The below letter was provided to Mr Richard Baines in response to his reporting Calls for long-term plan to protect threatened species from commercial fishing. In response to an enquiry from Mr Baines of 7 October 2015 AFMA corrected inaccurate information that he had provided to AFMA. This information has been publicly available on AFMA’s website since August 2015.
**************
Dear Richard
There are a number of inaccuracies in your reporting (both online and broadcast) Calls for long-term plan to protect threatened species form commercial fishing of 11 and 12 October 2015.
Firstly, there are allegations made that there have been deliberate omissions by AFMA on information regarding protected species mortalities in the Small Pelagic Fishery (SPF). This is incorrect. From time to time AFMA provides public information about management actions taken to address specific bycatch events, as was the case with the initial trips by the Geelong Star. All information provided by AFMA regarding management changes in response to particular bycatch events of the Geelong Star has been accurate and up-to-date at the time of reporting.
More usually however, bycatch management is just part of AFMA’s regular business and information on bycatch is provided on a routine basis via AFMA’s website. Monitoring of bycatch is a central component of overall management and to that end, I note that that AFMA’s monitoring of the Geelong Star far exceeds that of any other Australian fishery, commercial or recreational.
On a quarterly basis AFMA publishes on our website summaries of all threatened, endangered and protected species interactions from the more than 300 vessels operating in Commonwealth fisheries. This report is also provided to the Department of the Environment. The report for the quarter 1 April – 30 June 2015 has been on AFMA’s website since August 2015.
Secondly, your reporting implies that there is no long-term strategy to manage bycatch. The Commonwealth Policy on Fisheries Bycatch is in place to ensure that direct and indirect impacts on the marine environment are taken into account and managed accordingly. AFMA has taken specific action under the policy to implement comprehensive Ecological Risk Assessments and Bycatch Action Plans in our fisheries, including the SPF.
As was stated in our response to you of 9 October 2015, each Commonwealth fishery has in place a range of strict requirements to minimise the risk of bycatch. This includes the SPF. In correspondence to you of 23 June 2015, you were provided with examples of the strict bycatch requirements by vessels mid-water trawling in the SPF, including the Vessel Management Plan. Again this material is all publicly available on our website.
The Australian Government has implemented a number of National Plans of Action, such as the National Recovery Plan for Threatened Albatrosses and Giant Petrels, and is a participating member of International Plans of Action for particular species, such as the International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks. There are also specific long-term plans under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) to address certain groups of protected species, for example the Threat Abatement Plan for Seabirds. Information on these and other specific arrangements is again readily available on AFMA’s website and has been for many years.
Furthermore, all Commonwealth fishing operations are accredited under the EPBC Act. Part of this accreditation is the requirement to monitor, mitigate and report any interactions with protected species. Accreditations are subject to regular re-assessment.
Thirdly, your broadcast reporting grossly overstates the number of marine mammal mortalities reported in the Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery (ETBF). In this reporting you state that 776 mammals were killed in 2012, 414 in 2014 and 515 in 2015 respectively. In fact, the actual number of reported marine mammal mortalities was 0 in each of the three years of 2012, 2014 and 2015 and two in 2013. Your claim that 26 protected species were killed in the mid-water trawl sector of the SPF in 2014-15 is also incorrect and misleading. In 2014-15, 26 individual animals of four protected species were killed.
Good fisheries management is based on best available science, risk based regulation and management, comprehensive monitoring of fishing operations, and strict compliance and enforcement. The success of AFMA and Australia’s fisheries management is evident with various reports ranking Australia amongst the top countries in the world for fisheries sustainability. Given this, the inaccuracies and apparent ongoing bias in your reporting of this issue is very concerning.
Kind regards
Dr James Findlay
CEO
14 October 2015