Thread: super sized trawlers- no thanks!

want to see how big this thing is?
The Vessel | Seafish Pelagic

Originally Posted by weakestlink

https://www.facebook.com/VictorianAn...erTrawlerRally

Care to join a few boats towed from Carrum to Altona on Saturday 1st of September?

The kids and I will be going. I find it amazing we have catch limits to be sustainable in our recreational fishing then see a Dutch mega trawler be allowed to fish in our waters. The fish required to fund the trawlers running costs alone would dwarf all fish caught by recreational fishing children, men and women.

It will be too late to protest if our fish stocks are decimated by this type of fishing trawler. The statement they are doing no harm as they are only targeting bait with the super trawler fish is waffle. Bait fish feed all our larger fish including Bluefin and Yellow fin Tuna, marlin sharks and other and are critical to the ecosystem in our oceans and coastal waters.The Australian waters and the southern oceans are being targeted due to overfishing in the Northern hemisphere. We do not want to follow their path to destruction by allowing super trawlers here or anywhere. ...

Not only in the Northern Hemisphere.

If you want to know what it will be used for see: oceans campaign, global overfishing and realise how inefficient this type of fishing actually is! Also Preventing the collapse of one of the world and http://www.publicintegrity.org/node/7900/

It is not the first time large vessels like this have been hired by local fisheries companies and used in our southern fisheries.

The scientific information that the quotas are based on is reasonably robust despite alternative claims in the media.

Even with this this quota the fish stocks will be taken sustainably. However like all commercial fishing processes there is always the issue of bycatch and this is always a concern - in this part of the world the main issue will be seals but there are means to mitigate this but unfortunately the seals are often too smart for their own good and swim up the holes into nets that are designed to let them out when caught.

Observers will be onboard the vessel to ensure all the rules and laws are followed.

As I indicated large vessels (not as large but not far off) operate in our southern waters on a fairly regular basis.

Garry

The problem with this one is still that the livebait that this vessel is targetting is the food source for large pellagic fish like tuna, marlin, large sharks and mamals like seals and dolphins. There is anecdotal "evidence" that the last time the livebate was fished extensively around Tasmania the tuna numbers dropped significantly.

More than that the tonnage of fish caught by this monster will only produce 1/5 the tonnage of cattle feed to be used in Africa so we are not value adding but producing cheep protein feed at the same time as we potentially reduce the population of high value fish.

The reason the ship is here is because the they have overexploited the resources in other fishing zones.

IMHO, for the 20 or so short term jobs it may create the potential loss in other areas isn't worth it.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

The reason the ship is here is because the they have overexploited the resources in other fishing zones.

Lets not let the facts get in the way of a good story.

The ship is being leased by a Tassie fish company - it will not be operated by some Northern Hemisphere fisheries company.

The impact on the entire environment will have been taken into account. Now the allowable catch in the fishery has been determined - it can be taken by one operator or could be taken by 100 operators - depends on who has the quota - so what is the issue - the total allowable catch or the fact that one ship will take most of it.

Garry

Originally Posted by garrycol

Lets not let the facts get in the way of a good story.

The ship is being leased by a Tassie fish company - it will not be operated by some Northern Hemisphere fisheries company.

...

If this and other European megatrawlers are so good and so safe, why are they no longer allowed to fish in European waters?

In West Africa the small pelagic fish targetted by this megatrawler were decimated, falling 90% in one year of operation of the FV Magrius and other European megatrawlers.

The FV Magrius catches in one day what it takes 56 traditional Mauritanian boats one year to catch. 10 days of the FV Magrius in a fishery could mean 56 crews are out of work for years while the fishery recovers.

Just because Seafish tasmania is applying for the licences, doesn't mean that SeafishTasmania is an Australian Company. In other countries the practice has been for foreign capital, often Chinese and Russian, buy up local fishing companies to acquire the quotas and because of the structure of these companies it is often very difficult to track who actually owns what. Do we actually know who owns Seafish Tasmania?

Originally Posted by garrycol

Lets not let the facts get in the way of a good story.

The ship is being leased by a Tassie fish company - it will not be operated by some Northern Hemisphere fisheries company.
The impact on the entire environment will have been taken into account.
Now the allowable catch in the fishery has been determined - it can be taken by one operator or could be taken by 100 operators - depends on who has the quota - so what is the issue - the total allowable catch or the fact that one ship will take most of it.

Garry

So was the introduction of the cane toad

Some facts

Q. What is the issue?
Seafish Tasmania, a fishing company in the Commonwealth Small Pelagic Fishery (SPF), intends to bring a vessel to fish in the SPF. The vessel is coming from overseas and is larger than other vessels that fish in the Australian fishing zone
Q. How would the boat be allowed to come into Australia?
To fish in Commonwealth waters a boat must meet the definition of an Australian boat under the Fisheries Management Act 1991.
There are a number of steps for the boat to become an Australian boat. These include AFMA declaring the boat to be an Australian boat under the Fisheries Management Act 1991, or the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) registering the boat under the Shipping Registration Act 1981.
Seafish Tasmania has applied to AMSA for Australian registration of the Margiris. AMSA will assess the application in accordance with the Shipping Registration Act 1981.
Q. What is the status of fish stocks in the fishery?
The ABARES Fishery Status Reports 2010 list all stocks of SPF species, except for Redbait west, as ‘not overfished / not subject to overfishing’. Redbait west is assessed as ‘uncertain’ because of limited information available to assess its status. AFMA has implemented a conservative total allowable catch to reflect this uncertainty.
Table 1: Status of the Small Pelagic Fishery stocks from ABARES Status report 2010

Q. How will AFMA limit the amount of fish that can be taken from the fishery?
AFMA sets catch limits for the fishery each year, which are sustainable amounts of fish (by weight) that can be taken from the fishery. The best available science is used to set these limits, and due to the important place of small fish in the food chain, the limits are set at precautionary levels in the SPF. The total allowable catch is divided up between the operators in the form of quota. Operators must inform AFMA of all catch landed and AFMA verifies this information. If operators are found to have caught more than their quota holdings strict penalties apply.
Q. What does AFMA consider in setting catches?
In setting the total allowable catch each year, the AFMA considers advice from the Small Pelagic Fishery Resource Assessment Group (SPFRAG), South East Management Advisory Committee (SEMAC), AFMA Management and other relevant information. Agreement amongst RAG and MAC members is not always unanimous and AFMA takes into consideration all views when making its decisions.
SPFRAG is made up of scientific members and members from fisheries management, industry, states and the environmental and recreational sectors. It provides its advice after considering an annual stock assessment prepared by scientists led by the South Australian Research and Development Institute, catch and effort trends, risks and other relevant factors.
SEMAC includes representatives from AFMA, resource assessment groups, states, industry bodies, scientists and economists. It also has representatives from the environment and recreational sectors. SEMAC considers the recommendations of SPFRAG and makes its own recommendations of total allowable catch to the AFMA Commission.
The SPF Harvest Strategy, in place since 2008, specifies decision rules for setting sustainable catch limits based on the level of information known about the stocks. It uses a three tiered approach which allows higher potential catches where there is a higher level of information known about a stock.
Q. How do SPF catch limits compare?
The catch limits for species in the SPF are all at or below 10 per cent of the estimated spawning fish population. This is low compared to other Commonwealth fisheries, and is also considered conservative when compared to international standards for small pelagic fishes.
Q. What are total allowable catches for the SPF for the current season?
The table below outlines the total allowable catches (TAC) for the current season (1 May 2012 to 30 April 2013) and TACs for last season.
Redbait East8,6006,90010
Table 2: 2011-12 and 2012-13 TAC and estimated proportion of spawning biomass Species TAC (t) 2011-12 TAC (t) 2012-13 % of estimated spawning
biomass in 2012-13 Redbait West 5,000 5,000 7.5 Blue Mackerel East 2,500 2,600 <7.5 Blue Mackerel West 4,200 6,500 7.5 Jack Mackerel East 4,600 10,100 <7.5 Jack Mackerel West 5,000 5,000 7.5 Australian Sardine East 400 200 <7.5
Q. Why did the Jack Mackerel (East) TAC increase for 2012-13?
The TAC was increased because of research, based on surveys conducted in 2002-2004, that was published in 2011. The research indicated Jack Mackerel (East) had a higher spawning biomass than previously thought.
Based on this information, SPFRAG recommended a take of 7.5 per cent of the estimated spawning biomass. This was reduced by 500 tonnes to account for other factors (such as state catches) to give a TAC of 10,100 tonnes.
Q. Do environmental and recreational sectors have a say in the catch limits?
The views of the environmental and recreational sectors were taken into account when developing the SPF Harvest Strategy and setting TACs for SPF species. Environmental and recreational members sit on SPFRAG and SEMAC, which provide advice to the AFMA Commission in relation to SPF catch limits.
Q. Are state issues considered?
State catches are incorporated into the catch setting process. State representatives also attend meetings of SPFRAG and SEMAC to provide advice on state issues.
Q. How is research funded and are there any stock assessments planned for the coming years?
AFMA continues to facilitate the annual stock assessment of this fishery, which is used to assist in making catch limit decisions and is funded by the fishing industry through levies.
There is a proposal for South Australian Research and Development Institute to undertake a daily egg production method survey later this year which would be funded by Seafish Tasmania. The research proposal has been considered by SPFRAG but would not impact on the TAC for 2012-13.
Q. What is the effect of SPF catches on predator species such as tuna?
The SPF Harvest Strategy recognises that small pelagic species are an important component of the wider ecosystem, providing food for a range of species including larger fish, marine mammals and seabirds. Total allowable catch levels for SPF species are set at precautionary levels that take into consideration both the species’ productivity and broader ecosystem impacts.
At the moment, the total available catch in the fishery for all species does not exceed 10 per cent of the estimated spawning fish population and therefore, at least 90 per cent of the fish remain in the ecosystem for predator species.
Q. What will AFMA do to prevent localised depletion?
The annual fishery assessment report, currently undertaken for all SPF stocks, aims to determine the likelihood of localised depletion or change in the size/age structure of the catch that cannot be adequately explained by reasons other than a decline in abundance. Scientific advice suggests that, given the mobile nature of small pelagic species, any localised reductions in abundance less likely in comparison to species that stay in one area.
Quota allocations in the SPF have been divided into east and west zones by a line along 146°30’ East (roughly through the middle of Tasmania). This spreads fishing effort across zones and lowers the risk of localised depletion. In addition, large boats with freezing capacity are not restricted to fishing in areas close to processing facilities, as has historically been the case in the SPF, and so can spread fishing effort over more of the geographical distribution of the stock. The fishery extends from southern Queensland to southern Western Australia as shown in the map below.
The area of the Small Pelagic Fishery
AFMA will be monitoring this issue closely and will address any suspected instances of localised depletion if they arise.
Q. How will the boat be required to minimise bycatch of protected species?
Fishing methods used in the SPF are relatively selective, which means they have comparatively low levels of bycatch.
When requested by AFMA, Commonwealth fishing boats must carry independent AFMA observers to monitor fishing activities and any impact on the marine environment. Observers collect biological data about fish and bycatch, which forms part of the scientific assessment used to decide sustainable catch limits. AFMA will implement high levels of observer coverage on the proposed large freezer boat if it is introduced to the SPF.
Seal excluder devices are required to be used on midwater trawl nets to protect species such as seals and dolphins.
While the risk is not high, AFMA will work with Seafish Tasmania to develop a seabird management plan to minimise seabird interactions. AFMA understands that the proposed freezer boat will be processing whole fish so expects that there will be little offal discharge to attract seabirds.
Q. What monitoring and enforcement powers does AFMA have to deal with fishing operations that break the rules?
All Commonwealth-endorsed fishing vessels (concession holders) are subject to AFMA’s domestic compliance and enforcement programs and monitoring arrangements. The FV Margiris, if permitted to fish in Australian waters, would be subject to these arrangements as is the case with any other Commonwealth-endorsed fishing vessel.
AFMA has in place a range of monitoring programs and technologies which are used to monitor the activity of each of the vessels in the Commonwealth fleet:

• Vessel monitoring systems (VMS) – All Commonwealth-endorsed fishing vessels (including the FV Margiris if it fishes in Australia) are required to fit and maintain a satellite based electronic VMS unit, which reports a vessel’s position to AFMA in near-real time on a regular basis to ensure vessels are not fishing in closed areas.
• Electronic monitoring systems – AFMA has implemented electronic monitoring systems in a number of fisheries. These systems comprise both cameras and sensors which record and monitor all fishing activity.
• Observers – Commonwealth fishing boats must carry independent AFMA observers, when required, in order to monitor fishing activities and any impact on the marine environment. AFMA will implement 100% observer coverage on the FV Margiris, if it is permitted to fish in Australian waters.

AFMA has a program of inspections and at-sea patrols that focus on targeting identified high risk ‘key’ fishing ports, vessels/operators and fish receivers relevant to Commonwealth jurisdiction. These inspections are carried out by uniformed AFMA fisheries officers and are conducted based on risk analysis and relevant intelligence information.
The Fisheries Management Act 1991 and Regulations allow for a range of enforcement measures. These measures can be used in combination or separately depending on the severity of the offence and include:

• Warnings & cautions
• Commonwealth Fisheries Infringement Notices – a $220 “on the spot” fine
• Amendments to fishing concession conditions – to prevent the offence being repeated
• Directions by fisheries officers – such as ordering a vessel to port
• Suspension or cancellation of fishing concessions
• Prosecution – Maximum penalties under the Act which can be imposed by a court include:

- fines up to $55,000 for an individual or $275,000 for a corporation
- forfeiture of vessel, catch and fishing equipment;
- suspension or cancellation of fishing concessions or prohibiting a person from being on a boat either within or outside the AFZ for a period prescribed by the court; and
- up to 12 months imprisonment in the case of obstructing, threatening, assaulting or impersonating an officer.