Northern Prawn Fishery
Northern Prawn Fishery Management Advisory Committee (NORMAC)
NORMAC 47 Chair's summary
25 March 2000
The main items discussed at NORMAC 47 were the status of the NPF amendment on the gear units/effort reduction package including the recommendations in the report of the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Legislation Committee on the NPF Amendment; correspondence from Minister Truss in relation to the recommendations of the Senate Committee and future management of the NPF; and the most appropriate process for developing the long term strategic plan for the NPF. Other issues included an update on the NPF Strategic Plan 1996-2001, reports from the Research and Environmental sub-committee, the management costs sub-committee, the TED/BRD sub-committee and the NORMAC Closures sub-committee; and native title issues.
Update on gear units/effort reduction
AFMA management provided a progress report on the implementation of the gear units/effort reduction package, advising that the provisional grant of gear units had occurred. NORMAC noted that two disallowance motions had been tabled by the Senate, one by the Regulations and Ordinances Committee which had since been withdrawn, and one by Senator Harris, a One Nation Senator from Queensland. AFMA Management advised that until the Senate disallowance process and timeframe was completed, AFMA could not provide any further advice as to the implementation time for the gear units/effort reduction package but indicated that the target date was still the commencement of the 2000 tiger prawn season.
NORMAC noted the report of the review of the NPF Amendment by the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee had been handed down on 8 March 2000. NORMAC noted that the Senate Committee had supported the NPF amendment and the one for one translation from A units to gear SFRs, but had made a number of recommendations in its report and that Minister Truss was seeking advice form NORMAC and AFMA on how and when the committee’s recommendations would be progressed.
NORMAC 47 considered a number of issues raised by Minister Truss in his correspondence of 4 November 1999 accompanying his advice that the NPF amendment had been accepted. Minister Truss stated that in accepting the NPF Amendment, he requested NORMAC and NPF industry to address a number of issues relating to the need for further adjustment in the fishery and the long term management of the fishery. In summary these were:
- the need for industry and NORMAC to consider further timely measures to ensure the sustainability of tiger prawns in the future
- the need for industry and NORMAC to prepare a long term strategic plan which includes future management actions to be taken in response to increases in effort
- the need to ensure that cooperation and consensus drive future management arrangements
- the need for consideration of alternative methods of managing effort in the future including the use of time units; ways of increasing interaction between scientists and industry to foster stronger linkages; close attention to reducing bycatch; and current industry membership on NPF committees
- industry to consider establishing its own fund to buy out excess capacity, particularly when top ups expire
NORMAC noted that the Minister’s request that NORMAC develop a long term strategic plan was in accord with its (NORMAC’s) decision to review the current NPF Strategic Plan (1996- 2001) and to determine the research and management priorities for the fishery for the next 5 years. NORMAC members agreed that it would streamline the process if the NORMAC review, and the review requested by the Minister was undertaken as one process, and that this would also provide an effective forum for NPF SFR holders to consider the recommendations of the Senate Standing Committee. NORMAC agreed the review should be conducted over the next twelve months with a view to finalising the review and reporting to the AFMA Board in February/March 2001.
NORMAC noted that Minister proposed that the matters he raised and the recommendations of the Senate committee be referred to a working group with broad industry representation and chaired by an independent facilitator for consideration. However NORMAC was of the view that if broad industry support and ownership was to be obtained on the outcome of the review, all NPF SFR holders should be consulted, and that the most appropriate and effective process for doing this was through a serious of workshops and meetings involving NPF industry, researchers, managers and NORMAC members.
NORMAC noted that previous NPF workshops, held in working group format and chaired by an independent facilitator, had provided an excellent forum for obtaining broad industry views on research and management issues in the past. NORMAC therefore recommended that the first step in the review process should be a workshop to be held in Cairns in June 2000 and attended by SFR holders, researchers, managers and other interested stakeholders. Topics for the workshop would include the issues raised by the Minister, the Senate Committee recommendations and other issues relevant to the review of the NPF Strategic Plan such as research priorities for the future.
The broad outcomes of the working group discussions would be presented during the summary of proceedings at the conclusion of the June workshop, with a more detailed analysis of each working group report being undertaken following the workshop. This analysis would form the basis for future discussions on the issues.
It was proposed that the workshop would be immediately followed by a meeting of the new NORMAC (to be appointed in May) where the broad outcomes of the workshop would be discussed; another NORMAC meeting in November 2000 at which time the analysis of each working group report would be available; with a second workshop, again chaired by the independent facilitator and conducted in working group format, to be held in February 2001 at which the strategic direction recommended by NORMAC as a result of the outcomes of the previous workshop/meetings would be considered.
NORMAC recommended that a steering committee be formed to prepare the workshop agendas and background and issues papers for discussion at the workshops. NORMAC agreed that the steering committee would identify an appropriate independent facilitator to chair the workshops and the committee would liaise with the independent facilitator of the workshops as required. NORMAC resolved that the steering committee would draw up terms of reference to ensure all relevant issues were covered and that the membership of the committee should comprise the NORMAC Chairperson, AFMA Manager, NORMAC EO, Iain Smith, Theresa Lowe, Efrem Gamba, David Carter, Cathy Dichmont and Eddie Hegerl
NORMAC resolved that the AFMA Managing Director consult with the Minister’s office on the recommendations of NORMAC 47 in relation to the development of the long term management strategy for the NPF as outlined above.
At the Ministers request, NORMAC considered its response to the 9 recommendations made the Senate committee, noting that Minister Truss would be writing separately with regard to recommendations 2 and 9 (c). In developing its views on the recommendations, NORMAC took the approach that the NORMAC review of the long term strategic plan; the review requested by the Minister; and the consideration of the recommendations of the Senate Standing Committee by NPF industry would be undertaken as one process as outlined earlier in this report. I have summarised NORMAC’s initial response to the Senate committee’s recommendations in a separate attachment (Attachment 1) for your information.
NORMAC Membership
NORMAC noted advice from AFMA that the terms of all NORMAC members expire on 14 May 2000. NORMAC has previously advised the Board that its preferred selection process for the appointment of industry members to NORMAC is for the industry members to be nominated through the four NPF industry associations, noting that any SFR holder can nominate themselves for selection.
NORMAC nominated the ASIC Chairperson Mr. Russ Neal as the industry member on the panel to select industry members of NORMAC.
Whilst noting that the appointment of the MAC chairs is an AFMA Board function, NORMAC recommended that the current chairperson, Mr. Brian Jeffriess be reappointed as the chair of NORMAC.
NORMAC resolved that Mr. Eddie Hegerl and Dr. Burke Hill should be invited to apply for nomination to NORMAC as the conservation and research members of NORMAC. In the event that Dr. Hill did not seek reappointment to NORMAC, it was resolved that AFMA would call on research agencies to provide nominations for the research member.
NORMAC noted that AFMA would nominate the NPF manager, Trysh Stone to replace Frank Meere as the AFMA member on NORMAC.
NORMAC discussed whether the process of allowing advisers to continue to attend and participate in NORMAC meetings would continue when the new NORMAC was appointed. The Chairman advised that he considered the involvement of advisers to be highly productive as it added another dimension of expertise and was a useful training ground for potential future MAC members, and that in his view advisers should be incorporated into other MACs. The AFMA member indicated that whilst there was no provision for advisers under the legislation or in the MAC policy paper, he was not concerned with the inclusion of advisers in MAC meetings provided it was clearly understood that members were appointed for their personal expertise, not as representatives of any sectoral interest group, and were not accountable to advisers for decisions taken by the MAC.
Research and Environment
NORMAC received a report from the NORMAC Research and Environment sub-committee which included items on by catch issues, TEDs and BRDs, heavy metal monitoring, MPA’s and research priorities.
NORMAC noted the results of the CSIRO study into sustainability of bycatch indicate that the approach recommended by EA for monitoring of species that are rare and at risk will probably not be feasible in the NPF as the species most at risk are all rare. It was noted that monitoring of rare species is difficult and expensive, with over 4000 samples needing to be analysed to detect a 50% change in the numbers of a rare species. NORMAC resolved to appoint a special Bycatch Action Plan Working Group to address the identification and feasibility of indicators for monitoring bycatch in the NPF.
NORMAC noted that the Research and Environment subcommittee had reviewed the comments made by Minister Truss and the Senate committee recommendations relation to research matters, including improving relations between researchers and industry. NORMAC noted that AMC and CSIRO have submitted a proposal to FRDC for a TEDs/BRD bycatch monitoring project and that if funds are granted, this project will provide information that can be used to decide where to put resources for further reduction in bycatch. NORMAC endorsed the recommendations of the sub-committee on greater industry participation in the workings of the Research and Environment Subcommittee; the reintroduction of the pre-season workshop when the strategic review has been completed, the use of AFMA News as a means of making research results available to fishers; and inclusion in the AFMA web page of a list of research papers (including unpublished reports) relevant to the NPF with abstracts where possible.
NORMAC noted that the sub-committee welcomed the Senate Committee proposal for more research assistance but were concerned that assistance as recommended by the Senate committee would be restricted to one vessel. NORMAC noted its previous position of not supporting research in which the vessel skipper or owner has a financial interest in the catch. NORMAC supported the sub-committees preference for a fund to be established to support vessel based research. NORMAC noted the Subcommittee view that NPF research strategy should be based on the future directions of the fishery and that future needs were divided into three broad categories being assessment issues, the need to meet standards for the operation of the fishery, and environmental issues. It was agreed these issues should be considered as part of the NPF strategic review.
NORMAC noted developments in relation to the draft criteria for conducting fisheries assessments under the Wildlife Protection Act 1982, the outcome of the road tests and the advice that the NPF achieved the second highest ranking in the NPF road test. AFMA Management provided advice on the ESD indicators being developed by the Standing committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture; the certification of Western Australian rock lobster fishery by the Marine Stewardship Council; and the establishment of the Oceans Policy office in Tasmania.
NORMAC noted a report from the TED/BRD sub-committee including the proposed process for obtaining scientific permits in the future to trial devices which are outside the legal specifications. NORMAC rejected a proposal for an exemption from the TED/BRD regulations in the scampi fishery and requested more information be provided on the matter.
NPFAG
Dr. Cathy Dichmont provided NORMAC with a draft report on the status of NPF stocks for 1999. Dr. Dichmont advised effective fishing effort on grooved tiger prawns had decreased by approximately 15% and effective fishing effort on brown tiger prawns had decreased by approximately 40% compared with 1998. This was largely due to the decrease of 5240 boat days compared to 1998 and movement of effort from the tiger prawn fisheries to the banana and other fisheries in 1999. It was noted that effective catch per unit effort for both species declined between 1998 and 1999 and was below the average of the last 7 years.
NORMAC noted that according to the assessment carried out with the model of Wang and Die (1996) the recruitment of brown and grooved tiger prawns in 1999 declined from 1998 by 9% and 11% respectively. The present spawning stock in late 1998/early 1999 decreased by 2.5% for brown tigers but increased by 26% for grooved tiger prawns from the previous year.
NORMAC noted that spawning stock levels for both tiger prawn species as at the end of 19999 are below the target levels of Smsy (brown 63% and grooved 82%) and that both tiger prawn stocks Smsy requires effort of Emsy or less along with average recruitment. NORMAC noted that the lower the level of effort the faster rebuilding of stocks will occur. NORMAC agreed that NORMAC needs to determine the appropriate long term target of fishing effort, noting that under the precautionary principle, it would be inappropriate for the target to be more than Emsy.
The draft NPFAG report noted that the relatively poor performance of the rainfall model used to predict banana prawn catches in the Karumba region has caused concern and there is a possibility that the NPF banana prawn recruitment may be determined by factors other than rainfall. Among the possible factors is the possibility of an underlying stock recruitment relationship which has not get been determined, increased predation and other environmental factors. NORMAC noted that an FRDC funded project is investigating the possibility of factors other than rainfall affecting banana prawn recruitment and that a draft report of the project should be available towards the end of 2000.
Management Costs
NORMAC considered a report from the NORMAC Management Costs sub-committee on the draft NPF budget, including the 2000/2001 budget for NORMAC and the contract for the NORMAC executive officer. NORMAC noted that the draft NORMAC budget provided for industry workshops which may need to be reviewed when the final process for undertaking the NPF strategic review is agreed upon.
NORMAC noted that under the proposed budget, NPF logbook program costs had increased by 10% but the proposed level of services had decreased. AFMA reported that the budget had been prepared on a project management basis and felt that this more accurately reflected the amount of work that was undertaken on the NPF Logbook function. NORMAC expressed concern about the high percentage of "generic" work attributed to the NPF.
NORMAC noted that a proposal to outsource the NPF log book program had been received by the Costs committee from an ex-AFMA employee who has been responsible for the NPF logbook program. It was noted that out-sourcing of the Cairns component of the logbook program had been raised consistently for several years and that despite a commitment from AFMA to out-source the project by the end of 1999/2000 this had yet to be achieved. It was noted that AFMA will proceed to market testing for the position in the coming months.
NORMAC noted the initial submission from SIDCS offered more services for a lower cost but that issues such as data security and confidentiality would need to be addressed. However it was considered these issues could be adequately deal with through a contractual arrangement similar to research projects. NORMAC recommended that AFMA investigate the option of outsourcing the NPF log book program and the submission from SIDCS with a view to implementation for 2000/2001, noting that the SIDCS submission also included the potential for extension (education etc) work in the fishery.
NORMAC endorsed the draft compliance budget but noted that the budget was based on the current Compliance Operational Plan which is to be reviewed at the end of the 2000 fishing year and which could result in further savings
NORMAC noted that the VAS loan had been paid out and recommended that there be one levy collection annually in December. It was noted that this would need to be reviewed if there was a requirement to collect funds for an industry funded research vessel or industry funded buy back scheme.
Closures Sub-committee Report
NORMAC considered a number of issues which had not been resolved out of session in relation to the area closures within the NPF. These included changes to the assembly area in the southern gulf of Carpentaria, and changes to the Weipa and other area closures. The details of the agreed changes to these closures will be included in the 2000 NPF Information Booklet and are being circulated under separate cover to all SFR holders and skippers.
Annual Public Meeting
NORMAC 47 was preceded by the Annual Public Meeting of NORMAC which was attended by all NORMAC members, and a number of SFR holders, AFMA staff and other observers.
Page last updated
25 May, 2005
| 
