ISBN 978-1-921192-58-6
Wildlife bycatch management in Commonwealth fisheries1
Bensley, N, Stobutzki, I, Woodhams, J and Mooney, C 2010, Review of wildlife bycatch management in Commonwealth fisheries, BRS report prepared for the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry, Fisheries Policy Branch, Canberra, July.
© Commonwealth of Australia 2010
This work is copyright. The Copyright Act 1968 permits fair dealing for study, research, news reporting, criticism or review. Selected passages, tables or diagrams may be reproduced for such purposes provided acknowledgment of the source is included. Major extracts or the entire document may not be reproduced by any process without the written permission of the Executive Director, BRS.
The Australian Government acting through the Bureau of Rural Sciences has exercised due care and skill in the preparation and compilation of the information and data set out in this publication. Notwithstanding, the Bureau of Rural Sciences, its employees and advisers disclaim all liability, including liability for negligence, for any loss, damage, injury, expense or cost incurred by any person as a result of accessing, using or relying upon any of the information or data set out in this publication to the maximum extent permitted by law.
Postal address:
Bureau of Rural Sciences
GPO Box 858
Canberra, ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6272 2010
Fax: +61 2 6272 2001
Email:
Web:
Summary
The DAFF-NHT project
This review was part of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) National Heritage Trust funded project An integrated approach to wildlife bycatch: addressing key issues to progress the implementation of national plans of action. The overarching project’s aim was to examine key wildlife bycatch issues and recommend how current bycatch legislation and policy could be applied more effectively and strategically.
Wildlife bycatch
Bycatch is the incidental capture of non-target species by fisheries. Wildlife bycatch refers more specifically to the incidental capture by fisheries, of charismatic fauna such as marine mammals, marine turtles, seabirds and some sharks. Many of these species are protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). Over the past two decades there has been increasing expectations from the general public, markets and consumers regarding bycatch management and the environmental stewardship of fisheries.
While there have been some significant changes in the way bycatch is managed, there is ongoing concern over the effectiveness and whether the relevant legislative, policy and management frameworks have achieved their aspirations.
Aims of the review
This review examined the key legislation, policy and management instruments relevant to wildlife bycatch in Commonwealth fisheries, their inter-relationships and their implementation. Based on this, recommendations were developed to improve the implementation and effectiveness of these instruments. The review also provides background information to assist policy makers, managers and other stakeholders understand the Australian Government’s wildlife bycatch management initiatives.
Legislation and policy
The key agencies involved in bycatch management are DAFF, the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) and the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA).
The Fisheries Management Act 1991 (FM Act) and EPBC Act are the key legislation that establish the objectives and obligations for fisheries with respect to wildlife bycatch. There is no prioritisation between the legislative objectives related to bycatch, and other objectives, for example those related to target species. It is through this legislation that Australia also enacts its international obligations with respect to bycatch.
Since the early 1990s, a substantial policy base has been established for bycatch management, in both fisheries and environmental arenas. These policies articulate the legislative obligations with respect to bycatch which then need to be affected by AFMA, through fishery management plans and arrangements. The key fisheries policy document is the Commonwealth Policy on Fisheries Bycatch (2000) (referred to as the Commonwealth Bycatch Policy), which identifies fishery-specific Bycatch Action Plans (BAPs) as the primary implementation tool.
Management framework
AFMA’s management framework recognises the need to address bycatch issues in Commonwealth fisheries, particularly with the move to ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM). Through its processes, AFMA provides clear points for engagement with the fishing industry and other stakeholders and the formulation of scientific advice. However, the relative resources invested suggest a lower prioritisation of bycatch and environmental issues in comparison to target species management.
Bycatch Action Plans
The introduction of BAPs contributed to raising awareness of the need to manage bycatch. However, their effectiveness in improving bycatch management and delivering outcomes such as minimising bycatch and reducing interactions with protected species has been limited. The effectiveness of the BAPs has been constrained by the lack of clear actions, priorities, resource allocation, performance assessment and stakeholder support.
New Work Plan approach
In 2007, AFMA moved to implementing Bycatch and Discarding Work Plans as the key tool to implement the Commonwealth Policy on Fisheries Bycatch and overarching legislative objectives. The new process should learn from the BAPs, particularly in terms of developing actions that are prioritised and achievable within the required timeframe. The actions also need to be appropriately resourced, measurable and accountable. Elements of the work plans are consistent with this; however, the monitoring and evaluation framework is unclear.
Challenges
There is a long standing legislative and policy mandate to manage impacts on wildlife bycatch and there has been increased awareness of bycatch issues within management and industry. However, some key challenges remain, including:
- Better defining and obtaining stakeholder support for what are acceptable fisheries impacts.
- The development of monitoring and reporting systems capable of detecting fisheries impacts and demonstrating improvement.
- The development of predefined and transparent species- and fishery-specific reference points and decision rules.
- Improved performance reporting with a focus on the development of quantitative measures of performance against the objectives.
These are not new challenges or requirements, yet they persist as unresolved issues.
Recommendations
- Strengthen the inter-agency approach to wildlife bycatch management
Greater communication and collaboration is required across the three key agencies (DAFF, AFMA and DEWHA) to identify key issues and priorities and ensure the most effective investment of limited resources. The formation of a dedicated inter-agency bycatch working group could assist in developing a more collaborative approach, facilitate cost-effective access to expertise and streamline inter-agency consultation.
- Streamline bycatch work plans and increase accountability for the delivery of outcomes
To ensure the new Bycatch and Discarding Work Plans are effective they need to focus on explicit priority actions that can be achieved in a reasonable timeframe. Actions need to be well defined, outcome-focused and measurable. Priority must be given to allocating resources when the work plans are developed.
- Develop reference points and management decision rules
A more targeted and transparent process including reference points and decision rules for bycatch management would support priority-setting, stakeholder engagement and decision-making. This should also include benchmarking and performance assessment as key mechanisms for demonstrating the effectiveness of management approaches.
- Review the Commonwealth Policy on Fishery Bycatch
There would be value in reviewing the Commonwealth Bycatch Policy (2000) against its objectives and with regard to its relevance in the current management environment and the Australian Government’s commitment to EBFM.
Table of contents
Summary
The DAFF-NHT project
Wildlife bycatch
Aims of the review
Legislation and policy
Management framework
Bycatch Action Plans
New Work Plan approach
Challenges
Recommendations
Table of contents
Table of tables
Table of figures
Table of boxes...... vii
1. Introduction
1.1 Objectives
2. Defining bycatch
3. Legislative Framework
3.1 Fisheries Management Act 1991
3.2 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
3.3 Summary
4. Policy Framework
4.1 National Strategy on Ecologically Sustainable Development 1992
4.2 National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia's Biological Diversity 1996
4.3 Australia’s Oceans Policy 1998
4.4 National Policy on Fisheries Bycatch 1999
4.5 Commonwealth Policy on Fisheries Bycatch 2000
4.6 National Plans of Action: sharks and seabirds
4.7 Ministerial Direction 2005
4.8 National Strategy to Address Interactions between Humans and Seals 2007
4.9 Summary
5. Management Framework
5.1 Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
5.2 Australian Fisheries Management Authority
5.3 Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts
5.4 Summary
6. Bycatch Action Plans
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Summary of case studies
6.3 General implementation issues
6.4 Bycatch and Discarding Work Plans
7. Discussion
7.1 Recommendations
Acronyms
References
Table of tables
Table 1. Species and threshold for which AFMA will provide an interaction triggered report
Table 2. Relevant EPBC Act Recovery Plans and Threat Abatement Plans
Table 3. Relevant EPBC Act listed key threatening processes
Table 4. Introduction and review of two-year Bycatch Action Plans
Table of figures
Figure 1. Legislative framework: the dashed line represents specific EPBC Act requirements in management plans and subsequently Bycatch and Discarding Work Plans
Figure 2. AFMA’s Ecological Risk Management Framework (AFMA 2007; adapted from AFMA’s diagram)
Figure 3. Logic model framework showing examples of the correct usage of the various elements of the framework (adapted from McCawley, 1997). Note: an evaluation step features in each element of the framework including measures of both process and outcome indicators
Wildlife bycatch management in Commonwealth fisheries1
Table of boxes
Box 1. Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery Management Plan 2005—specific ecosystem requirements
Box 2. Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery Management Plan 2005—obligations of holders of SFRs
Box 3. Principle 2 and Objective 2 of the Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries
1. Introduction
In 2006, the Bureau of Rural Sciences (BRS) commenced the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) – Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) project An integrated approach to wildlife bycatch: addressing key issues to progress the implementation of national plans of action. The overarching aims were to examine key wildlife bycatch issues and recommend how current bycatch policy and legislation may be applied more effectively and strategically.
This review represents one activity within this broad project and aims to identify opportunities to improve wildlife bycatch management by recommending improvements to the current bycatch management arrangements.
Fisheries bycatch generally refers to the incidental capture of non-target species. The term ‘wildlife bycatch’ refers more specifically to the incidental capture of charismatic fauna such as marine mammals, marine turtles, seabirds and some sharks. Many of these are threatened, endangered or protected (TEP) species under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). While bycatch is inevitable in most fisheries, the species of wildlife bycatch and the type and frequency of interactions varies greatly with each fishery, fishing method and the time and area fished.
There are legislative, policy and management requirements placed on fishers, government agencies, and the general community to protect wildlife from unacceptable and unsustainable fishing impacts. For Commonwealth fisheries, ensuring these requirements are met is a shared responsibility between DAFF, the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA)[1] and the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA). These agencies have different overarching objectives, however, desired wildlife bycatch management outcomes are similar: mitigate or at least minimise fishery interactions and, where necessary, facilitate the recovery of populations and meet any legislative requirements.
Internationally there is also an increasing number of conventions and agreements that explicitly recognise the need to manage the broader environmental impacts of fishing, including bycatch (e.g. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (UNCLOS), Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS)). As a signatory, Australia has obligations under these international instruments and is accountable to fulfil these.
Managing wildlife bycatch can add significant direct costs to fishing operations, however, there are incentives for industry. Bycatch management and environmental credentials are playing an increasing role in market access, wholesaler and retailer support and consumer choice. There is an increasing focus on the environmental certification of products to assist retailers and consumers. The expectations of the general public and environmental non-government organisations (ENGOs) in terms of stewardship and conservation of Australia’s oceans have also grown. This has lead to greater scrutiny of government policy and management arrangements and the fishing industry to demonstrate its environmental sustainability. Where bycatch management has obvious benefits to fishers, the fishing sector has proven itself to be one of the most innovative and adaptive industries known. However, where wildlife bycatch management costs appear to outweigh the direct benefits it can increase resistance to adapt (Bache, 2003).
In 2000, the Australian Government recognised the need for a more strategic approach to bycatch management by introducing the Commonwealth Policy on Fisheries Bycatch (hereafter referred to as the Commonwealth Bycatch Policy). The Commonwealth Bycatch Policy recognises that fishery-specific actions are required to reflect the needs of the particular bycatch issues and fishery. However, the policy seeks to provide an overarching structure to guide implementation and ensure consistency across fisheries. DAFF administers the policy and AFMA is responsible for its implementation (DAFF 2003).
In the nine years since the introduction of the Commonwealth Bycatch Policy there have been some significant changes in the way bycatch is managed in Commonwealth fisheries. In particular, Bycatch Action Plans (BAPs), (now Bycatch and Discarding Work Plans), have been incorporated into statutory fishery management plans. There has been documented progress in addressing some species-specific issues (e.g. turtle bycatch in the Northern Prawn Fishery (Brewer et al 2006), seabird bycatch in the Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery (Baker and Finley 2010)). However, there has been little in the way of a review of the effectiveness of these arrangements. While there has been an investment in policy development and management frameworks, concerns have been raised by managers and stakeholders (e.g. ENGOs) about whether the legislative, policy and management frameworks have achieved their aspirations.
1.1 Objectives
The review aims to:
- Identify the key legislation, policy and management instruments relevant to wildlife bycatch, their inter-relationships and their implementation.
- Provide recommendations to improve the design and implementation of instruments, to increase their effectiveness.
The review should serve as a useful background document to assist policy-makers, managers and other stakeholders understand the principal wildlife bycatch management initiatives established by the Australian Government.
The review focuses on Commonwealth fisheries, however, some of the instruments discussed apply to all jurisdictions and some of the issues and recommendations could also be considered by state/territory agencies. Similarly, while focused on wildlife bycatch, some recommendations may also assist in increasing the effectiveness of management of other bycatch species.
2. Defining bycatch
The Commonwealth Bycatch Policy includes a definition of bycatch to support implementation of the policy:
- That part of a fisher’s catch which is returned to the sea either because it has no commercial value or because regulations preclude it being retained.
- That part of the ‘catch’ that does not reach the deck of the fishing vessel but is affected by interaction with the fishing gear.
An important distinction is that byproduct species (defined as ‘…unintended catch [that] may be kept or sold by the fisher’) and discards (defined as ‘unintended catch…returned to the sea’) are not considered as bycatch for the purposes of the policy. The term ‘interaction’ is not defined in the Commonwealth Bycatch Policy.
Definitions of bycatch vary widely and the term is often used interchangeably with similar terms such as ‘incidental take’ or ‘incidental catch’, and ‘non-target’. The Fisheries Management Act 1991 (FM Act) uses the terms ‘incidental catch’, ‘by-catch’ and ‘non-target’, however, they are not further defined by the Act.
There is no specific mention of the term bycatch or an analogous term in the EPBC Act. However, the associated Guidelines for the Ecologically Sustainable Management of Fisheries include the definition:
Bycatch—species that are discarded from the catch or retained for scientific purposes, and that part of the “catch” that is not landed but is killed as a result of interaction with fishing gear. This includes discards of commercially valuable species.
This differs from the Commonwealth Bycatch Policy in that it includes catch of commercially valuable species that is discarded and excludes species that are ‘…affected by interaction with the fishing gear’ but not killed. What constitutes ‘affected’ and ‘interaction’ is not further defined.
The various applications of the term ‘bycatch’ in the principle legislation and some policies have given rise to a number of operational definitions. Currently, there are at least three different definitions of bycatch applied in a range of policy and management instruments. Definitions also differ between specific fishery management plans.
When industry and management are developing strategies to address bycatch issues, the correct use of definitions is essential when setting objectives, when conducting assessments against performance measures, and during the development of decision rules, compliance programs and management strategies. The terminology needs to be consistent across the policy and management instruments, compatible with common use and have practical application. The current suite of definitions is overly complex which increases the likelihood that definitions may be applied incorrectly.