Economic snap shot of the WA fishing industry · Economic snap shot of the WA fishing industry iv Figure 10 Variable cost shares of fishing inputs 24 List of tables Table 1 Fishing

Confidential

Economic snap shot of the WA

fishing industry

Prepared for the WA Fishing Industry Council

February 2010

Reliance and Disclaimer

The professional analysis and advice in this report has been prepared by ACIL Tasman for the exclusive use of the

party or parties to whom it is addressed (the addressee) and for the purposes specified in it. This report is supplied

in good faith and reflects the knowledge, expertise and experience of the consultants involved. The report must not

be published, quoted or disseminated to any other party without ACIL Tasman‘s prior written consent. ACIL

Tasman accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any loss occasioned by any person acting or refraining from action

as a result of reliance on the report, other than the addressee.

In conducting the analysis in this report ACIL Tasman has endeavoured to use what it considers is the best

information available at the date of publication, including information supplied by the addressee. Unless stated

otherwise, ACIL Tasman does not warrant the accuracy of any forecast or prediction in the report. Although ACIL

Tasman exercises reasonable care when making forecasts or predictions, factors in the process, such as future market

behaviour, are inherently uncertain and cannot be forecast or predicted reliably.

ACIL Tasman shall not be liable in respect of any claim arising out of the failure of a client investment to perform to

the advantage of the client or to the advantage of the client to the degree suggested or assumed in any advice or

forecast given by ACIL Tasman.

ACIL Tasman Pty Ltd

ABN 68 102 652 148 Internet www.aciltasman.com.au

Melbourne (Head Office) Level 6, 224-236 Queen Street Melbourne VIC 3000

Telephone (+61 3) 9604 4400 Facsimile (+61 3) 9600 3155 Email [email protected]

Darwin Suite G1, Paspalis Centrepoint 48-50 Smith Street Darwin NT 0800 GPO Box 908 Darwin NT 0801


Brisbane Level 15, 127 Creek Street Brisbane QLD 4000 GPO Box 32 Brisbane QLD 4001


Perth Centa Building C2, 118 Railway Street West Perth WA 6005


Canberra Level 1, 33 Ainslie Place Canberra City ACT 2600 GPO Box 1322 Canberra ACT 2601


Sydney PO Box 1554 Double Bay NSW 1360


For information on this report

Please contact:

Peter Johnson Telephone (08) 9456 2211 Email [email protected]

Contributing team members:

Grant Coble-Neal Rosie McKenzie Jonathan Piper-Green

http://www.aciltasman.com.au/

mailto:[email protected]







Economic snap shot of the WA fishing industry

iii

Contents

Executive summary v

1 Introduction 1

2 Study Approach 3

2.1 Method of Analysis 3

2.2 Data 4

3 Summary of the WA fishing industry 5

3.1 Wild catch industry 5

4 The WA Rock Lobster industry 14

4.1 Location 14

4.2 Governance 14

4.3 Value chain 15

4.4 Profile 15

4.5 Production 17

4.5.1 Catch 17

4.5.2 Processing 21

4.6 Exports 22

4.7 Issues 22

4.7.1 Low settlement and recruitment 23

4.7.2 Impacts 23

5 The WA aquaculture industry 26

6 Estimates of economic impact 28

7 Conclusion 31

8 Bibliography 32

List of figures

Figure 1 Relative shares of volume and value across species groups in the WA wild catch fishing industry 13

Figure 2 Rock Lobster value chain 15 Figure 3 Map of WA rock lobster industry 16 Figure 4 Total rock lobster volumes by zone 18 Figure 5 Harvest rate as a proportion of total legal harvest (zone A) 18 Figure 6 Average catch per pot (kg) by concession 19 Figure 7 Ex-vessel prices for rock lobsters 20 Figure 8 Approximate market value for Western Rock Lobster pots 20 Figure 9 Production by product for the Rock Lobster Industry 21


iv

Figure 10 Variable cost shares of fishing inputs 24

List of tables

Table 1 Fishing industry employment by place of work, full time equivalent jobs 5

Table 2 Volume and value of the Kimberley wild catch fishing industry 6 Table 3 Volume and value of the Pilbara wild catch fishing industry 6 Table 4 Volume and value of the Gascoyne wild catch fishing industry 7 Table 5 Volume and value of the Mid West wild catch fishing industry 8 Table 6 Volume and value of the Wheatbelt wild catch fishing industry 8 Table 7 Volume and value of the Perth wild catch fishing industry 9 Table 8 Volume and value of the Peel wild catch fishing industry 10 Table 9 Volume and value of the South West wild catch fishing industry 10 Table 10 Volume and value of the Great Southern wild catch fishing

industry 11 Table 11 Volume and value of the Esperance wild catch fishing industry 11 Table 12 Key statistics for the Western Rock Lobster Industry 17 Table 13 Rock lobster exports from WA 22 Table 14 Small community fishing employment profile 24 Table 15 WA aquaculture production by volume 26 Table 16 WA aquaculture production by value ($’000) 27 Table 17 Industry value-added at factor cost ($ millions) 28 Table 18 Total industry value added at factor cost – direct plus indirect ($

million) 29 Table 19 Fishing industry direct plus indirect employment by place of work,

full time equivalent jobs 30


Executive summary v

Executive summary

The Western Australian Fishing Industry Council (WAFIC) commissioned

ACIL Tasman to estimate the contribution of the fishing, pearling and

aquaculture industry (‗fishing industry‘) to the Western Australian economy. Of

particular interest was the importance of the industry to small communities

located around the State. The study found that if the fishing industry is allowed

to languish, the impact would be significant on many of these small regional

communities.

Input-output analysis was used to capture the interdependence between the

fishing industry and other industries within the State, both in direct and

indirect forms. From an economic impact perspective, the study found that:

• the WA fishing industry creates $295.9 million in value-added for the state;

• rock lobster contributes the largest portion of value-added, totalling

$145.1 million (49 per cent);

• the Mid West region is the single largest regional contributor to value-

added with $92.2 million (31 per cent); and

• when flow-on benefits are included, the total contribution of the industry

to the WA economy is $817.8 million.

The study concludes that the industry is currently confronting significant

challenges, particularly in the Western Rock Lobster industry. As the fishing

industry is a significant employer in many small coastal communities –

particularly in the Gascoyne, Mid West and Wheatbelt regions – a contraction

of the fishing industry would lead to significant impacts at the small

community level and, in some cases, even at the regional level.

WA Fishing Industry

The Western Australian fishing industry comprises both wild harvest and

aquaculture (including pearling). The study highlighted the importance of

fishing to many regions of Western Australia. Of all the regions, the Mid West

region has the highest levels of employment at 952 full-time equivalent jobs

(FTEs). The Gascoyne, Kimberley and Perth regions also have significant

employment in the industry. Total direct employment across the state totals

over 4,300. When the flow-on effects are included, direct plus indirect

employment is estimated to exceed 9,800.

Wild Catch Fishing Industry

Across regions there are signs of decline in production in the wild catch

industry, averaging 29 per cent. The only species group showing positive


Executive summary vi

growth is molluscs. (Wild catch of pearl oysters, has also shown significant

increases; however, this sector is included with aquaculture.)

On a region by region basis:

• Fish and prawns dominate the wild catch sector in the Kimberly region

− Pearl oyster fishing is also a significant contributor to the Kimberley,

but for the purposes of this report is included with the aquaculture

industry.

• The Pilbara region is heavily dependent on fish, with fish production

accounting for more than 90 per cent of production volume.

• The Gascoyne region has a more even spread across species groups.

• The Mid West region accounts for 40 per cent of the State‘s wild catch

production.

• The Wheatbelt has small production but is the second largest producer of

rock lobster behind the Mid West.

• Perth accounts for 10 per cent of the wild catch industry, with rock lobsters

featuring prominently.

• Crustaceans production is prominent in the Peel region.

• Fish are the primary produce of the South West.

• There is declining production in the Great Southern region, primarily as a

result of declining fish production.

• Esperance produces finfish and their production has been relatively stable.

Western Rock Lobster Industry

Rock lobsters account for the largest portion of the wild catch industry in

terms of value and is second largest in terms of volume. Commercial fishing

for Western Rock Lobster is limited by the number of licences and pots that

are allowed to be used in fishery. There are currently 28,100 active pots (41 per

cent of total entitlements) in the fishery and 399 boats. The rock lobster

industry also includes 6 processing plants employing a total of 800-1,000

people (part-time and full-time). There are six processing and exporting

companies servicing the WA rock lobster industry.

The Western Rock Lobster fishery is worth between $200-600 million a year

and is the most valuable single species fishery in Australia, with an average

catch of 10,800 tonnes a year representing around 20 per cent of the total value

of Australia‘s fisheries.

The study found that declining production volumes is clearly evident. As the

most significant single species fishery in Australia, the sustainability of the

Western Rock Lobster industry is essential. Despite careful management, rock

lobster stocks are expected to reach record lows. In addition to declining


Executive summary vii

stocks, the rock lobster industry has sustained reductions in value caused by

reductions in unit prices.

Below average puerulus settlement was observed in most locations in the West

Coast rock lobster fishery in 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 which recorded the

lowest settlement on record. These low settlements will have a major impact

on the catch of rock lobsters three and four years after settlement,

commencing in 2009-10. With the uncertainty surrounding the cause of the

extremely low puerulus settlements, the increased uncertainty in the predicted

catch and associated breeding stock beyond the 2011 season, reduced catches

will continue into future seasons. It is expected that total annual catch for the

fishery would be 5,500 – 6,000 tonnes in the 2009-10 season, with the annual

catches expected to stay at this level for the next few years.

The bulk of Rock Lobster exports in 2006-07 were to Japan, Taiwan, Hong

Kong/China and the United States. The main products exported are live

product to Asia and whole frozen lobster and tails to the United States and

Europe.

The study anticipates that reductions in production would have a significant

impact on local communities via reductions in household income for crew

members. Upstream fishing boat suppliers would also be significantly affected.

WA Pearling and Aquaculture Industry

The WA pearling and aquaculture industry accounts for 28 per cent of the

entire WA fishing industry by value. In terms of value, pearl production is by

far the most important product, generating revenue of $113 million in 2007-08.

Amongst the produce of the industry, marron and koi carp have shown strong

growth in production volumes, whilst mussels, yabbies and ornamental fish

and crustaceans have experienced declining production volumes.


Introduction 1

1 Introduction

This report was commissioned by the Western Australian Fishing Industry

Council (WAFIC) to estimate the contribution of the fishing, pearling and

aquaculture industry (the ‗fishing industry‘) to the State economy. A particular

point of interest is the impact on small communities located around the State.

This is the first report of what is anticipated will be a series of reports

produced periodically to document important economic changes in the

industry over time. For the purpose of this report, the fishing industry includes

wild catch fisheries and pearling/aquaculture (which includes all pearling

activities, from the wild catch of pearl oysters to the cultivation of pearls).

The main purpose for the economic snapshot is to provide initial information

on industry development to policy makers about the Western Australian

fishing industry. The WA fishing industry is currently facing a number of

significant challenges and needs a robust background data set that informs

industry and government decision makers.

The nature of these challenges is diverse, spanning both economic and

biological issues. For example, the Western Australia fishing industry has

experienced the most significant economic downturn in its history. If the

industry is allowed to languish, the impact could be devastating on many small

regional communities.

As a first step to confronting these challenges, it is critical that over this

adjustment period industry and government decision makers have a clear

understanding of the socio economic impact of the downturn, and its drivers.

This fundamental data will underpin decision making on crucial issues which

have potentially significant implications for the industry‘s long term recovery

and its future growth.

The WA fishing industry is comprised of two main components:

• The wild harvest industry

• The pearling and aquaculture industry.

As the term implies, the wild harvest industry refers to the harvesting of finfish

and crustaceans, among other types, that occur naturally in onshore and

offshore marine environments. By contrast, the pearling and aquaculture

industry is concerned with the cultivation of aquatic organisms. Pearling, which

for this study is included with aquaculture, includes a wild harvesting

component in the collection of pearl oysters.

The following sections provide an outline of the industry and the economic

impacts both at a State and regional level. In presenting the regional level


Introduction 2

results, we have reported according to the economic regions as defined by

development commission boundaries.

The report is structured as follows:

Section 2 describes the approach (or method) adopted in this study.

Section 3 presents a summary of the WA wild catch fishing industry.

Section 4 provides a basic case study of the Western Rock Lobster industry.

Section 5 discussed the WA pearling and aquaculture industry.

Section 6 then provides the results of our input-output analysis.

Section 7 concludes the report.


Study Approach 3

2 Study Approach

2.1 Method of Analysis

A key method of analysis adopted in this report is input-output analysis. An

input-output table provides a summary, or a ―snapshot‖, of the transactions

occurring within an economy over a selected period. An input-output table is

based on the fundamental notion that industries are inter-dependent.

In simple terms an input-output table shows, for a given industry, which other

industries it purchases from and to which other industries it sells. Input-output

multipliers, derived from input-output tables, represent the extent of the inter-

dependence between industries. Input-output multipliers are summary

measures that can be used for estimating the impact on all industries in the

economy from changes in demand for the output of any one industry. Input-

output tables can also be used to measure the relative importance of different

industries in an economy.

The underlying concept of the input-output approach is to trace the

expenditure and value-adding that occurs within an industry. In thinking about

the fishing industry, this involves tracking purchases of inputs such as labour,

materials (e.g. bait, feed), energy (e.g. diesel, electricity), and services (e.g.

accountants, financial advice, legal services). It is these economic linkages

(from supplying industries to the producing industry) that generate the so-

called multiplier effects. Thus, the economic effects can be considered as being

comprised of direct and indirect (i.e. consequential flow-on) effects. The

expansion or contraction of the fishing industry will invariably lead to larger

economic impacts on communities dependent on the fishing industry.

The stages of production defined in this study are:

• Beach/farm gate value

• Net value of local processing.

The boundaries between the fisheries industry and other industries have been

sharply defined in this study. For example, we exclude the net value of local

retail and food service trade and the value of local transport. This contrasts

with other studies such as Econsearch (2007).

Estimates of direct and flow-on economic indicators are reported by:

• Contribution to Gross State Product (GSP)

• Employment.


Study Approach 4

Value of output measures the revenue of goods and services produced by

private sector firms within the fishing industry. Contribution to GSP is a

measure of the net value (i.e. value of output minus cost of goods and services

used to produce the output) of the fishing industry to WA‘s economy.

Employment measures the number of full-time equivalent workers in the

industry.

These measures are divided into direct and flow-on effects. Direct effects

measure the first-round effects generated by the fishing industry. The flow-on

effects measure the second, third, fourth etc round cumulative impact of

production-based economic activity induced by the fishing industry. The sum

of the direct and flow-on effects gives the total impact.

2.2 Data

Data has been obtained primarily from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the

WA Department of Fisheries and from representatives of the WA fishing

industry. Supplementary data has also been obtained from ABARE.

These data span the value and employment generated by the WA fishing

industry. Aggregation in data tends to obscure the regional and small

community contributions. Where possible, we have supplemented the official

data with industry knowledge and informal surveys.


Summary of the WA fishing industry 5

3 Summary of the WA fishing industry

Estimates of employment in the WA fishing industry are presented in Table 1.

These data are derived from various sources including the WA Fishing

Industry Council, the State of the Fisheries Report 2007-08 (WA Department

of Fisheries) and from various industry representatives. Table 1 shows that the

Mid West region has the highest levels of employment, at 952 FTE (full-time

equivalent jobs). Other regions with significant employment are Gascoyne,

Kimberley and Perth.

It should be noted that Table 1 does not include the employment found in the

Western Australian Department of Fisheries, which is up to 450 full time

equivalent positions.

Table 1 Fishing industry employment by place of work, full time equivalent jobs

Region Rock

Lobster

Prawns Other

Marine

Fishing

Aquaculture

(including

pearling)

Processing Total

industry

Gascoyne 0 114 181 25 230 550

Goldfields -

Esperance 67 0 80 0 2 150

Great Southern 0 0 64 91 13 169

Kimberley 0 73 134 586 0 793

Mid West 712 0 137 12 91 952

Peel 37 0 93 8 0 138

Pilbara 0 22 268 0 0 289

South West 70 0 113 75 0 258

Wheatbelt 321 0 62 8 0 391

Perth 160 0 83 36 368 647

Western Australia 1,367 209 1,215 841 704 4,337

3.1 Wild catch industry

In terms of value and production, Table 2 to Table 11 provide a detailed

summary of wild catch production by both volume and value across regions.



The Kimberley wild catch fishing industry produces mainly fish, with prawns

the next most significant industry. Note that prawn volumes have been

declining, with 2007-08 production just 31 per cent of 2003-04 levels; however,

this has been offset by steadily improving volumes of fish. In total, the industry

Table 2 Volume and value of the Kimberley wild catch fishing industry

Species group Volume (Tonnes) Value ($ ‘000s)

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 1,335 1,879 1,501 1,466 1,733 6,608 8,915 7,425 7,500 8,637

Crabs 1 1 4 8 6 9 10 53 111 87

Prawns 583 469 428 154 180 5,379 4,246 3,791 1,376 1,405

Rock Lobsters - . . . . - . . . .

Other

Crustaceans 5 3 2 1 1 50 35 21 11 5

Molluscs1

3 - - 1 1 14 2 - 6 2

Other Classes 20 81 58 55 17 59 243 175 164 52

Total 1,947 2,433 1,993 1,685 1,938 12,119 13,451 11,465 9,168 10,188

Data source: Department of Fisheries

Note: 1) not including pearl oysters

Table 3 Volume and value of the Pilbara wild catch fishing industry


2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 3,749 3,532 2,962 2,549 2,037 12,277 11,876 10,434 9,013 7,650

Crabs 64 47 56 67 18 272 201 238 285 75

Prawns 384 266 252 137 124 4,385 2,949 2,412 1,302 999

Other Crustaceans 19 25 13 9 5 193 250 130 87 51

Molluscs 1,010 66 45 28 29 3,681 143 93 59 62

Other Classes 67 10 8 25 10 200 29 24 75 30

Total 5,293 3,946 3,336 2,815 2,223 21,008 15,448 13,331 10,821 8,867




is worth an average of $11.3 million per year. It should be noted that the

Kimberley wild catch figures in Table 2 do not include the wild harvest of pearl

oysters in the Kimberley. Wild harvest pearl oysters are included in the pearling

and aquaculture in Section 5.

The Pilbara wild catch industry is also heavily dependent on fish production,

accounting for more than 90 per cent of volume and 86 per cent of value in

2007-08 (Table 3). Prawn fishing is the next largest industry sector. The total

Pilbara wild catch industry generated $8.9 million in 2007-08, a 58 per cent

decline since 2003-04.

Compared with the Kimberley and the Pilbara, The Gascoyne‘s fisheries

production is more evenly spread across species groups. Table 4 shows that

almost half of production can be attributed to molluscs by volume in 2007-08.

This represents an increase in share from 25 per cent in 2003-04 but it should

be noted that scallop harvests (the major contributor to mollusc production)

can vary dramatically dependent upon environmental conditions. The share

increase of molluscs is due partly to increasing volumes, but also to decreasing

fish production. Prawns account for slightly more than half of total Gascoyne

production by value.

Table 4 Volume and value of the Gascoyne wild catch fishing industry


2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 1,715 1,616 1,147 874 877 7,400 7,046 5,486 4,134 4,064

Crabs 707 899 806 904 902 4,322 5,136 4,454 5,262 5,166

Prawns 2,809 2,868 2,738 2,304 2,317 35,090 36,271 32,593 25,889 24,951

Rock Lobsters . 12 . . 7 . 258 . . 167

Other

Crustaceans 3 2 3 2 4 26 20 28 24 43

Molluscs 1,790 1,646 1,463 2,304 3,750 6,373 5,636 4,880 8,220 13,488

Other Classes . . . 1 . . . . 2 .

Total 7,024 7,043 6,157 6,389 7,857 53,211 54,367 47,441 43,531 47,879




In value terms, the Mid West region accounts for 40 per cent of total State wild

catch production (Table 5). This is almost exclusively due to rock lobster

production. Across all regions, the Mid West accounts for the largest share of

rock lobster production (40 per cent in 2007-08).

Although substantially smaller in production and value, the Wheatbelt is also a

significant producer of rock lobsters. By volume, the region is the second

largest producer of rock lobster behind the Mid West. The region is also highly

Table 5 Volume and value of the Mid West wild catch fishing industry

Species

group Volume (Tonnes) Value ($ ‘000s)

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 2,510 2,508 2,453 1,290 863 6,493 6,986 6,445 4,301 3,699

Crabs 19 13 27 9 . 212 171 347 111 .

Prawns 26 13 . . . 301 135 . . .

Rock

Lobsters 5,385 5,425 5,006 4,930 4,898 102,322 116,632 140,176 140,502 118,529

Other

Crustaceans 1 - . . . 7 5 . . .

Molluscs 615 5,418 1,455 131 1,288 2,364 18,821 5,141 640 4,732

Total 8,556 13,377 8,941 6,360 7,049 111,699 142,750 152,109 145,554 126,960


Table 6 Volume and value of the Wheatbelt wild catch fishing industry


2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 140 116 106 65 42 610 667 631 435 236

Crabs 3 24 . . . 42 318 . . .

Rock Lobsters 3,343 3,124 2,991 2,241 2,525 63,511 67,157 83,759 63,874 61,110

Molluscs 34 33 31 36 34 93 91 85 99 93

Total 3,520 3,297 3,128 2,342 2,601 64,256 68,233 84,475 64,408 61,439




specialised in this species group and thus may be vulnerable to adverse shocks,

such as declining production. Indeed, the data in Table 6 suggests a declining

trend.

Perth accounts for 10 per cent of the State wild catch industry by value,

following a declining trend from 17 per cent in 2003-04. Rock lobsters feature

prominently.

Table 7 Volume and value of the Perth wild catch fishing industry


2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 1,400 888 734 453 141 1,983 2,019 1,588 894 317

Crabs 254 157 124 67 59 1,565 877 891 656 578

Prawns 32 8 . - - 336 78 . 1 -

Rock Lobsters 3,231 2,416 1,610 1,064 1,211 61,381 51,951 45,081 30,319 29,312

Other

Crustaceans 1 - . - . 8 3 . - .

Molluscs 173 117 115 128 111 1,450 1,345 1,304 1,213 1,012

Total 5,091 3,586 2,583 1,712 1,522 66,723 56,273 48,864 33,083 31,219




The Peel region production (Table 8) appears to be declining. Across species

groups, crustaceans (crabs, prawns and rock lobsters) account for 71 per cent

of total production in 2007-08.

Table 9 indicates that fish are the primary produce in the South West wild

catch industry. Total production volume has decreased by 62 per cent since

2005-06. Value has declined by 59 per cent over the same period.

Table 8 Volume and value of the Peel wild catch fishing industry


2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 227 185 200 168 127 660 682 748 589 320

Crabs 65 80 77 106 91 276 341 327 452 388

Prawns 16 12 15 5 7 212 161 187 53 75

Rock Lobsters 924 635 444 250 232 17,548 13,650 12,433 7,137 5,621

Other

Crustaceans - - - - - 1 - - - -

Molluscs 13 18 10 10 9 40 51 29 28 26

Total 1,245 930 746 539 466 18,737 14,885 13,724 8,259 6,430


Table 9 Volume and value of the South West wild catch fishing industry


2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 1,969 1,984 2,457 1,403 922 3,699 4,203 4,753 3,354 2,603

Crabs 26 24 12 23 22 110 147 139 99 231

Rock Lobsters 817 642 344 114 71 15,537 13,826 9,613 3,232 1,708

Molluscs 94 94 92 80 75 3,792 3,749 3,825 3,098 2,892

Total 2,906 2,744 2,905 1,620 1,090 23,138 21,925 18,330 9,783 7,434




Decline in production volume is also evident in the Great Southern (Table 10).

Total volume is down 23 per cent from 2003-04 to 2007-08. This decline is

driven largely by declining fish production. Crustacean production has

remained relatively stable.

Table 10 Volume and value of the Great Southern wild catch fishing industry


2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 3,593 2,492 3,089 2,701 2,816 3,592 3,580 3,747 3,754 4,018

Crabs 25 16 14 17 23 405 201 181 208 285

Rock Lobsters 3 15 3 17 10 77 331 66 483 251

Other

Crustaceans - . . . . 3 . . . .

Molluscs 94 47 55 24 25 830 826 1,011 519 477

Total 3,715 2,570 3,161 2,759 2,874 4,907 4,938 5,005 4,964 5,031


Table 11 Volume and value of the Esperance wild catch fishing industry

Species

group Volume (Tonnes) Value ($ ‘000s)

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7S

2007-0

8S

2003-0

4

2004-0

5

2005-0

6

2006-0

7

2007-0

8

Fish 837 679 724 655 923 2,634 2,305 2,452 2,569 3,374

Crabs 7 8 4 6 4 216 244 95 156 88

Rock

Lobsters 41 34 43 51 35 1,058 854 1,114 1,292 887

Other

Crustaceans . . - . . . . 1 . .

Molluscs 261 167 165 219 179 8,725 6,728 6,693 6,520 6,024

Total 1,146 888 936 931 1,141 12,633 10,131 10,355 10,537 10,373




Finally, the Esperance (Goldfields-Esperance) region shows signs of relative

stability (Table 11). As with the Great Southern, this region primarily produces

finfish product. One other notable feature is that molluscs represent 64 per

cent of total wild catch production value in this region.

Overall trends in the wild catch

Clearly, across regions there are signs of decline, averaging 29 per cent. The

only species group showing positive growth is molluscs, which exhibits growth

of 35 per cent across regions. (The wild catch pearl oyster fishery has also

showed significant growth but is included in the aquaculture sector.) The

decline in market value is less severe, registering 19 per cent across species

groups. Prawns have shown the most severe decline (40 per cent).

Although it is beyond the scope of this report to investigate, probable causes

of the decline are:

• Fluctuations in wild stocks

• Rising input costs, creating a classic profit squeeze over the course of the

boom in the WA resources over the same period.

• External pressure from recreational and conservation groups restricting

access

• Competition from imports (which have become cheaper due to the rising

value of the Australian dollar).

In order to provide an overview of the wild catch industry, Figure 1 presents

pie charts of both volume and value across species groups for 2007-08.



The most notable feature is the rock lobsters account for the largest portion of

the wild catch industry in terms of value and is second largest in terms of

volume.

Figure 1 Relative shares of volume and value across species groups in the WA wild catch fishing industry

FISH37%

CRABS4%

PRAWNS9%

ROCK LOBSTERS31%

OTHER CRUSTACEANS

0%

MOLLUSCS19%

OTHER CLASSES0%

FISH11%

CRABS2%

PRAWNS9%

ROCK LOBSTERS69%

OTHER CRUSTACEANS

0%

MOLLUSCS9%

OTHER CLASSES0%

Volume Value

Note: Based on 2007-08 data

Does not include the harvest of pearl oysters



The WA Rock Lobster industry 14

4 The WA Rock Lobster industry

Given the prominence of the rock lobster catch, this section provides a brief

discussion of the WA rock lobster industry.

4.1 Location

The fishery is essentially made up of two halves, A and B zones in the North

(Kalbarri, Port Gregory, Abrolhos Islands, Geraldton, Dongara and Leeman)

and C zone in the South (Leeman, Jurien Bay, Cervantes, Lancelin, Seabird,

Two Rocks, Fremantle, Mandurah, Busselton, Dunsborough and Augusta).

The largest rock lobster producing region is the Mid West. This part of the

rock lobster industry forms part of the West Coast Bioregion as defined by the

Western Australian Department of Fisheries. The region runs from north of

Kalbarri to Augusta and includes the Abrolhos Islands. The region is

predominantly a temperate oceanic zone, and is heavily influenced by the

Leeuwin Current, which transports warm tropical water south along the

continental shelf.

4.2 Governance

The Rock Lobster industry is a fishery which is effectively managed by a

coalition of Government and industry under the Fisheries Resources

Management Act. There are several peak bodies that represent the industry

including the:

• Western Rock Lobster Council (WRLC) - represents the Commercial

Western Rock Lobster Fishermen of WA. It was formed in 2001 as a peak

industry body to address issues affecting commercial fishermen in the

Western Rock Lobster Industry.

• Rock Lobster Industry Advisory Committee (RLIAC) - a statutory advisory

committee established under the Fish Resources Management Act 1994 and is

designed to identify issues that affect rock lobster fishing; advise the

Minister on the management, protection and development of rock lobster

fisheries; and respond to Ministerial requests for advice on rock lobster

fisheries issues.

Commercial fishing for Western Rock Lobster is limited by the number of

licences and pots that are allowed to be used in the fishery. There are currently

28,100 active pots in the fishery and approximately 399 boats (as of last season,

although boat numbers are expected to decline further next season). There are

also controls on the times fishing is allowed, the size and breeding status of



lobsters allowed to be caught and the size and type of pots used (Western Rock

Lobster Council). Lobsters are fished using baited pots.

4.3 Value chain

The value chain for the rock lobster industry in Western Australia is

summarised in Figure 2. It comprises of research which determines annual

catch, the catch effort, processing facilities and the distribution of product to

the domestic and international markets. Overlying this is the governance of the

industry.

Figure 2 Rock Lobster value chain

SettlementResearch

Boats

Pots

Employees

Catch

Processors

Employees

Products

ProcessExport

DomesticMarket

GOVERNANCE

Source: ACIL Tasman

4.4 Profile

The rock lobster industry comprises 399 boats, with an allocation of 28,114

active pots(out of 69,038 total pots), 6 processing plants employing a total of

800-1,000 people (part-time and full-time) (see Table 12). There are six

processing and exporting companies servicing the WA rock lobster industry:

1. Bluewave Seafoods

2. Geraldton Fisherman‘s Co-op.

3. Indian Ocean Rock Lobster

4. Kailis Bros Pty Ltd.

5. Vinci Seafood Exporters Pty Ltd

6. Westralian Seafoods.

Figure 3 presents a map of the Western Rock Lobster fishing zones, ports and

processing facilities. According to Caputi, et al. (2008), the Western Rock

Lobster (Panulirus Cygnus) is fished by three managed fisheries, West Coast

Rock Lobster Managed Fishery, August — Windy Harbour Managed Fishery,

and the South Coast Crustacean Fisheries. Of the three, the West Coast Rock

Lobster Managed Fishery is the largest and the most valuable single species

wild catch fishery in Australia.



Figure 3 Map of WA rock lobster industry

-21.733

1

Zone C

-34.4

Zone B Zone AGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTONGERALDTON

Point SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint SamsonPoint Samson

OnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslowOnslow

Coral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral BayCoral Bay

CarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvonCarnarvon

DenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenhamDenham

KalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarri

Port GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort Gregory

Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison

LeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeeman

CervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantesCervantes

LancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelin

MandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurahMandurah

BunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunburyBunbury

AugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugustaAugusta

AlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbanyAlbany

Bremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer BayBremer Bay

HopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetounHopetoun Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance Esperance

HillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarysHillarys

FremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantleFremantle

1

Zone C

Zone B Zone A

KalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarriKalbarri

Port GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort GregoryPort Gregory

GeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldtonGeraldton

Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison Port Denison

LeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeemanLeeman

JurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurienJurien

LancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelinLancelin

Ports

Rock Lobster

Processing Plants

Data source: (Western Rock Lobster Council)

As indicated in the map, the West Coast Rock Lobster Managed Fishery is

managed in three zones. Zone A encompasses the Abrolhos Islands, Zone B is

north of latitude 30 degrees south, and Zone C is south of 30 degrees south

(Department of Fisheries, 2008, p. 15).

The rock lobster fishery is currently operating an average of 70 pots per boat

and 399 boats. Boat numbers have been in steady decline from 704 in 1989-90

(Huddleston, 2006, p. 17) and are expected to decline further in the 2009-10

season.



There is substantial infrastructure to support the rock lobster industry at the

Abrolhos islands. In 1998, 22 of the islands were occupied by fishermen, with

approximately 1,200 separate structures, including community facilities,

accommodation, storage, engine and freezer sheds. At this time there were 114

separate jetties, 238 landings and 43 dinghy jetties. Commercial lobster fishing

is the only form of commercial fishing that is permitted to operate in the

Abrolhos Islands and establish camps (Abrolhos Islands Management

Advisory Committee, 1998).

The Abrolhos Islands are home to rock lobster fishermen from March until

June, for the remainder eight months of the year, however, the Abrolhos

remains almost deserted (About Australia, 2009).

The majority of rock lobster fishing vessels typically have a crew of 2 or 3 (a

skipper and one or two deckhands) (International Risk Consultants Group of

Companies , 2009).

Table 12 Key statistics for the Western Rock Lobster Industry

Variable Statistic

Season opening times Western Rock Lobster 15 November – 30 June

Abrolhos Islands 15 March – 30 June

Number of boats 399

Number of boat employees 1,117

Number of processing plants 6

Number of processing employees 800-1,000

Number of pots 18,498 (Zone A), 14,906 (Zone B), 35,634 (Zone C)

Note: Boat employee numbers estimated based on an average of 2.8 crew per boat

Data source: Industry sources and consultant’s estimates

4.5 Production

4.5.1 Catch

The Western Rock Lobster fishery is worth between $200-600 million a year

and is the most valuable single species fishery in Australia, with an average

catch of 10,800 tonnes a year (Western Rock Lobster Council) representing

around 20 per cent of the total value of Australia‘s fisheries. There was a severe

reduction in the catch for the 2007-08 and subsequent season due to low

settlement numbers. Current catches are estimated to be as low as 5,500 tonnes

for the current 2009-10 season.

Production in the zone C has averaged 5,560 tonnes per annum over 2003-04

to 2007-08 representing 52 per cent of the Western Rock Lobster fishery



(Figure 4). Zone A production has averaged 3,030 tonnes per annum,

representing 28 per cent of production.

Figure 4 Total rock lobster volumes by zone

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Ton

nes

zone A zone B zone C


Declining volumes is clearly evident with the sharpest trend decline occurring

in zone C. Figure 5 provides insight into harvest rates in zone A as a

proportion of the total legal harvest. The longer-term view indicates that the

harvest rate reached a peak in 2000 and has since trended downwards.

Figure 5 Harvest rate as a proportion of total legal harvest (zone A)

0.76

0.78

0.8

0.82

0.84

0.86

0.88

0.9

0.92

0.94

0.96

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Har

vest

rate

(pro

port

ion

of le

gal b

iom

ass

harv

este

d) Western Rock Lobster Annual Harvest Rates

Source: Fletcher, W.J. and Santoro, K. (eds). 2007. State of the Fisheries Report 2006-07. Department of Fisheries,

Western Australia. http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/sof/2006/west%20coast%20bioregion.pdf Accessed 30/07/2009.

http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/sof/2006/west%20coast%20bioregion.pdf



As discussed in section 4.7.1, part of the reason for the decline is due to low

recruitment rates and, therefore, declining rock lobster stocks. However, other

factors (particularly economic) may also be influencing the performance.

In order to gauge the longer-term economic sustainability of the WA rock

lobster industry, the next set of figures present time series data relating to

productivity and market performance.

Figure 6 Average catch per pot (kg) by concession

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1990/91

1991/92

1992/93

1993/94

1994/95

1995/96

1996/97

1997/98

1998/99

1999/00

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

kg

A Zone B Zone C Zone


Figure 6 shows the average catch in kilograms per pot by zone. The series

exhibits volatility, particularly in zone C. Average catch has remained relatively

stable over time for zones A and B, suggesting that productivity is being

maintained in these zones. However, zone C productivity has shown a

declining trend since 2003-04. The productivity across all zones, however,

contrasts with other sectors of the economy in which productivity has actually

shown strong growth. This suggests that the combination of effort and pot

reductions among other things has served to maintain relatively flat

productivity.



Figure 7 Ex-vessel prices for rock lobsters

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1990/91

1991/92

1992/93

1993/94

1994/95

1995/96

1996/97

1997/98

1998/99

1999/00

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

$/kg

A & B Zones ($/kg) C Zone ($/kg)


Figure 7 shows the ex-vessel prices for rock lobsters across zones. There is

relatively little price difference between zones. Thus, given declining

productivity, zone C fishermen are likely to be experiencing a more

pronounced profit squeeze than fishermen in zones A and B.

Figure 8 Approximate market value for Western Rock Lobster pots

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1990/91

1992/93

1994/95

1996/97

1998/99

2000/01

2002/03

2004/05

2006/07

2008/09

$ in

thou

sand

s

Zone A & B Low Zone A & B High Zone C Low Zone C High


Another aspect of economic sustainability is wealth accumulation associated

with the value of productive assets. Rising wealth can provide a significant

source of compensation for owner-operators as well as provide a basis for

industry expansion. Figure 8 shows the range of market values (low and high



price) for Western Rock Lobster pots in different zones. The chart indicates

steadily rising wealth for pot owners between 1990-91 and 2002-03. Since that

time, however, the market value has experienced a pronounced increase in

volatility. Series peaks were experienced in 2006-07 and have since fallen

sharply.

Comparing the relatively flat price profile (which actually suggests falling real

prices) to the recently volatile market price of pots suggests that the source of

volatility is likely to be factors other than price. Fishermen who have bought

pots during 2006-07 have sustained a pronounced fall in wealth. However, this

might be offset by the prospect of reduced competition in the future as the

concentration of pot ownership increases. If stocks rebuild, reduced

competition may yield higher profits for remaining rock lobster operations.

4.5.2 Processing

The Western Rock Lobster Industry is currently serviced by six processing

companies. These companies purchase live lobsters from the fishermen, and

either process them in facilities located in Geraldton, Cervantes, Ledge Point

and Fremantle or export live.

Major products produced, by share (weight) are:

• Lobster tails 18 percent

• Whole lobsters 30 percent

• Live lobsters 52 percent.

Figure 9 Production by product for the Rock Lobster Industry

Lobster tails18%

Whole lobsters30%

Liv e lobsters52%

Source: Department of Fisheries, personal communication



4.6 Exports

The bulk of Rock Lobster exports in 2006-07 were exported to Japan, Taiwan,

Hong Kong/China and the United States (Department of Fisheries, 2008). The

main products exported are live product to Asia and frozen lobster tails to the

United States and Europe. Together these two product types make up 70 per

cent of Western Rock Lobster exports.

Table 13 Rock lobster exports from WA

Year Tonnes Value ($’000s)

2005-06 8,218 323,746

2006-07 6,684 284,226

2007-08 6,060 227,410

Data source: ABARE

4.7 Issues

As the most significant single species fishery in Australia, the sustainability of

the Western Rock Lobster industry is essential. In the early 1990s there was

evidence of declining spawning stock, leading experts to conclude that the

fishery is fully exploited (Fernandez, Cross, & Caputi). Analysis of the industry

conducted during the 1990s and 2000s has identified increasing productivity

due to the introduction of technology such as colour echo sounders and GPS

as potential threats to industry sustainability. For example, Fernandez, Cross,

and Caputi reported an increase in catch rates of 13-17 per cent.

In response, management arrangements have been implemented aimed at

restricting the total effort via the Total Allowable Effort system and associated

input controls (Department of Fisheries, 2008, p. 15). Under this system, the

primary control mechanism is the number of pots licensed and the proposed

usage rate. Transfer provisions in licensing allow market forces to determine

the most efficient use of license and pot entitlements. Total number of pots

has been set at 69,038 and the utilisation rate has been limited. Management

also includes protection of females in breeding condition, size limits, and gear

controls.

Despite careful management, rock lobster stocks are now at a record low (ABC

News, 2009). The Government of Western Australia is also considering further

tightening of controls such as reducing the number of fishing days per week

from 6 to 4, additional pot restrictions and changes to legal size limits (Get

Farming Australia, 2009).

In addition to declining stocks, the rock lobster industry has sustained

reductions in value caused by reductions in unit prices. On average, rock



lobster prices fell by 9 per cent in WA. ABARE cite the strength of the

Australian dollar as a factor contributing to this.

4.7.1 Low settlement and recruitment

Below average puerulus settlement was observed in most locations in the West

Coast rock lobster fishery in 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 which recorded the

lowest settlement on record. These low settlements will have a major impact

on the catch of rock lobsters three and four years after settlement,

commencing in 2009-10 (Department of Fisheries, 2009, p. 1).

In response to this low settlement, management action in the form of a

reduction in fishing effort was taken during the 2008-09 season to limit the

commercial rock lobster catch with the aim of maintaining rock lobster

breeding stock levels. The result was a reduction in the predicted catch from

9,200 to 7,800 tonnes.

With the uncertainty surrounding the cause of the extremely low puerulus

settlements, the increased uncertainty in the predicted catch and associated

breeding stock beyond the 2011 season, reduced catches will continue into

future seasons. It is expected that total annual catch for the fishery would be

5,500 - 6000 tonnes in the 2009-10 season, with the annual catches remaining

at this level for the next few years.

4.7.2 Impacts

At the community level, the impact of changes to rock lobster production can

be gauged by inspecting cost share data of the inputs. Figure 10 shows the

major cost categories associated with rock lobster fishing boats.

The main inputs are wages, fuel and bait. The value chain also extends to

repairs and maintenance of boats. Based on this information, we can anticipate

that reductions in production would have a significant impact on local

communities via reductions in household income for crew members. Upstream

fishing boat suppliers would also be significantly affected.



Figure 10 Variable cost shares of fishing inputs

Bait10%

Fuel & oil19%

General boat expenses

2%

Harbour fees and licences

11%

Repairs & maintenance

6%

Wages48%

Superannuation4%

Data source: (Western Rock Lobster Council Inc., 2007, p. 27)

Total wage expenditure across fishing boats is estimated at approximately

$37.3 million.1 Total expenditure is estimated to be $77.7 million. Much of that

expenditure is likely to be expended directly in small local fishing communities.

A 10 per cent reduction in pots utilised could lead to a reduction in wages of

around $3.7 million. Across all variable expenditure, the first-round impact

would be a loss of $7.8 million to communities.

The flow-on economic impact of a 10 per cent contraction in the Western

Rock Lobster industry would vary according to community size and diversity

of economic activity. Table 14 provides an indication of the dependence on the

industry by each of the small communities in which the Western Rock Lobster

industry has a significant presence.

Table 14 Small community fishing employment profile

Community Persons employed in

agric. & fishing to total

employed persons

Persons employed in

agric & fishing to

population

Kalbarri 7% 3%

Dongara 13% 5%

Leeman 12% 6%

Green Head 16% 6%

Jurien Bay 6% 3%

Cervantes 9% 3%

Lancelin 18% 6%

Ledge Point 39% 16%

Note: employed persons

Data source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

1 Calculations assumed number of pots used is 70 and number of boats is 399. We also

assumed average wages of $1,336 per pot with an additional $120 in superannuation.



Ledge Point has the highest dependence, with 39 per cent of persons within

the community employed in primary production. Much, if not all, are likely to

be employed directly in the Western Rock Lobster industry.


The WA pearling and aquaculture industry 26

5 The WA pearling and aquaculture industry

The WA pearling and aquaculture is a significant industry, accounting for 28

per cent of the entire WA fishing industry by value. The structure of the

industry is summarised in Table 15 and Table 16.

Table 15 WA aquaculture production by volume

Common name Units 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Mussels Tonnes 765 730 765 622 481

Barramundi Tonnes 295 284 19 43 366

Marron Tonnes 44 51 55 65 60

Yabbies Tonnes 72 74 69 88 61

Silver Perch Tonnes 39 20 21 26 16

Ornamental Fish and

Crustaceans

Number

71,982 47,118 68,876 61,170 51,288

Rainbow Trout Tonnes 17 21 30 12 14

Gold Fish Number 33,451 39,384 33,151 32,818 33,918

Koi Carp Number 17,003 47,118 20,453 17,876 35,620

Pearl oysters Number 405,000 488,300 467,400 600,700 670,000

Note: * Industry figures have not been included where there are less than five productive licensees in a category to protect the confidentiality of individual producers. Also note that Pearling is not included in the above table Data source: Department of Fisheries

Table 15 shows volume across the types of pearling and aquaculture product.

Several products have been excluded from the table due to confidentiality

restrictions. These include: algae, other types of molluscs, marine crustaceans,

miscellaneous types of finfish, and pearls (although the harvesting of pearl

oysters has been include for illustrative purposes). Of those published in the

table, it is clear that several products have experienced declining production

since 2003-04. These include: mussels, silver perch, yabbies and ornamental

fish and crustaceans. Other product lines (marron, pearl oysters and koi carp)

have shown strong growth in production.


The WA pearling and aquaculture industry 27

Table 16 WA pearling and aquaculture production by value ($’000)

Common name 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Mussels 2,071 2,089 2,159 1,812 1,531

Barramundi 1,904 1,526 163 467 3,870

Marron 1,015 1,200 1,364 1,602 1,637

Yabbies 1,010 1,119 1,037 1,380 1,060

Silver Perch 434 226 259 320 245

Ornamental Fish and Crustaceans 152 202 161 288 223

Rainbow Trout 134 148 172 110 132

Gold Fish 59 58 51 59 81

Koi Carp 51 202 220 96 162

Pearls 122,000 122,000 122,000 122,000 113,000

Note: * Industry figures have not been included where there are less than five productive licensees in a category to

protect the confidentiality of individual producers. Also note that Pearling values are implied farm gate prices.

Unprocessed pearls are not actually traded.


Table 16 presents a slightly more complete picture of WA pearling and

aquaculture production by value. Casual inspection of these data indicates that

pearl production is by far the most valuable product, generating revenue of

$113 million in 2007-08. The next most significant in value are: mussels,

barramundi, and marron.

Implied prices suggest that WA pearling and aquaculture products have

enjoyed rising prices.


Estimates of economic impact 28

6 Estimates of economic impact

This section presents the results of the construction of regional input-output

tables for the WA fishing industry.

Industry value-added estimates are provided in Table 17. At the state level, the

WA fishing industry creates $295.9 million in value-added product. Across

products, rock lobster contributes the largest portion of value-added, totalling

$145.1 million (49 per cent). Seafood products is the next largest contributor to

value-added, followed by other marine fishing and aquaculture.

Across regions, the Mid West is the single largest contributor to fishing value-

added with $92.2 million (31 per cent), followed by Perth at $61.0 million (21

per cent).

The fishing industry makes important contributions to regional economies.

The rock lobster industry accounts for 2.3 per cent of all of the value-added

(across all industries including fishing) in the Mid West and 1.1 per cent in the

Wheatbelt. Prawns contribute 4.1 per cent to the Gascoyne. Pearling and

aquaculture represents 1.4 per cent of total value-added in the Kimberley.

Table 17 Industry value-added at factor cost ($ millions)

Region

Rock Lobster Prawns Other marine

fishing

Aquaculture

(including

pearling)

Seafood

products

Total industry

Gascoyne 0.0 18.4 10.2 1.0 12.0 41.5

Goldfields

Esperance 0.8 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.3 6.4

Great

Southern 0.0 0.0 2.6 3.6 1.8 7.9

Kimberley 0.0 1.0 4.5 22.9 0.0 28.4

Mid West 82.7 0.0 2.9 0.5 6.0 92.2

Peel 4.2 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.0 5.1

Pilbara 0.0 0.9 5.5 0.0 0.0 6.4

South West 1.9 0.0 3.8 2.9 0.0 8.6

Wheatbelt 37.6 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 38.2

Perth 17.9 0.0 1.6 1.4 40.1 61.0

Western

Australia 145.1 20.3 37.4 32.9 60.2 295.9

Data source: ACIL Tasman



Table 18 presents estimates of the direct and flow-on effects of the WA fishing

industry.

Table 18 Total industry value added at factor cost – direct plus indirect ($ million)

Region

Rock

Lobster

Prawns Other

marine

fishing

Aquaculture

(including

pearling)

Seafood

products

Total

industry

Gascoyne 0.0 25.9 12.3 1.5 24.4 64.1

Goldfields

Esperance 1.3 0.0 7.1 0.0 0.8 9.2

Great

Southern 0.0 0.0 3.6 8.0 5.0 16.6

Kimberley 0.0 1.4 5.5 31.2 0.0 38.1

Mid West 113.6 0.0 4.0 1.3 15.4 134.4

Peel 5.8 0.0 1.0 0.8 0.0 7.6

Pilbara 0.0 1.3 6.8 0.0 0.0 8.1

South West 3.2 0.0 5.7 8.7 0.0 17.7

Wheatbelt 50.6 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.0 51.9

Perth 35.8 0.0 3.8 6.1 126.1 171.8

Western

Australia 301.5 43.4 91.6 150.4 231.1 817.8


Table 19 shows that the total contribution of the industry to the WA economy

is $817.8 million when flow-on benefits are included. The $817.8 million

includes the direct effects shown in Table 17.

With these flow-on impacts included, we find that the rock lobster industry

accounts for 3.1 per cent of total value-added in the Mid West and 1.5 per cent

in the Wheatbelt. Prawns contribute 5.8 per cent to the Gascoyne. Pearling and

aquaculture represents 1.8 per cent of total value-added in the Kimberley.

Table 1 in Section 3 shows direct employment in the WA fishing industry in

different regions of the state. Table 19 captures the direct plus the indirect jobs

after the application of the appropriate regional multipliers.

Whereas total direct employment for the fishing industry in WA (see Table 1)

was 4,337 jobs, once the indirect employment effects are included this figure

more than doubles to 9,808 jobs in WA, with the vast majority of these jobs in

regional areas.



Table 19 Fishing industry direct plus indirect employment by place of work, full time equivalent jobs

Region

Rock

Lobster

Prawns Other

marine

fishing

Aquaculture

(including

pearling)

Seafood

products

Total

industry

Gascoyne 0 183 200 30 585 998

Goldfields

Esperance 142 0 235 0 6 383

Great

Southern 0 0 83 133 43 259

Kimberley 0 77 142 657 0 876

Mid West 989 0 147 19 265 1,420

Peel 52 0 97 13 0 162

Pilbara 0 25 278 0 0 302

South West 239 0 150 130 0 518

Wheatbelt 1,407 0 76 13 0 1,495

Perth 304 0 112 77 1,323 1,816

Western

Australia 2,707 409 1,681 1,883 3,127 9,808



Conclusion 31

7 Conclusion

This report has presented an economic snapshot of the WA fishing industry

showing the structure of the industry and providing estimates of value-added

and employment. As is evident in this report, the industry is currently

confronting significant challenges. This is particularly evident in the Western

Rock Lobster industry, which is by far the largest single species fishery in

Australia. A delicate balancing act is currently being carried out to ensure both

the biological and economic sustainability of the industry.

Other parts of the WA fishing industry are also showing signs of stress. This is

likely to be due to a multitude of factors such as: increasing import

competition (particularly with the appreciation of the Australian dollar),

reduced access to stocks and rising input costs.

In terms of employment, the industry is relatively small. However, the fishing

industry is a significant employer in many small coastal communities,

particularly in the Gascoyne, Mid West and Wheatbelt regions. The industry is

also likely to be highly complementary to the tourism industry. Expansion or

contraction of the fishing industry would lead to significant impacts at the

small community level and, in some cases, even at the regional level.

Despite the challenges, there are signs of resilience and even growth. Although

relatively small, the WA aquaculture industry has shown areas of growth in

recent years and is likely to provide an increasingly important avenue for future

growth.


Bibliography 32

8 Bibliography ABARE. (2008). Australian fisheries statistics. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from ABARE:

http://www.abare.gov.au/publications_html/afs/afs_09/09_FishStats.pdf

ABC News. (2009, August 4). Rock lobster industry thrown lifeline. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from ABC: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/08/04/2645593.htm

About Australia. (2009). Abrolhos Islands. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from About Australia: http://www.about-australia.com/western-australia/australias-coral-coast/destinations/abrolhos-islands/articles/abrolhos-islands/index.php

Abrolhos Islands Management Advisory Committee. (1998, December). Management of the Houtman Abrolhos System. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from Fisheries Western Australia: http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/mp/mp117/fmp117.pdf

Caputi, N., Melville-Smith, R., de Lestang, S., How, J., Thomson, A., Stephenson, P., et al. (2008). Stock Assessment for the West Coast Rock Lobster Fishery. Perth: Department of Fisheries.

Department of Fisheries. (2008). State of the Fisheries Report 2007-08. Perth: Department of Fisheries.

Department of Fisheries. (2009). Summary of information provided to RLIAC for the 2009-10 West Coast Rock Lobster Managed Fishery Season.

Econsearch. (2007). The economic impact of aquaculture on the South Australian state and regional economies, 2005/06. Adelaide: PIRSA.

Fernandez, J. A., Cross, J. M., & Caputi, N. (n.d.). The impact of technology on fishing power in the Western Rock Lobster (Panulirus cygnus) fishery. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand: http://www.mssanz.org.au/MODSIM97/Vol%204/Fernandez.pdf

Get Farming Australia. (2009). Tough measures aim to steer rock lobster industry through dangerous waters. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from Get Farming Australia: http://www.getfarming.com.au/pages/farming/articles_view.php?fId=9200020090217094238

Huddleston, V. (2006). A Social Assessment of Coastal Communities Hosting the Western Rock Lobster Fishing Fleet. Perth: Department of Fisheries.

Huddleston, V. (2006). Assessment of Western Rock Lobster Strategic Management Options. Perth: Department of Fisheries.

International Risk Consultants Group of Companies . (2009). Western Rock Lobster Ecological Risk Assessment. Perth: Government of Western Australia Department of Fisheries.

Western Rock Lobster Council. (n.d.). Retrieved July 20, 2009, from www.rocklobsterwa.com

Western Rock Lobster Council Inc. (2007). Improving the economic efficiency of the Western Rock Lobster fishery. Perth: WRLC.

Documents

Economic snap shot of the WA fishing industry · Economic snap shot of the WA fishing industry iv Figure 10 Variable cost shares of fishing inputs 24 List of tables Table 1 Fishing