2021 State of the Environment Report Marine Chapter – Expert Assessment – Management Effectiveness – Recreational fishing

Researchers: Emma Flukes (Point of contact) ,  Lyle, Jeremy (Author) ,  Lyle, Jeremy, Dr (Author) ,  Lyle, Jeremy, Dr (Author) ,  Lynch, Tim (Author)
View all 10 related researchers

Brief description The Marine chapter of the 2021 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of Management – Recreational fishing". ***A PDF of the full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided) is downloadable in the "On-line Resources" section of this record as "EXPERT ASSESSMENT 2021 - Effectiveness of Management - Recreational Fishing"*** ---------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROACH TO MANAGING THE PRESSURE In Australia, participation in the recreational sector is high by global levels (Hyder et al., 2018) and complex. Fishers target highly diverse but low productivity ecosystems, which lead to variable catches of many species. For some species, the proportion of the catch taken by recreational fishers can be large, at times rivalling or exceeding the harvest from commercial fisheries (Henry and Lyle, 2003; Brown, 2016; van Putten et al., 2017). The intensity of recreational fishing activities can therefore pose a threat to both stocks and marine biodiversity, at least at a local scales (Stuart-Smith et al., 2008; Edgar et al., 2018; Little et al., 2019). It should be noted, however, that recreational fishing can also have positive socio-economic roles, creating significant economic activity, playing an important social role for coastal communities and providing nutrition (Pascoe et al., 2014; Griffiths et al., 2017; Cooke et al., 2018). Regulatory responsibilities for Australian fisheries are shared between the Australian Commonwealth Government and the governments of each state or territory. States manage recreational fisheries but are required to adhere to State or Commonwealth regulations as they apply to access and prohibitions such as “no take” reserves for biodiversity conservation such as National Park or Sanctuary Zones in Marine Parks. Marine recreational fishery catch, is solely managed by the states, even when occurring in Commonwealth waters, and are regulated through a combination of input and output controls as well as licensing and spatial and temporal access controls (Lynch et al., 2019). Recreational fisheries management typically relies on output controls, mainly possession and size limits to reduce potential overharvest and protect spawning biomass. There are also examples of input controls, such as closed seasons, gear restrictions and gear exclusions. Spatial and/or temporal closures are also used to protect spawning events, rebuild stocks, limit impacts in sensitive area or life history stages. Closures are also used in marine reserves and parks for the conservation of biodiversity. Recreational fisheries assessments are conducted by all states and territories across Australia. Assessments include telephone–diary surveys, which provide catch and effort estimates at broad spatial (state-wide, regional) and temporal (annual, seasonal) scales (Table 1). Smaller-scale, targeted research that includes onsite roving, progressive counts, and access-point surveys are also undertaken to deal with complexity and meet legislated requirements for particular fishery performance and resource allocation (Smallwood et al., 2012; Wise et al., 2012; Lynch, 2014; Ochwada-Doyle et al., 2014; Wood et al., 2016; Lynch et al., 2020). While there is growing professional regional cooperation and coordination between Australia’s recreational fishery scientists, through workshops and collaborations, surveys are not synchronized or aligned temporally between states (Table 1). Surveys are expensive and, between jurisdictions, there are varying gaps in time series continuity between repeat surveys. While basic methodologies for each of the state-wide surveys are similar, there are also some differences, such as the sampling frames used (telephone number lists vs fishing licence) and survey scope (e.g. coverage of interstate fishers, replication). Ultimately, the objectives, scale and resources available to individual states across Australia’s federal system are what drives survey design and frequency. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT Synthesis of literature published in the last 5 years and expert knowledge of the assessment authors. ---------------------------------------- 2021 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Approach • Assessment grade: Partially effective Assessment trend: Improving Confidence grade: Adequate Confidence trend: Adequate Comparability with 2016: Somewhat comparable • Outputs • Assessment grade: Partially effective Assessment trend: Improving Confidence grade: Adequate Confidence trend: Adequate Comparability with 2016: Comparable • Outcomes • Assessment grade: Partially effective Assessment trend: Unclear Confidence grade: Adequate Confidence trend: Adequate Comparability with 2016: Comparable ---------------------------------------- CHANGES SINCE 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT Consistent with 2016 assessment.

Lineage Statement: QUALITY OF DATA USED IN THE ASSESSMENT not supplied

Lineage

162.42188,-7.20703 162.42188,-47.46094 102.65625,-47.46094 102.65625,-7.20703 162.42188,-7.20703

132.5390625,-27.333984375

text: westlimit=102.65625000000001; southlimit=-47.4609375; eastlimit=162.421875; northlimit=-7.207031249999999