTF and WDTF

AFMA has a Scientific Observer Program in place through which information independent of logbook data is collected on a minimum of 6% of fishing operations. Baseline biological data (e.g. otoliths, length, sex

12

sampling) is collected by onboard observers on all key commercial species as a high-priority. When fishing in the shallower areas of the NWSTF, operators must carry on-board an AFMA observer.

5.3. Bycatch reduction

AFMA established a bycatch and discarding program in February 2007 to provide additional resources and direction for pursuing policy and legislative objectives in relation to bycatch and discarding. The bycatch and discarding program is aimed at assisting fisheries tackle bycatch and discarding issues in a focused and cost-effective way. The NWSTF and WDTF bycatch and discarding work plans were first developed in 2008, but last updated in 2011. They are available for download at http://www.afma.gov.au/managing-our-fisheries/environment-and-sustainability/bycatch-and-discarding/ The work plans focus on developing management measures to reduce and monitor interactions with high risk and protected species and discarding of key target species. Work plans are reviewed annually to assess any specified milestones, incorporation of new bycatch information or need for new research.

6. Catch Data

6.1. Total catch of target species

The following table represents the top 20 species (by retained weight) for the NSWTF and the WDTF for the period 2001-2011.

Table 1: Top 20 species (by retained weight) in the NWSTF and WDTF, 2001-2011.

NWSTF Catch Weight (Kg) WDTF Catch Weight (Kg)

Australian Scampi 225,552 Bugs 428,805

Scampi (mixed) 187,050 Orange roughy 160,091

Velvet Scampi 58,758 Ruby Snapper 134,113

Goldband snappers 54,365 Deepwater Flathead 133,593

Royal Red Prawn 48,203 Tang's Snapper 32,022

Boschma's Scampi 38,566 Scampi (mixed) 25,102

Redspot Emperor 33,290 Bar Rockcod 18,708

Squids 24,051 Long Tail Rubies/Snapper 16,386

Saddletail Snapper 23,850 Amberjack 14,040

Fish (mixed) 16,145 Gemfish 13,700

Crimson Snapper 9,680 Mirror Dory 10,704

Robinson's Seabream 8,590 Endeavour Dogfish 8,643

Sharptooth Jobfish 8,365 Radiant Rockcod 8,051

Red Prawn 7,027 Boarfishes 7,482

Red Striped Prawn 6,643 Latchet 6,658

Red Carid 6,422 Gould's Squid 5,583

Spiny Lobsters 6,212 Red Gurnard 4,838

Red Emperor 5,160 Rosy Snapper 4,735 Mangrove Jack 5,080 Pelagic Armourhead 4,677

Late Bream/ Yellow Sweetlip 2,700 Flame Snapper 4,540

13

6.1.1. North West Slope Trawl Fishery

Total catch in the NWSTF and WDTF has declined over recent years mainly as a result of reduced effort. Additionally, the target species have shifted over time. The NWSTF remains primarily a scampi fishery, however more recently focus has shifted to also include finfish species. The WDTF began as a finfish fishery, then shifted to target primarily bugs, and has recently shifted back towards finfish again. Total catch in the NWSTF is highly variable. In recent years effort has also declined as well, with eight boats operating in 2004 but less than five boats operating in the years since. In 2007 there was an increase in catch due to one operator specifically targeting finfish in the shallower areas of the fishery. In late 2011, an operator again commenced targeting finfish in this area of the fishery. At the date of publication, the catch data for 2011 was not complete.

Figure 3. NWSTF total catches (kg) from 2001 to 2011.

6.1.2. Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery

Total catch in the WDTF is also highly variable. Similar to the NWSTF, effort has also declined in the WDTF, with seven boats operating in 2004 but less than five boats operating in the years since.

WDTF Catch 2001-2011

334,498

303,991

183,383

112,092

7,219 6,466 4,840

102,035

46,56530,013

4,546

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

Catc

h (

kg

)

Figure 4. WDTF catches (kg) from 2001-2011.

NWSTF Total Catch 2001-2011

119,385

80,97071,935

43,535

76,441

27,205

198,421

29,106 29,82940,307

79,285

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

To

tal

Catc

h (

kg

)

14

6.2. Logbook Effort Data

Fishing effort in both the NWSTF and the WDTF has decreased since 2001 (see Figures 5 and 6 below). Effort is constrained by economic factors such as fuel, as well as other operational constraints such as weather. NWSTF vessels also operate in adjoining state trawl fisheries.

6.2.1. North West Slope Trawl Fishery

Figure 5 . NWSTF effort 2001-11

6.2.2. Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery

Figure 6 . WDTF effort 2001-11.

6.3. Total catch of by-product

Due to the multi-species nature of the NWSTF and WDTF there are minimal by-product species. The NWSTF primarily targets and captures scampi and finfish and the WDTF does not have defined target species. In addition, the targeting behaviour in the WDTF has been known to change over time.

NWSTF effort 2001-11

9,114

4,938

5,505

3,819

7,068

2,560

5,934

1,9451,527

1,916 2,026

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

Eff

ort

(tr

aw

l h

ou

rs)

WDTF Effort 2001-11

2,312

6,197

4,632

2,590

194382

104

1,061

485 531

590

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

Eff

ort

(tr

aw

l h

ou

rs)

15

The main by-product species of the WDTF are sharks and rays (chondrichthyan species). These species are generally taken in low numbers, especially with the minimal effort currently occurring in the fishery. Notwithstanding this, some shark species have been determined by the ERA to be high risk. Accordingly, management controls for these species have been included in the harvest strategy.

6.4. Total catch of bycatch species

Table 2 outlines the top 20 discards (by weight) as recorded in AFMA logbooks. Please note that this only represents those discards that are recorded in AFMA logbooks and it is likely to be an underestimate of the true level of discarding in the fisheries. AFMA also collects estimates of discards from on-board observers, however this information is contained in observer reports that are confidential.

Table 2. Discards in the NWSTF and WDTF 2001-11

Common name Catch weight (kg) Common name Catch weight (kg)

Fish (mixed) 134,617 Smooth Seabass 4,210

Prawns (mixed) 53,829 Piked Spurdog 2,023

Scampi (mixed) 9,387 Yellowback Bream 1,400

Crabs 5,127 Stingrays 1,175

Whiptails 3,975 Whitefin trevally 630

Red Prawn 2,420 Mirror Dory 411

Goldband snappers 1,277 Fish (mixed) 317

Conger eels 1,270 Bigspine Boarfish 280

Dogfishes 1,215 Ghostsharks 259

Southern Ribbonfish 1,148 Pelagic Armourhead 240

Sponges 1,065 Shortfin scad 130

Trachyscorpia sp 950 Endeavour Dogfish 119

Skates 895 Gummy Shark 119

Ghostsharks 783 Ornate Angelshark 106

Shortfin Seabat 690 Furry coffinfish 100

Red Carid Prawn 673 Yelloweye redfish 100

Boarfishes 600 Red Gurnard 100

Blackfin armour gurnard 420 Whiptails 70

Stingrays 418 Leatherjackets 60

Red Emperor 340 Lanternfishes 60

7. Status of target stock

7.1. Resource concerns

The ABARES Fishery Status Reports 2010 assessment of the NWSTF and WDTF is extracted in Figure 7. Much of the uncertainty rating stems from a lack of data on the target species and the low effort in the fisheries. As noted previously, the effort and catch in the both fisheries is very low and as such it is unlikely that there is an immediate threat to fish stocks.

16

7.1.1. Status of stock

Figure 7. NWSTF and WDTF stock status (source: ABARES Fishery Status Reports 2010)

7.2. Stock assessments

The scampi stock was assessed in 2010 by ABARES using a surplus production model. This assessment suggested that scampi biomass at the end of 2008 was probably between 65 per cent and 85 per cent of unfished biomass. Fishing mortality in recent years is estimated to have been well below the fishing mortality rate that achieves MSY (Woodhams et al, 2011).

7.3. Results of stock recovery strategies

There are no stock recovery strategies for the NWSTF or the WDTF as no stocks are considered overfished.

8. Protected species

8.1. Frequency and nature of interactions

Interactions with protected species in the NWSTF and WDTF are minimal. The ERA results indicated there were no threatened, endangered or protected (TEP) species listed for either fishery.

8.2. Management action to reduce interactions with TEP species

In 2011, vessels in the NWSTF reported 19 interactions with TEP species (ten seahorses and pipefish, nine sea snakes). Details of these interactions are listed below. Since 2001 there have been no other reported interactions with TEP species in the WDTF.

Table 3. NWSTF TEP Interactions 2011

Alive Dead Total

Seahorses & pipefishes 7 3 10

Seasnakes 9 Nil 9

17

9. Impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem

9.1. Results of any Ecological Risk Assessments

While the management controls for the key commercial species contained in the harvest strategy will largely control the fishing activity and therefore catch and effort expended in the fishery, care needs to be taken to ensure that any vulnerable bycatch or by-product species are not put at risk. Quantitative ERAs have been undertaken for both the WDTF The complete ERA and ERM reports for the NWSTF and WDTF are available for download at http://www.afma.gov.au/managing-our-fisheries/environment-and-sustainability/Ecological-Risk-Management/ Table 4 identifies the priority species for consideration in managing the ecological effects of fishing for the WDTF (AFMA 2010a) and the NWSTF (AFMA 2010b). This list was compiled from the highest level of assessment undertaken for species within each fishery. By taking into account the effort and management arrangements of these fisheries, Table 5 is a subset of the Level 2 ERA high-risk species identified for the WDTF (Wayte et al. 2007a) and the NWSTF(Wayte et al. 2007b). Species in bold are managed as “Key Commercial Species”

Table 4. Priority species for consideration in managing the ecological effects of fishing for the WDTF and the NWSTF (AFMA 2010 b and d respectively)

Fishery Taxonomic group Common name Scientific name

WDTF Teleost Gemfish Rexea solandri WDTF Teleost Mirror Dory Zenopsis nebulosus WDTF Teleost Big-spined boarfish Pentaceros decacanthus WDTF Teleost Tang snapper Lipocheilus carnolabrum WDTF Invertebrate Champagne crab Hypthalassia acerba NWSTF Invertebrate Scarlet prawn Aristaeopsis edwardsiana

Table 5. High-risk species identified from the Level 2 ERAs for the WDTF and NWSTF (Wayte et al. 2007a and b respectively).

Fishery Taxonomic group Common name Scientific name

WDTF Shark Platypus shark Deania quadrispinosa

WDTF Shark Dusky shark Carcharhinus obscurus

WDTF Shark Brier shark Deania calcea

WDTF Shark Bight ghost shark Hydrolagus lemures

WDTF Shark School shark, Tope shark Galeorhinus galeus

WDTF Shark Ornate angel shark Squatina tergocellata

WDTF Shark Green-eyed dogfish Squalus mitsukurii

WDTF Shark Piked dogfish Squalus megalops

WDTF Shark Endeavour dogfish Centrophorus moluccensis

WDTF Chimaera Longspine chimaera Chimaera sp. C [Last & Stevens, 1994] WDTF Chimaera Whitefin chimaera Chimaera sp. E [Last & Stevens, 1994] WDTF Teleost Australian Tusk Dannevigia tusca

WDTF Teleost Chinaman/Leatherjacket Nelusetta ayraudi

WDTF Teleost Gemfish Rexea solandri

WDTF Teleost Jackass Morwong Nemadactylus macropterus

WDTF Teleost Mirror Dory Zenopsis nebulosus

WDTF Teleost Yellow-spotted boarfish Paristiopterus gallipavo

WDTF Teleost Big-spined boarfish Pentaceros decacanthus

WDTF Teleost Yellowback bream Dentex tumifrons

WDTF Teleost Tang snapper Lipocheilus carnolabrum

WDTF Teleost Bigscale rubyfish Plagiogeneion macrolepis

WDTF Invertebrate Champagne crab Hypthalassia acerba

NWSTF Invertebrate Scarlet prawn Aristaeopsis edwardsiana

18

It is important to note that quantitative Level 3 assessments of the impacts of each fishery identified no species at any high risk category under the current level of fishing effort (AFMA 2010c, d). As a developing fishery, however, it is recognised that there is potential for effort levels to increase future years. As such, unless they are managed as “Key Commercial Species” the Level 2 ERA high-risk species shown in Table 5are managed under the following control rules: Trigger 1

• Catch of 2 tonnes for any ERA Level 2 high-risk species.

Response

• Investigate spatial distribution of the catches to attempt to determine why the trigger has been reached.

• If catches are spatially or temporally aggregated, impose a spatial and/or seasonal closure.

• If the trigger has been reached because a market has opened up for that species, add the species to the

list of “key commercial species” and establish revised control rules.

• If the catch is spatially and/or temporally patchy or random, consult with experts and if there are no

concerns, report as such.

• Reconsider the trigger limit value in light of the outcomes above.

Trigger 2

• Catch of 4 tonnes for any ERA Level 2 high-risk species

Response

• No targeted fishing permitted on that species.

• Investigate spatial distribution of the catches to attempt to determine why the trigger has been reached.

• If catches are spatially or temporally aggregated, impose a spatial and/or seasonal closure.

9.2. Deepwater dogfish

The impact of commercial fishing on deepwater dogfish species is of particular concern for fisheries management around Australia and a number of these species were classified as “high risk” in the Level 2 ERA for the WDTF. Control rules associated with triggers for dogfish (including Deania, Squalus and Centrophorus) are now a condition on the WDTF and NWSTF fishing permits. The fishing permit holder must not take deepwater dogfishes of the following species: Harrissons Dogfish (Centrophorus harrissoni), Endeavour Dogfish (C. moluccensis), Southern Dogfish (C. zeehaani) and Greeneye Spurdog (Squalus chloroculus) - unless:

• (a) for trips under six days the combined amount of these species taken does not exceed 15 kilograms

whole weight per day; or

• (b) for trips over six days the combined amount of these species taken does not exceed 90 kilograms

whole weight per trip.

• In this condition, one day is a 24 hour period that commences at 00.01 hours UTC + 10; and the weights in

clauses (a) and (b) apply to all deepwater dogfish of the species specified, including those returned to the

water whether alive or dead. Deepwater dogfishes of the species specified in this condition that are taken

alive, must be returned to the water carefully and quickly.

9.3. Nature of impacts on the ecosystem

There are growing concerns about the impacts of demersal trawling on structured benthic habitats. There is evidence that recovery from these impacts is slow in deepwater temperate habitats (e.g. Kaiser et al. 2006; Løkkeborg 2005; Watling and Norse 1998; Williams et al. 2010), but can be relatively short term in tropical shallow-water habitats (e.g. Haywood et al. 2005; Bustamante et al. 2010). This research is applicable to the NWSTF and WDTF and the extent of these changes will vary with levels of fishing effort.

19

9.4. Management action taken to reduce impacts, and results

Given the low effort in the NWSTF and WDTF it is unlikely that the fishery has a major impact on the ecosystem. However, given the recent trends towards the targeting of finfish in the NWSTF, AFMA will continue to monitor logbook and observer data closely to ensure that this type of fish trawling does not have detrimental impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems.

In response to concerns about the impact of shallow water trawling the NWSTF, AFMA has implemented strict move on provisions and 100 per cent observer coverage in a defined shallow area of the fishery.

For the area of the fishery shallower than 200 metres (as defined by a set of latitude and longitudes), if the take of coral and sponge exceeds 50 kilograms in any one shot, then the holder must cease fishing on the nominated boat immediately and not fish at any point within a five nautical mile radius of that shot for five days. As soon as practicable, but in any event no later than 24 hours after the take of more than 50 kilograms of coral or sponge in any one shot, the holder must notify AFMA’s Licensing section. The notification must include details of the shot including the location.

Upon receipt of a notice from AFMA advising that a 50 kilogram limit has been triggered by any boat in the fishery, the holder is prohibited from fishing within five nautical miles of the shot that triggered the limit from the time of receiving the notification for a period of five days. After five days of triggering a limit or receiving notice from AFMA that a limit has been triggered, if the holder fishes within the five nautical mile area of the shot that triggered the limit they must carry an AFMA scientific observer onboard the nominated boat.

Due to the large spatial extent of both fisheries, they encompass multiple ecosystems delineated at a broad scale by the marine bioregions and at a smaller scale by the provincial bioregions. The fisheries have been divided into Ecological Management Zones which broadly coincide with those established by Western Australian Fisheries. The Ecological Management Zones do not necessarily coincide with stock boundaries, but assist with targeting management arrangements suitable for the different bioregions.

- The WDTF has two Ecological Management Zones: the “Gascoyne” zone to the north of 26.5°S; and, the “West” Zone to the south of 26.5°S.

- The NWSTF has two Ecological Management Zones: the “Pilbara” to the west of 120° E; and, the “Kimberley” Zone to the east of 120° E.

Maps of the two bioregions are included at Attachment 2.

The implementation of Commonwealth Marine Reserves in both the South-West and North-West marine bioregions is likely to have a significant impact on future expansion of the fisheries. Furthermore this may lead to structural change in the fishery if any fishing effort is displaced by the implementation of the Commonwealth Marine Reserves.

9.5. Future Management arrangements for the NWSTF and WDTF

Following the revision of the Harvest Strategy in 2011, AFMA is in the process of revising the 2004 Statement of Management Arrangements for the NWSTF and WDTF Given the current effort in the fisheries, any further development of a management plan for the fishery is unlikely in the near future. As mentioned, the implementation of Commonwealth Marine Reserves in the South-West and North-West may lead to the displacement of effort in the fishery.

20

10. References

AFMA (2007). Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery – Great Australian Bight Trawl Sector. A guide to the 2007 Management Arrangements. Australian Fisheries Management Authority 53pp.

AFMA (2010a). Residual Risk Assessment of the Level 2 Ecological Risk Assessment - Species Results. Report for the Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery. Australian Fisheries Management Authority January 2010, 15pp.

AFMA (2010b). Residual Risk Assessment of the Level 2 Ecological Risk Assessment - Species Results. Report for the North West Slope Trawl Fishery. Australian Fisheries Management Authority March 2010, 22pp.

AFMA (2010c). Ecological Risk Management Report for the Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery. Australian Fisheries Management Authority 15pp.

AFMA (2010d). Ecological Risk Management Report for the Northwest Slope Fishery. Australian Fisheries Management Authority 15pp.

Bustamante, R.H., C. Dichmont, N. Ellis, S. Griffiths, W.A. Rochester, M. Burford, Peter Rothlisberg, Q. Dell, M. Tonks., H. Lozano-Montes, R. Deng, T. Wassenberg, A. Revill, J. Salini, G. Fry, S. Tickell, R. Pascual, F. Smith, E. Morello, T. van der Velde, C. Moeseneder, S. Cheers, A. Donovan and T. Taranto (2010). Effects of trawling on the benthos and biodiversity: Development and delivery of a Spatially-explicit Management Framework for the Northern Prawn Fishery. Final

Dichmont, D., Hunter, C., Venables, B. (2002). Ruby Snapper Stock Assessment, Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery. CSIRO Division of Marine Research Draft Report, Cleveland. 39pp.

Evans, D. (1992). The Western Deep Water Trawl and North West Slope Trawl Fisheries, pp. 19-27. In The fisheries biology of deepwater crustacea and finfish on the continental slope of Western Australia, Rainer, S.F. (ed). Final Report FRDC Project 1988/74, 308pp. Fletcher, W.J. & Santoro, K.(eds) 2011,. State of the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Report 2010/11. Department of Fisheries, Perth

Fowler, J., McLoughlin, K (eds) (1996). North West Slope Trawl Fishery and Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery 1994, Fisheries Assessment Report compiled by the Northern Fisheries Resource Assessment Group. Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.

Furlani, D., Dowdney, J., Bulman, C., Sporcic, M. and Fuller, M. (2006a). Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing: Report for the Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery. Report for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.

Furlani, D., Dowdney, J., Bulman, C., Sporcic, M. and Fuller, M. (2006b). Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing: Report for the North West Slope Trawl Fishery. Report for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.

Haywood M, Hill B, Donovan A, Rochester W, Ellis N, Welna A, Gordon S, Cheers S, Forcey K, Mcleod I, Moeseneder C, Smith G, Manson F, Wassenberg T, Thomas Steve, Kuhnert P, Laslett G, Buridge C and Thomas Sarah. (2005). Quantifying the effects of trawling on seabed fauna in the Northern Prawn Fishery. Final Report on FRDC Project 2002/102. CSIRO, Cleveland. 488 pp.

Kaiser, M.J., Spencer, B.E. (1995). Survival of by-catch from a beam trawl. Marine Ecology Progress Series 126:31-38.

Klaer, N., Wayte, S., Punt, A., Day, J., Little, R., Smith, A., Thomson, R., Tuck, G. (2008). Simulation testing of alternative Tier 3 assessment methods and control rules for the SESSF. Paper to ShelfRAG and SlopeRAG, August 2008.

21

Løkkeborg, S. 2005. Impacts of trawling and scallop dredging on benthic habitats and communities. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 472. Rome, FAO. 2005. 58p.

Lynch, A.W. and Garvey, J.R. 2005. North West Slope Trawl Fishery Scampi Stock Assessment 2004. Data Group, Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.

Moore, A.S., Gerner, M., Patterson, H.M. (2007a) North West Slope Trawl Fishery Data Summary 2006. Fisheries Section, Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.

Moore, A.S., Gerner, M., Patterson, H.M. (2007b) Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery Data Summary 2006. Fisheries Section, Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.

Rainer, S.F. (1992). Growth of the Australian Scampi, Metanephrops australiensis, pp. 61-73. In The fisheries biology of deepwater crustacea and finfish on the continental slope of Western Australia, Rainer, S.F. (ed). Final Report FRDC Project 1988/74, 308pp.

Thrush, S.F., Hewitt, J.E., Cummings, V.J. and Dayton, P.K., Cryer, M., Turner, S.J., Funnell, G.A., Bud, R.G., Milburn, C.J., Wilkinson, M.R. (1998). Disturbance of the marine benthic habitat by commercial fishing: impacts at the scale of the fishery. Ecological Applications 8(3): 866-879.

Veale, L.O., Hill, A.S., Hawkins, A.S.J., Brand, A.R. (2000). Effects of long-term physical disturbance by commercial scallop fishing on subtidal epifaunal assemblages and habitats. Marine Biology 137:325-337.

Wadley, V. (1992). The biology of scampi, prawns, carids, bugs and crabs exploited by deepwater trawling, pp. 95-122. In The fisheries biology of deepwater crustacea and finfish on the continental slope of Western Australia, Rainer, S.F. (ed). Final Report FRDC Project 1988/74, 308pp.

Wayte, S., Dowdney, J., Williams, A. Fuller, M., Bulman, C., Sporcic, M., Smith, A. (2007a). Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing: Report for the Western Deepwater Trawl Fishery. Report for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.

Wayte, S., J. Dowdney, A.Williams, C.Bulman, M.Sporcic, M.Fuller, and A.Hobday (2007b). Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing: Report for the North West Slope Trawl Fishery. Report for the Australian Fisheries Management

Wallner, B.G. and Phillips, B.F. (1995). Development of a trawl fishery for deepwater metanephropid lobsters off the northwest continental slope of Australia:designing a management strategy compatible with species life history. ICES mar. Sci. Symp., 199:379-390.

Wassenberg, T.J., Hill, B.J. (1993). Selection of the appropriate duration of experiments to measure the survival of animals discarded from trawlers. Fisheries Research 17:343-352.

Western Australian Department of Fisheries (2010). Northern Demersal Scalefish Fishery Research Report. Fisheries Research Division, Western Australian Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories, Western Australia - September 2010

Woodhams, J, Stobutzki, I, Vieira, S, Curtotti, R & Begg GA (eds) 2011, Fishery Status reports 2010: status of fish stocks and fisheries managed by the Australian Government, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra