South East
Management Advisory Committee
(South East MAC)
MAC CHAIR’S SUMMARY
Teleconference
Small Pelagic Fishery TAC Recommendations for 2012/13
26 March 2012
SOUTH EAST MAC (SEMAC)
CHAIR: Mr Steve McCormack
Dates 26 March 2011
South East MAC met by way of teleconference at 2:30 pm (AEDT) on Monday 26th March 2012 to
recommend Total Allowable Catches (TACs) for the Small Pelagic Fishery (SPF) for the 2012/13 season.
The MAC appreciated the contribution of Dr Tim Ward (Acting Chair SPF RAG) in explaining the
operation of the SPF Harvest Strategy Framework and the differences in the biological settings
adopted for small pelagic species in comparison to those used in the SESSF Harvest Strategy
Framework.
Based on the scientific advice from SPFRAG and SPF RAG Chair the MAC considered that all the TAC
recommendations were consistent with the SPF Harvest Strategy and the MAC’s recommendations
are:

Full and unanimous support for the proposed TACs for Redbait (east and west), Blue Mackerel
(east and west), Jack Mackerel (west) and Australian Sardine (east).

Full and unanimous support for the proposed Bycatch TAC for Yellowtail Scad.

Full support for the proposed TAC for Jack Mackerel (east - Tier 2) with recommendations to
better specify monitoring, data collection and assessment responses in the Harvest Strategy and
under the supporting Research Plan to address concerns over possible local depletion and trophic
impacts.
Based on the information provided in background papers and the advice of Dr Ward, the MAC agreed
with advice from SPF RAG that the SPF Harvest Strategy Framework is precautionary with respect to
stock sustainability. The MAC also noted that a recent review1 of similar fisheries involving Dr Tony
Smith (lead author) supported by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) indicated that exploitation
rates (for small pelagic species) below 30% of spawning biomass were considered precautionary with
respect to ecosystem impacts.
Meeting administration
Most members participated in the teleconference and the requirements for a quorum were met. The
list of participants is provided at Attachment 1. Apologies were received from:

Mr Morison (scientific member travelling overseas) - provided a submission in support of the
proposed TACs.

Mr Toumazos (prior commitment) contacted the MAC Chair indicating his support for the
proposed TACs.
The MAC noted that Mr Ciconte (industry invited participant) had recently resigned from South East
MAC.
The MAC acknowledged and considered submissions from the SPF RAG conservation member and the
SPF recreational member in regard to their concerns over the proposed increase in the Jack Mackerel
(east) RBC from 5,000 tonnes to 10,600 tonnes under the Harvest Strategy general meta-rule. The
MAC welcomed the participation of Mr Graham Pike (SPF recreational member) in the phone hook-up
and appreciated Mr Pike formalising his involvement with the MAC Chair prior to the meeting.
The teleconference went smoothly. A number of members raised similar concerns about the difficulty
inherent in trying to resolve issues over the telephone. The MAC Chair welcomed advice from AFMA
indicating that it intended to harmonise the SPF TAC process with the SESSF process which should
enable the MAC to cover both SESSF and SPF TAC recommendations in session at its January 2013 TAC
meeting.
1
Impacts of Fishing Low – Trophic Level Species on Marine Ecosystems – Smith et al - Science 26 August 2011: pp 1147-1150.
South East MAC - Teleconference 26 March 2011
2 of 8
Declarations
The MAC reviewed the standing declarations of potential conflicts of interest and noted the following
declarations specific to the SPF:
Mr Gerry Geen Direct conflict of interest in regard to TAC setting noting that Seafish Tasmania P/L
holds approximately 60% of the Jack Mackerel SFRs, 70% of the Redbait (east) SFRs,
30% of Blue Mackerel (east) SFRs and significant quota holdings in the western zone.
Mr Jeff Moore Declared a professional interest (as GABIA EO) in the condition on concessions which
requires that SPF operators wishing to mid-water trawl in the Great Australian Bight
(currently Zone B) to have a GABTF Boat SFR attached to their SPF package.
Mr Les Scott
Managers a partnership which holds a Jack Mackerel endorsement.
Updated and existing declarations are provided in Attachment 2.
Recommended Total Allowable Catches for Blue Mackerel, Redbait and Yellowtail Scad for 2012/13
The MAC agreed that the RBCs recommended by the SPF RAG were consistent with the fishery’s
Harvest Strategy. The Committee noted that recent Commonwealth activity had been low and that
state catches had been taken into account in converting the RBCs to TACs. On the basis of this process
the MAC therefore considered that the TACs were also consistent with AFMA’s sustainability
objective. The MAC supported the recommended TACs summarised in Table 1.
The MAC confirmed that the TAC recommended for Yellowtail Scad was a Bycatch TAC and noted
advice from the Acting RAG Chair that the proposed level (300 tonnes) was under catches taken in the
fishery in years of higher activity when catches had ranged between 400 and 500 tonnes.
Recommendation 1
South East MAC unanimously supports the following TACs for 2012/13 as recommended by AFMA
and consistent with SPF RAG’s advice:
Species
Eastern Zone (tonnes)
Western Zone (tonnes)
Blue Mackerel
2,600 Tier 2
6,500 Tier 2
Redbait
6,900 Tier 1
5,000 Tier 2
Australian Sardine
200 Tier 2
Not applicable
Recommendation 2
South East MAC unanimously supports a Bycatch TAC of 300 tonnes (administered under permits)
being set for Yellowtail Scad for 2012/13 in the event that the SPF continues to be managed under
transitional arrangements.
Recommended Total Allowable Catches for Jack Mackerel
Western Zone (Tier 2)
The MAC supported the proposed TAC (5,000 t) for Jack Mackerel (west) noting that it was consistent
with the SPF Harvest Strategy and was fully supported by SPF RAG.
Recommendation 3
South East MAC unanimously supports a TAC of 5,000 tonnes being set for Jack Mackerel (west) for
2012/13.
South East MAC - Teleconference 26 March 2011
3 of 8
Eastern Zone (Tier 2)
The MAC noted that SPF RAG recommendation to increase the Jack Mackerel (east) RBC from 5,000
tonnes to 10,600 tonnes was subject to conditional support from the RAG’s conservation member and
the RAG’s recreational member. The AFMA paper before the MAC and submissions from RAG
members indicated that the RAG meeting record was in dispute in relation to the way this conditional
support was recorded.
The MAC established that the application of the meta-rule to increase the RBC was consistent with the
SPF Harvest Strategy and noted that Seafish Tasmania Pty Ltd had submitted a research plan in line
with the requirements for the Tier 2 meta-rule. The MAC welcomed input from Mr Geen during the
discussion (mostly background) and noted that he, in keeping with a prior commitment to the Chair,
did not contribute to the forming of the TAC recommendation for Jack Mackerel (east).
Some members of the MAC noted concerns about the effect of the increase in the TAC in relation to
heightened risks of localised depletion, trophic impacts and by extension possible impacts on other
users of the resource. The MAC’s understanding was that, while the RAG members who opposed the
increase were concerned about short term impacts, their main concerns were:
 that the current Harvest Strategy wasn’t sufficiently tight regarding the obligation on industry to
conduct additional Daily Egg Production Method (DEPM) surveys and to collect additional biological
data;
 that greater specificity was needed in relation to decision rules in relation to outcomes of DEPM
surveys; and
 that greater specificity was also needed in regard to gathering and assessing information to detect
evidence of localised depletion and trophic impacts and trigger management responses.
Some members of the MAC also noted concerns in relation to the proposed introduction of a factory
freezer vessel. The MAC resolved that this was outside the scope of the advice being requested but
was prepared to provide advice if and when asked.
The Committee was cognisant that its role did not extend to reopening RAG discussions but, noting
concerns raised in relation to the RAG process, attempted to work through the concerns that had
been raised in the context of AFMA’s legislative objectives. These are addressed under a series of subheadings.
MAC members’ concerns over reference to an old DEPM
A number of MAC members expressed interest in the age of the DEPM survey in that it was conducted
in 2002 for Jack Mackerel (eastern zone) and had only just been analysed and made available to SPF
RAG. Dr Ward explained that while most of the stock would have turned over in the intervening
period that the survey outcomes were still informative to the Tier 2 harvest strategy and that the
proposed RBC took into account the time lag and risk and was in accordance with the harvest strategy
set at 7.5 % of that biomass estimate.
The MAC noted that currently management costs in the fishery were approximately twice the Gross
Value of Production (GVP) and that industry could not afford to support research on all species
simultaneously. The MAC accepted that persevering with an analysis of data for species when market
conditions were unfavourable and/or catches well below TACs would not have represented cost
effective management or have been consistent with maximising net economic returns.
The MAC accepted advice from its scientific members that a 7.5 % exploitation rate for relatively
productive species was highly precautionary and was consistent with AFMA’s ESD objective. The MAC
noted that in the context of the risks to the stock, committing to additional stock assessments would
not have been consistent with attempting to maximise net economic returns for the fishery
(Commonwealth sector).
South East MAC - Teleconference 26 March 2011
4 of 8
The MAC also recognised that should fishing activity increase next season then the ensuing egg survey
would provide a basis for the Jack Mackerel (east) to be elevated to a Tier 1 assessment. The MAC
however was not in favour of implementing more binding requirements to conduct DEPM surveys
under higher TACs noting that the GVP of the fishery coupled with the high cost of management
prevented industry from committing to future surveys. The Committee noted Dr Ward’s advice that
the Tier 1 Harvest Strategy already factored in additional precaution each year if surveys weren’t
replicated and considered that this represented cost effective management while still providing
precautionary safeguards.
Localised Depletion
A number of South East MAC members expressed concern over localised depletion and noted that this
could have ecological impacts but also impact on the ability of other sectors to effectively access the
resource (state fisheries, recreational fishers chasing bait) and indirectly on the game fishing and
charter sectors by reducing the amount of baitfish available to tunas and marlins etc.
The MAC accepted advice from the scientific invited participant that commercial fishing operations
were likely to cause localised depletion in most fisheries. The scientific participant added that given
the mobile nature of small pelagic species any localised reductions in abundance were likely to be less
persistent in comparison to more sedentary species. The MAC noted that most Harvest Strategies for
Commonwealth fisheries did not take into account localised depletion.
The MAC noted industry experience that fishing for small pelagic species to date had been largely
confined to waters near processing facilities which had the potential to lead to large catches from a
relatively small area. By comparison a freezer vessel could range more widely as the challenge of
refrigerating catch promptly is mainly a matter of onboard management. The Committee noted that
for conventional vessels the product quality is influenced by the distance operations are from port and
consequently the time required to steam to a processing facility and unload the catch.
The MAC was comfortable supporting the proposed TAC with respect to risks of localised depletion
given the species is pelagic coupled with the low exploitation rate and scientific advice that the
increase did not represent a long term risk to the broader stock or to specific areas in the fishery.
Some members of the MAC indicated concern about the potential for localised depletion given that
some stocks were shared with the states and the recreational sector and that it could also exacerbate
any food chain issues for ecologically related species.
The Committee supported relaying these concerns to the Commission and suggests that the pending
review of the SPF Harvest Strategy will provide an opportunity to consider the incorporation of
monitoring mechanisms to deliver information which could meaningfully assess any implications to
the stock arising from any localised depletion detected. This might also be augmented with decision
rules to activate management responses.
The MAC welcomed industry preparedness to take on these concerns and work with AFMA to develop
strategies to mitigate against any concentration of fishing effort that might give rise to significant
localised depletion.
Trophic impacts
The MAC accepted advice from the SPF RAG Chair that the Tier 2 exploitation rate (and associated
RBCs) were highly precautionary with respect to trophic impacts. The MAC also noted that the SPF
Harvest Strategy Settings were conservative with respect to the findings of an independent review
into the impacts of fishing low forage fish species on marine ecosystems1.
The Committee recognised that concerns about trophic impacts were intertwined with localised
depletion because the traditional Jack Mackerel fishery was prosecuted in waters where significant
numbers of seabirds and marine mammals forage including, at times, animals from breeding colonies
and rookeries.
South East MAC - Teleconference 26 March 2011
5 of 8
Some members of the Committee also supported relaying concerns over trophic impacts to the
Commission and suggested that AFMA again use the review of the SPF Harvest Strategy and research
plan to improve the SPF’s ability to inform and respond to the possibility of significant trophic impacts.
Actions
1 That SPF RAG review the SPF Harvest Strategy and update the SPF research plan to better specify
information requirements, assessment and management responses with regard to localised
depletion and trophic impacts.
2 That South East MAC consider the SPF Harvest Strategy and research plan (in session) with
specific reference to concerns identified in relation to the proposed TAC for Jack Mackerel (east)
Relevance of factory freezer vessels to TACs
The MAC noted some concerns raised in relation to the proposed TAC for Jack Mackerel (east)
suggested that a ‘super trawler’ might also have differential impacts on the stock and ecosystem.
The MAC endorsed a view expressed by the GAB invited participant that (in a ITQ fishery) the setting
of TACs should be a completely separate issue from a vessel approval processes and that TACs should
be based on the best available stock assessment/scientific information considered in terms of the
relevant harvest strategy.
In this context, the MAC agreed the potential for a freezer vessel to enter the fishery would require a
separate process for consultation and engagement with stakeholders. The GAB invited participant
sought clarification that any operation to mid-water trawl in the GABTF must be accompanied by the
historical and existing requirement that a GABTF Boat SFR must also be assigned to the operation, to
avoid any redistribution of wealth issues.
The MAC supported this view noting that in a generic context processing at sea was considered to be
the most economically efficient way of utilising quota for small pelagic fish species. Members also
noted advice from industry that these vessels generally deployed similar sized trawl gear to large wet
boats and their ability to fish was moderated by their processing capacity. Members recalled earlier
advice that suggested freezer vessels would be able to range more widely than the large wet boat
mid-water trawlers previously deployed in the fishery and that as a consequence the likelihood of
localised depletion might be reduced.
The MAC considered that based on the information available that factory vessel operations would not
generate any differential impacts above that of wet boats taking similar catches.
The MAC was comfortable that AFMA had the tools and experience to successfully to manage
processing at sea in the SPF.
Recommendation 4
That a TAC of 10,600 t be set for Jack Mackerel (east) for 2012/13 subject to a commitment to address
concerns about the potential for localised depletion and trophic impacts (Actions 1 and 2).
Process concerns
The MAC acknowledged a concern raised by the recreational invited participant that recent SPF RAG
meeting minutes were not posted on AFMA’s website and this reduced transparency and made
researching the assessment history of the fishery difficult. The AFMA member noted this and agreed
to advise the MAC when the information was posted.
Action 3
AFMA to ensure documentation from recent SPFRAG meetings is posted on its website on a timely
basis.
South East MAC - Teleconference 26 March 2011
6 of 8
Next meeting
The MAC Chair noted that AFMA had signalled its desire to convene the MAC in late April or early May
2012. The Chair thanked members and observers for their input and closed the teleconference at 2:47
pm (AEDT).
Mr Steve McCormack
South East Chair
28 March 2012
Attachment 1 – Participants in South East MAC’s Teleconference 26 March 2012
Members
Mr Steve McCormack (Chair)
Ms Beth Gibson (AFMA)
Mr Simon Boag (industry member)
Mr Gerry Geen (industry member)
Mr Les Scott (industry member)
Observers
Mr George Day (AFMA)
Dr Tim Ward (SPF RAG Chair - Acting)
Apologies
Mr Brian Bailey (industry observer)
Mr Sandy Morison (scientific member)
Ms Anissa Lawrence (conservation member)
Dr Ian Knuckey (scientific invited participant)
Mr Jeff Moore (GAB invited participant)
Mr Malcolm Poole (recreational invited participant)
Mr Anthony de Fries (executive officer)
Mr Grahame Pike (recreational)
Ms Yvonne Zunic (AFMA)
Mr Philious Toumazos (industry member)
South East MAC - Teleconference 26 March 2011
7 of 8
Attachment 2 - Register of South East MAC members’ (and observers’) declared potential conflicts of
interest as at the 26 March 2011.
Member
Declared Interest
Mr Stephen McCormack
No pecuniary interest
Ms Beth Gibson
Senior Manager Demersal and Midwater Fisheries. No pecuniary interest
Dr Ian Knuckey
Director Fishwell Consulting Pty Ltd
Principal Investigator – Fishery Independent Survey (FIS) SESSF
Principal Investigator – Hook Trial
ShelfRAG Chair
Industry Liaison Officer – South East MAC
Range of research interests in relation to South East Fisheries including the gillnet sector and
Blue Warehou Survey
Mr Simon Boag
Executive Officer South East Trawl Fishing Industry Association (SETFIA)
Board member Commonwealth Fisheries Association (CFA)
Director of two quota holding and operating fishing companies in the SESSF
Mr Gerry Geen
A partner in Seafish Tasmania Pty Ltd that holds: two Zone A, B, C, D midwater trawl; purseseine Permit packages; four Zone A purse-seine SPF Permits; four Tasmanian purse-seine Jack
Mackerel Permits; and a Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Trawl Boat SFR
Direct conflict of interest in regard to TAC setting noting that Seafish Tasmania Pty Ltd holds
approximately 60% of the Jack Mackerel SFRs, 70% of the Redbait (east) SFRs, 30% of Blue
Mackerel (east) SFRs and significant quota holdings in the western zone.
Mr Les Scott
Managing Director Fishing Company - potential conflict of interest with a number of agenda
items. No litigation between his company and AFMA.
Managers a Partnership which holds a Jack Mackerel endorsement
Mr Anissa Lawrence
Consultant
Co-investigator (conservation advisor) in the hook trial design project. Undertakes contracts
for a number of Conservation NGOs (with only one currently related to fisheries but in the
Asia Pacific region)
Contracted to the MSC – outreach management training
Mr Malcolm Poole
Chairman - Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW
Member – New South Wales Maritime Ministerial Advisory Council
Mr Jeff Moore
Employed by GABIA, CFA Board member.
Interest in the condition on SPF concessions which requires operators wishing to mid-water
trawl in the waters of the GABTF to have a GABTF Boat SFR attached to their SPF package.
Mr Anthony de Fries (EO)
No pecuniary interest. Fisheries consultant.
Observers
Mr George Day
Manager Small Pelagic Fishery. No pecuniary interest.
Mr Graham Pike
SPF RAG recreational member
Assoc Prof Tim Ward
SPF RAG member and Acting RAG Chair, Science Leader Fisheries Program within SARDI
Aquatic Sciences. Involvement and interest in research projects for a range of fisheries
Ms Yvonne Zunic
Employee of AFMA.
Submissions (not present in teleconference)
Mr Sandy Morison1
Mr Philios Toumazos
1
SESSF RAG Chair. Slope and DeepRAG Chair. Interest in fisheries research projects.
1
Gillnet sector permits. Shark quota holder
Declarations as provided to South East MAC 8 on 30 January 2012
South East MAC - Teleconference 26 March 2011
8 of 8