Original source · versioned page text
2019-07-18 OM Agenda - Item 1 - Attachment 1 - Noosa Fishing Futures
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
Ordinary Meeting Agenda
18 July 2019
Attachment 1 to Item 1
NOOSA FISHING FUTURES
REPORT on OPTIONS for SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT of the NOOSA RIVER,
ESTUARY and BEACHES
MAY 2019
1
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 43 sections
Section 2
CONTENTS
Executive Summary Page 3
Introduction Page 4
An overview of commercial fishing activity in the Noosa waterways, Page 6
Queensland Fisheries data on these fisheries, the regulatory arrangements
and current issues relevant to those commercial fisheries
K8 OCEAN BEACH NET FISHERY
N1 RIVER AND LAKES NET FISHERY
T5 BEAM TRAWL FISHERY
Options for the Noosa Council and the Queensland Government to work Page 21
more closely on future fisheries management arrangements including the
status quo, short-term, medium-term and longer-term
SHORT-TERM OPTIONS
NOOSA COUNCIL PREPARE a SUBMISSION to QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT DISCUSSION
PAPER to be RELEASED IN JUNE
A REALLOCATION of the T5 BEAM TRAWL FISHERY
MEDIUM-TERM OPTIONS
BEGIN a PROCESS to REMOVE NETS FROM PARTS of the NOOSA RIVER and LAKES
WORK WITH the QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT on a NOOSA REGIONAL MANAGEMENT
TRIAL
LONGER-TERM OPTIONS
ESTABLISH a NET FREE ZONE in PARTS of the NOOSA RIVER, ESTUARIES and LAKES
ESTABLISH a NOOSA MARINE PARK
Community and stakeholder engagement plan Page 38
COMMUNITY and STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN
PRECIS of OTHER SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES Page 41
2
Section 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of the development of the Noosa River Management Plan, the Noosa Shire Council commissioned an
evidence based desktop study of the Noosa River, estuary and beach fisheries.
The purpose of the study was to provide Council with information on commercial fisheries active in the river,
estuary, lakes and beaches to better understand these activities, the current management arrangements that
regulate these activities and the recorded commercial fisheries catch history in the waterways from 2013 to
2018 for the T5 Beam Trawl Fishery, the K8 Ocean Beach Net Fishery and the N1 Net Fishery.
The information provided is sourced directly from local commercial fishers and other local stakeholders that
have a high level of interest in the Noosa River, estuary and beaches. From this information, the paper provides
a range of options for Council to consider that are considerate of short-term, medium-term and longer-term
priorities. The paper provides a pathway to implement these options that will afford Council the opportunity
to garner community and stakeholder support.
The paper uses spatial catch and effort data from Fisheries Queensland over a six-year period to validate the
commercial catch in the relevant fisheries.
The options are framed based on feedback from key stakeholder groups and can be achieved in the timeframes
outlined in the stakeholder engagement plan, which provides a pathway forward for Council to further engage
with the Noosa community and with key stakeholders assessed as high interest, high impact.
The short-term options emphasize the importance of ongoing engagement with the Queensland government
in the short-term cognisant of some key dates over the next 18 months in the local and state government
election cycles. The short-term options focus on some reforms for sustainable management of the N1 and K8
net fisheries in the river, lakes and beaches as well as consideration of a reallocation process for the T5 Beam
Trawl fishery. These reforms are based on information collected from local stakeholders.
The medium and longer-term options present Council with the opportunity to consider some of the bigger
picture issues that recognise the key features and natural assets of the region that are consistently listed as
the top four reasons for tourist visits to the Noosa region – the high conservation values of the Noosa national
park and beaches and the natural beauty and amenity of Noosa.
3
Section 4
INTRODUCTION
As part of the development of the Noosa River Plan, the Noosa Shire Council have commissioned an evidence-
based desktop study of the Noosa River, estuary and beach fisheries. This information gathered will be used
to inform the River Plan.
The focus of this paper is on the commercial fisheries that operate in the Noosa region to better understand
the activities of fishermen and current management arrangements that regulate these activities.
The Noosa River is one of three river catchments located within or partly within the Noosa Shire Council area.
The Noosa River flows south from the Cooloola section of the Great Sandy National Park into Laguna Bay. It is
fed by springs that drain major sand deposits and is one of the few Queensland rivers with a continuous year-
round freshwater inflow. The catchment forms a coastal lagoon system of five lakes that discharge into the
Pacific Ocean at Noosa Heads.
The Noosa estuary is considered of high ecological value, abuts a national park and includes numerous fish
habitat protection areas. The waterways remain the subject of high levels of community interest given the
high value attributed to this community asset. This high level of interest is reflected in the numerous studies
Noosa Council have commissioned over time on water quality, benthos and the health of the Noosa water
catchment area more broadly.
One of these studies undertaken by Dr Ruth Thurstan, identifies declining catch rates by most anglers based
on analysis of historical catch records and other fisheries relevant, publicly available media commentary over
the 100 years recorded history of Noosa. As a result of this study and others, increasing investments are being
made by Council, local philanthropists and other interests to ‘bring back the fish’ of Noosa waterways.
More recently, a study by Greg Skilleter revealed significant loss (between 70 and 90%) of benthic biodiversity
over the last 20 years. Given the critical role of benthos in sustaining fish populations and catch, it indicates
that regardless of fishing pressure, past fish catch rates are unlikely to be sustained.
The Noosa Council submission to the Queensland Government Green Paper on Fisheries Management Reform
in 2016 noted concerns over the compatibility of some commercial fishing activities currently permitted in the
Noosa River, lakes and beaches. This paper provides information to assist Council to better understand these
activities and provide stakeholder feedback directly from commercial fishers and other key local stakeholders
that have an interest in the Noosa waterways about current commercial fishing practices and combines that
information with up-to-date fisheries catch data from Fisheries Queensland.
A detailed stakeholder analysis has been conducted that includes local Noosa commercial fishers, recreational
fishers, recreational and charter businesses that operate on the river, local businesses and tourist and
conservation groups that have a high level of interest in the permitted activities in the Noosa waterways. The
focus of the stakeholder engagement and data collection is on the principle fisheries active in the waterways;
the Beam Trawl T5 fishery and the Inshore Net Fishery that operates on the Ocean Beach (K8 Fishery) and
offshore, as well as in the rivers and lakes (N1 and N11 Fishery).
Fresh Advisory provided Council with an Initial Findings Report (February 2019) that focussed on a stakeholder
analysis and engagement plan, the relevant Fisheries Data analysis for the active fisheries currently operating
in the Noosa waterways and an analysis of other fisheries management reforms to provide some insight into
reforms undertaken in other jurisdictions. This information was assembled to provide Council with information
upon which to consider some draft options that will enable Council to have a greater level of involvement in
the regulatory decisions that apply to the current commercial fishing practices in the Noosa waterways.
The paper is divided into the following sections;
4
Section 5
An overview of current fisheries activities in the Noosa waterways, relevant fisheries data from 2013
to 2018, the relevant regulatory and management arrangements for those fisheries and the current
issues relevant to these commercial fishing activities;
Possible future fisheries management changes as options for Council to consider in the short-term,
medium-term and longer-term with costs and benefits of these options; and,
A detailed stakeholder analysis and engagement plan timeline on how to implement the options.
The paper also provides a pathway for ongoing engagement with the Queensland Government on the current
Sustainable Fisheries Strategy 2017-2027 process.
5
Section 6
OVERVIEW OF COMMERCIAL FISHING ACTIVITY IN THE NOOSA WATERWAYS, QUEENSLAND FISHERIES
DATA ON THESE FISHERIES, THE REGULATORY ARRANGEMENTS & CURRENT ISSUES RELEVANT TO
THOSE COMMERCIAL FISHERIES
K8 OCEAN BEACH NET FISHERY AND THE N1 RIVER AND LAKES NET FISHERY
Diagram 1
The two major commercial fisheries operating in the Noosa River, lakes and beaches are the East Coast Inshore
Fin Fish Fishery and the T5 Beam Trawl Fishery. The East Coast Inshore Fishery includes;
The K8 Ocean Beach Net Fishery operating between 1st April to 31st August; and,
The N1 Inshore Net Fishery operating all year (that operates predominately in the rivers and lakes but
also on the Noosa North Shore outside of the K8 season).
6
Section 7
This section of the paper focusses on the K8 and N1 net fisheries and the current activities of the commercial
fishers operating in the Noosa region, the regulatory framework they operate within and their catch data from
2013 to 2018. The areas of the relevant net and beam trawl fisheries are shown in diagrams 1 and 2.
The East Coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery
The East Coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery runs the full length of the Queensland coastline and is made up of three
main components, the inshore net fishery, the line fishery and the crab fishery. The fishery operating in the
Noosa River, estuary and beaches of interest to the Noosa Council and community is the net fishery.
Commercial net fishers require a Queensland commercial fisher licence to be in charge of commercial fishing
activities aboard either their own commercial fishing boat or another person's commercial fishing boat. The
commercial fisher licence allows you to:
use authorised equipment to commercially take fish species under fishery symbols appearing on
a commercial fishing boat licence
supervise crew members assisting you in those fishing activities.
The net fishers operating in the Noosa region predominately use two types of gear; an N1 net fisher will use a
50mm – 165mm mesh net and K8 netters use 12mm – 75mm mesh nets, that can be no longer then 500m. The
length of an N1 net varies according to the specific area regulations and can range from 200m to 1500m. There
are also spatial rules that restrict access to a fishery symbol that apply in the Noosa River, estuary and beaches.
Commercial fishers who have an authority to fish in the Area 8 Net Fishery (Ocean Beach – Area 8) are required
to hold a K8 symbol and can only access the fishery from the 1st April to the 31st August. Commercial net fishers
who have an authority to access the net fishery outside of the K8 season (for the remainder of the year) will
have an N1 or an N11 symbol. An N1 symbol1 is an authority to fish the East Coast of Queensland and an N112
symbol is essentially an authority to bait fish. Presently, there are 12 K8 symbol holders with the authority to
fish in the Ocean Beach – Area 8 Net Fishery. This includes the Noosa River, estuaries and beaches extending
from Noosa Heads up to the northern tip of Fraser Island. Any fish, other than barramundi or regulated coral
reef fin fish, may be taken. Targeted species will typically include bream, mullet, tailor, whiting and flathead.
The holders of a K8 symbol have an as-of-right-use for N1 apparatus within Queensland waters, which allows
them to fish anywhere in state waters for those species permitted to be taken with that apparatus.
The K8 symbol is essentially an extra right that allows the holder to use a particular net for the ocean beach
fishery for a specified time period being 1st April to 31st August. However, outside of that period, any licensed
commercial fisher with an N1 and N11 symbol has the right to fish in those areas. Presently there are 86 N1
symbol holders and 281 N11 symbols holders who have the authority to access these fisheries. The
jurisdictional arrangements for fisheries management in Queensland are as follows:
The Fisheries Act 1994 (Qld) provides Queensland’s principal legislative framework for the regulation
of commercial fishing, recreational fishing, indigenous fishing, coastal areas that are important as
fisheries habitat and marine plants. The Act provides a range of mechanisms aimed at the sustainable
management of fisheries including management plans, quotas, offences, licences and declarations of
closed seasons, closed waters and fisheries habitat areas.
The Fisheries Regulation 2008 (Qld) provides technical and geographic detail for these mechanisms.
Management plans such as the Fisheries (East Coast Trawl) Management Plan 2010 (Qld) are
subordinate legislation created under the Act.
1
https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/61252/n1-fishery.pdf
2
N11 symbol (small mesh net)
The new N11 fishery symbol was introduced to replace the N6 fishery symbol and allow the use of small mesh nets to
collect fish for commercial purposes. It was only allocated to licences with demonstrated previous activity in the
commercial sale of baitfish. This change aimed to address latent effort and to remove unnecessary fishery symbols.
7
Section 8
The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries administers the Act which is part of a complex network of Federal
and State laws regulating fisheries. The State Government regulates fisheries resources and any change to the
management arrangements will require the agreement and subsequent regulatory approval of the
Queensland Government. Some key fisheries management issues for the Net Fishery include;
Investment Warning - The Queensland Government issued an Investment and Increased Effort
Warning3 notification for Queensland commercial fishers on the 6th March 2014. The purpose of issuing
the warning is to notify commercial fishers that a review of the management of Queensland’s fisheries
is about to commence that will result in future changes to the management of fisheries in Queensland,
and that existing and new operators in all Queensland commercial fisheries are warned that any
expansion of fishing effort or increased investment in these fisheries after 6 March 2014, may not be
recognised in assessing applications for new or continued access to these fisheries, following the
implementation of any new management arrangements that may be put in place following, or during,
the implementation of the outcomes of this review.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) - As part of the government’s Sustainable Fisheries Strategy 2017-
2027 vessel tracking4 will be required on all commercial fishing boats by 2020 with a priority to install
units on net, line and crab commercial fishing boats. This includes boats fishing in the Noosa
waterways. This regulation took effect on 1st January 2019 meaning all fishing vessels are now recorded
when fishing.
Development of Harvest Strategy underway – The net fishery is likely to have a suite of new
arrangements by the middle of 2020, including species-based whole-of-fishery catch limits aimed at
recovering stocks to 60% of natural abundance, individual fisher catch quotas on the 5-6 main species
which drive effort and behaviour in the fishery, and bycatch strategies and catch disposal records
aimed at improved compliance and other measures.
There are two distinct net fisheries operating in the Noosa waterways and beaches. The K8 ocean
beach fishery and the N1 net fishers who predominately fish the river and lakes.
3
https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/1396372/Investment-and-increased-effort-warning-
notification-for-all-Queensland.pdf
4 https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/business-priorities/fisheries/sustainable/sustainable-fisheries-strategy/vessel-
tracking
8
Section 9
THE K8 OCEAN BEACH NET FISHERY
Ocean beach net fishing on the Noosa North Shore
Information gleaned from local commercial fishers and Fisheries Queensland recorded catch data for the K8
ocean beach net fishery identified that there are nine owners of K8 symbol holders with the authority to fish
the K8 Ocean Beach Net Fishery, that operates from 1st April to 31st August. They are;
SYMBOL HOLDER SYMBOLS HELD
Allan Burton C1, C2, C3, K8, L1(3), L3(1), N11 & T5
Andreassen Investments Pty Ltd C1, K8 & N11
Jeff Clark K8, L3(1), N11 & T5
Jeff Clark K8, L3(1), N11 & T5
Madonna Rees K8, N11, S
Mark Alexander K8, L3(1) & N11
Mark Alexander K8 & L2(0)
Mark Catlow K8, L3(1) & N11
Michael & Brooke Savige K8, L3(1) N11 & T1
Paddockmist Pty Ltd K8, L3(1), N10 & N11
Paddockmist Pty Ltd K8, L1(1), L3(1) & N11
Tracey Eardley K8, N11 & T5
Local commercial fishers have identified that not all the K8 symbol holders are active in the fishery, suggesting
that around 6 have been active each year in the last 6 years. Without being able to identify the individual
fishers, they could be the same or a combination of the twelve symbol holders. The fishery almost exclusively
targets spawning mullet aggregations in the ocean beach in Laguna Bay during the peak winter months of
June and July. The whole mullet fishery is dominated by two major seafood processors, Markwell Fisheries
(Paddockmist Pty Ltd) from Chinderah and SupaFin Seafoods from Brisbane. The processors will often supply
crews on the beach to work with local K8 fishers who will typically catch around 100 tonnes of whole sea mullet
per year depending on seasonal factors. The processors market their product all over Australia, including to a
prominent Sunshine Coast wholesaler and a Noosaville bait outlet. The Fisheries Queensland data in Table 1
identifies the total annual catch for ocean beach netting and haul netting (including the months outside of the
K8 season) with the principle species and a high proportion of the catch, being whole sea mullet. The data is
9
Section 10
identified by year and fishing method, the number of active licenses, the number of days fished, the species
and catch in tonnes.
Table 1
Year Method Licenses Days Species Catch (t)
2013 Ocean Beach Netting 5 9 Dart 1.11
2013 Ocean Beach Netting 9 84 Mullet 90.13
2013 Ocean Beach Netting 6 22 Tailor 4.64
2013 Ocean Beach Netting 6 16 Whiting 0.39
2014 Ocean Beach Netting 14 497 Mullet 105.45
2014 Ocean Beach Netting 5 13 Tailor 0.20
2014 Ocean Beach Netting 9 59 Trevally 0.69
2014 Ocean Beach Netting 11 60 Whiting 1.30
2015 Ocean Beach Netting 8 30 Bream 0.39
2015 Ocean Beach Netting 6 18 Dart 0.71
2015 Ocean Beach Netting 9 73 Mullet 148.48
2015 Ocean Beach Netting 7 30 Tailor 1.02
2015 Ocean Beach Netting 6 15 Whiting 0.30
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 8 28 Bream 0.25
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 5 11 Flathead 0.04
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 7 7 Milkfish 0.09
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 10 61 Mullet 153.80
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 7 13 Queenfish 0.05
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 9 27 Tailor 1.48
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 5 12 Trevally 0.21
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 9 30 Whiting 0.51
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 8 37 Bream 1.58
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 8 21 Dart 2.15
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 7 9 Flathead 0.36
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 10 68 Mullet 75.66
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 6 7 Queenfish 0.05
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 5 11 Shark - whaler 0.13
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 8 30 Tailor 0.85
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 6 14 Trevally 1.61
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 9 31 Whiting 1.37
2018 Ocean Beach Netting 7 11 Bream 0.04
2018 Ocean Beach Netting 10 43 Mullet 138.38
2018 Ocean Beach Netting 5 6 Whiting 0.24
10
Section 11
Spatial data map showing catch for the net and trawl fishery by site for Grid W35
The East Coast Inshore Fishery is presently the subject of review as part of the Queensland Government’s
Sustainable Fisheries Strategy 2017-2027. The Fisheries Directions Paper released in January outlined the
proposed direction of their future fisheries management reforms. Then in March, Fisheries Queensland sent
out to commercial fishers a Draft Allocation Approach Discussion Paper seeking feedback from fishers on the
preferred management framework (harvest strategy) of a Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC) and
Individual Transferable Quota (ITQ).
11
Section 12
This information will be used to inform the Fisheries Discussion Paper recently released by the Government as
the final step in the consultation process before proposed regulatory changes are implemented and completed
by the 1st September 2019. The current Fisheries Regulations 2008 are up for their ten-year review which was
extended in 2018 so it is unlikely that another extension will be provided – hence the requirement for Fisheries
Queensland to legislate by the 1st September.
THE N1 NET FISHERY IN THE RIVER AND LAKES
N1 inshore net fishers haul in their catch
The net fishers operating in the rivers and lakes are using an N1 symbol. This is a separate fishery to the K8
fishery operating on the ocean beach, and the fishery operates all year. Fisheries Queensland record the ocean
beach catch as “Ocean Beach Netting” or haul netting. The N1 fishery is recorded by Fisheries Queensland as
“Net Complex” which is also mostly referred to in the data as ring netting. This is where mesh nets are
suspended in the water and used to encircle a school of fish. The N1 mullet component of the net fishery in the
lakes and rivers is the largest as indicated in the FQ data. However, this data also includes an offshore
component of the N1 fishery.
The issue with this data set is Site 16 also records some ocean beach catch by ring netting and there’s no way
of separating the ocean beach component of the N1 fishery from the rivers and lakes part of the N1 fishery.
This is not important for a description of the N1 fishery but it may be important if future fisheries management
options give consideration to limit the use of mesh nets in the rivers and lakes. The principle species caught is
mullet and is the largest net fishery in the Noosa region, larger than the K8 ocean beach fishery. This is
demonstrated by the Fisheries Queensland data by aggregated method and region in table 4.
12
Section 13
Table 4
Year Fishing Method Group Catch (t)
2013 NetComplex 167.55
2013 Ocean Beach Netting 98.05
2014 NetComplex 123.65
2014 Ocean Beach Netting 84.34
2014 Tunnel Netting 0.61
2015 NetComplex 165.74
2015 Ocean Beach Netting 153.17
2016 NetComplex 178.09
2016 Ocean Beach Netting 159.34
2017 NetComplex 253.22
2017 Ocean Beach Netting 85.22
2018 NetComplex 205.83
2018 Ocean Beach Netting 140.18
Commercial Fisheries catch data for the K8 Ocean Beach Net fishery and the T5 Beam Trawl fishery has been
provided by Fisheries Queensland for the years 2013 through to 2018. Information in this paper is sourced from
Fisheries Queensland5, Fishnet Public, ASIC’s Companies and Business Register, traditional and online media
platforms and stakeholders with a direct and indirect stake in the future management of the Noosa waterways.
Where possible, data on commercial fishers is examined to identify the licenses that have the authority to fish
in the Noosa River, estuaries and beaches.
Feedback from local commercial fishers and some stakeholders have identified a range of issues around
current regulations and practices within this component of the net fishery and these have informed some
short-term options for Council to consider. Issues included are suggested changes to net size in the Lakes
Cootharaba, Cooroibah or Weyba, consideration of a regulated weekend closure for the Ocean Beach Fishery,
consideration of a change to the regulated use of nets in the Noosa River at Munna Point to move the line
closer to Makepeace Island, and the development of a code of practice for the mullet fishery.
Net Fishery License and Symbol Listings
The Queensland Fisheries Summary Report, October 2018 indicates for the East Coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery,
the number of net symbols in the fishery that have an Authority to access the Noosa waterways is 379 as
identified in Table 1. Whilst this statement is accurate, the reality is that only a small proportion of these
symbol holders are active in the Noosa area. This would include the 12 K8 net fishers, between 8 to 12 N1 net
fishers (which may vary from year to year) and some N11 fishers, the N11 being recognised as a symbol that
most commercial fishers use to catch bait fish6.
5
Fisheries Queensland will not provide data where there are less than 5 boats active in a region. That can result in an
underestimate of the catch of individual species due to data access limitation of the author. Fisheries Queensland privacy
laws prevent it from providing access to this data but it will be made available if a formal proposal for structural
adjustment is considered.
6
NOTE: Changes to fishing regulations during the last reform of the ECIFF provided all N2, K, N10 and N4 licence holders
with the ability to operate in accordance with the N1 netting provisions. This adds significantly to the number of licences
(just over 240 in total) that could currently access the Noosa system and therefore be ‘entitled’ to seek compensation
under current management arrangements. The same reforms enable any commercial crab or line operators to use ‘small
mesh nets’ to take bait for their own use. This also would add significantly to the number of licenses that could access the
Noosa system (just over 2248 in total). This requires some explanation which will be provided at the formal briefing.
13
Section 14
Table 1
SYMBOL NUMBER of AUTHORITY
SYMBOLS
N1 86 The East Coast of Queensland. Can access Noosa waterways
from 1 January to 31 December.
N11 281 The East Coast of Queensland and tidal waters in the Gulf of
Carpentaria. Can access Noosa waterways from 1 January to
31 December.
K8 12 The fishery area consists of the area of all tidal waters;
1. from the eastern tip of Noosa Heads along the shore
to the eastern tip of Inskip Point; and,
2. then to the southern tip of Fraser Island; and,
3. then along Fraser Island’s eastern shore to the
island’s northern tip; and,
4. the shore of Breaksea Spit.
Access is between 1st April to 31st August.
There are numerous Queensland based brokers to the commercial fishing industry who typically advertise
their offering as brokers for the sale, purchase and leasing of commercial fishing licences, symbols, quota and
commercial fishing boats. All have websites that list the licenses and symbols for sale or lease at current market
rates. Five commercial brokers were examined to seek information on the availability and current market price
for a primary license, and an N1, N11, K8 and T5 symbol. All values listed are a guide only and should be taken
to represent the price only at the time of inquiry (February 2019). There are a number of factors that will impact
on the market price for licenses and symbols including a formal investment warning when issued by Fisheries
Queensland however this in itself has not historically been seen as preventing continued activity in the buying,
selling and leasing of licenses and symbols. Feedback from FQ suggests some of the current prices are broadly
the same as prices achieved during the recent buy back scheme. The following license and symbols listings are
taken from those sites that had the relevant symbols listed:
BROKER SYMBOL/LICENSE PRICE BUY OR LEASE
Qld Fishing Brokerage N1 $55,000 To Buy
Saltwater Solutions N1 & L3 (1) $68,000 To Buy
Seavine Marine None listed
Pro Fishing Queensland N1, N11, L1 & L3 $9,000 To Lease for 12
Months
Bay & Ocean Commercial N1 $55,000 To Buy
Fishing Brokerage
As Above N1 $60,000 To Buy
As Above Primary License $17,500 To Buy
Bay & Ocean Commercial T5 symbol only $25,000 To Buy
Fishing Brokerage
Sectoral Analysis of Economic Value
Local N1 net fishers note their principal species caught in the rivers and lakes is mullet and they supply mostly
local and regional markets for human consumption as well as some local bait and tackle outlets. Prices
achieved for mullet between April and August are depressed due to the large volume of mullet harvested from
the K8 ocean beach fishery and on average achieve $4/kg for male and females. Outside of the K8 season they
achieve significantly higher prices of up to $9/kg. Information sourced from conversations with local seafood
retail outlets and commercial fishers indicates production from the Noosa area results in a small percentage of
locally caught seafood being sold for human consumption in some local retail outlets. This information is
reflected in the Stakeholder Analysis. For the K8 ocean beach fishery a fair proportion of the mullet that is
processed by the two major processors, Markwell Fisheries or SupaFin Seafoods, and comes back to the local
14
Section 15
bait and tackle outlets in Noosa. The K8 ocean beach mullet fishery is considered a low value fishery with
females attracting $4/kg and males $2/kg to the fishermen (referred to as the beach price). These prices are
lower than what the local N1 fisher is achieving. Initial conversations recorded with local seafood outlets report
that they take very little fish from local commercial fishers however closer analysis has identified numerous
retail outlets that sell locally caught net species such as mullet, flathead and whiting for human consumption
in the Noosa region. A local net fisher who fishes the lakes and river throughout the year will typically supply
product to the local bait and tackle shops or the a local Food Van.
Without a detailed analysis of the supply chain and sales information from processors and commercial fishers,
attributing a precise value to the Noosa region of the economic benefits from commercially harvested seafood
is not possible. Also, difficult to quantify is the economic value of the principal species (mullet) caught in the
lakes and rivers. A local net fisher has identified their indicative prices per kg for their product sold to local bait
and tackle outlets as well as their produce supplied for human consumption, however they were unable to
provide any data on the volume of fish sold.
Information supplied by the Noosa Council on an Industry sector analysis7 in 2017/18, for the Noosa Shire
Council area contributed 3.3% of Regional QLD’s Fishing, Hunting and Trapping employment and 3.1% of its
value added. Industry sector profiles reveal the way in which each industry contributes to the economy in
Noosa Shire Council area using ten economic measures generated by NIEIR8 economic modelling. This helps
in understanding the role each industry sector plays in the economy. In the first chart, you can also see how
the output of an industry is divided between local sales, domestic exports and international exports. This
information can reveal how an industry is structured, and whether it is focused on exporting or on serving the
local population.
7
https://economy.id.com.au/rda-sunshine-coast/industry-sector-analysis?IndkeyNieir=23004&WebID=100
8
National Institute of Economic and Industry Research (NIEIR)
15
Section 16
The table and second chart also show how Noosa Shire Council area contributes to the wider economy.
16
Section 17
THE T5 BEAM TRAWL FISHERY
The T5 Beam Trawl Fishery is one of three sub-fisheries within the Queensland East Coast Trawl Fishery
(ECTF). It represents the smallest component of the ECTF in terms of annual effort and number of vessels with
an estimated Gross Value of Production (GVP) of approximately $1.3 Million. Operators in the fishery tow small
beam trawls targeting prawns in rivers, creeks and inshore areas within 3 nautical miles of the coast. The catch
of by-product species in the fishery is negligible and consists mainly of small fin fish species. Commercial catch
is almost entirely composed of banana prawns, greentail (bay) prawns, and school prawns.
View looking backwards from a T5 Beam Trawler
School prawn is the main species caught in the Noosa T5 areas D and E. The biological stock structure of school
prawn remains largely unknown. Eastern School prawn inhabit numerous estuarine habitats in Queensland
and a portion of this biomass remains unfished, with fishing effort confined to accessible sections of larger
river systems due to vessel size. The average annual catch (4t) in recent years (2012–17) has been well below
the long-term average of ~60t (1990–2015). Long term catch levels are variable and nominal catch rates are
fairly-stable but with occasional very high catch and high catch rate years9.
Trawling is defined by the use of beam trawl
gear which results in a small trawl footprint. The
vessels are entitled to work in specified areas,
are limited to a maximum size of 9 meters
towing a single 5m wide trawl net made of mesh
no smaller than 28mm for nets used in rivers and
creeks. The net is attached to 2 'sleds' connected
by a rigid pole, or beam, that holds the net open
for fishing, a ground chain is connected to the
net footrope across its mouth and contacts the
sediment to stir up prawns. Trawl shots are generally short (less than 1 hr), occur in shallow water and result in
9
Submission for the reassessment of the Queensland River and Inshore Beam Trawl Fishery Wildlife Trade Operation
approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
A report prepared by the Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, December 2018
17
Section 18
relatively small amounts of prawns caught (less than 100kg). Bycatch reduction devices in nets are compulsory
and combined with short shots and shallow water, the bycatch in this fishery is relatively low and generally
survives well. Interactions with species of conservation interest are minimal.
Diagram 2
There are 36 T5 symbol holders that have the authority to fish in the Noosa river and waterways (the T5 beam
trawl fishery also includes the Brisbane and Logan Rivers area) however many of these fishers are not active in
the Noosa waterways and may have never been active in the Noosa area. Local commercial fishers indicate
18
Section 19
the T5 fishers who have historically fished the Noosa area being no more than eight fishers with as little as two
being active in recent years. The fishing season is open all year. The Fisheries Queensland data shows that 6
fishers were active in the T5 fishery in 2013, less than 5 in 2014, 6 in 2015 and less than 5 in 2016 and 2017 and
6 in 2018.
In January 2013, much of southern Queensland suffered from major flooding including in the Burnett and Mary
River catchments. In the six years that followed these major flood events, there has been a significant drop-
off in effort in the Noosa area T5 fishery with no more than 6 boats active in any given year. The average annual
catch over this 6-year period was 4.35 tonnes. This information is validated when discussed with local T5
fishers. The data for T5 Beam Trawl – aggregated method by year shows low volumes of prawns caught for
the data period 2013 – 2018.
Year Fishing Method Group Catch (t)
2013 Beam trawling 6.48
2014 Beam trawling 3.68
2015 Beam trawling 2.98
2016 Beam trawling 0.01
2017 Beam trawling 2.13
2018 Beam trawling 10.84
Numerous studies into the health of the Noosa River have been undertaken. Recent studies include the 2014
Historical Ecology of the Noosa Estuary Fisheries Report by Dr Ruth Thurstan. Dr Thurstan’s report
examined historical fisheries productivity in the Noosa Estuary to better inform the Noosa community about
ecological changes that occurred prior to their lifetimes, and to provide insights into the species that inhabited
the Noosa River and their changing abundance over time. The historical analysis of prawn trawling records
shows fishing effort declining from 1990 – 2015. The year 1991 showed 26 licenses recording catch for a total
of 1,103 fishing days down to a low of just 63 fishing days recorded in 2014.
More recently, Greg Skilleter’s interim findings report Biodiversity in the Noosa River System - Assessment
of the status and options for recovery of prawns & estuarine biodiversity in the Noosa River identified;
marked declines in the number of species and overall abundance in the sediments. Comparisons of data collected
in 1998 with samples from 2018, taken in exactly the same sections of the estuary. These declines were seen in all
the major groups of animals (polychaete worms, amphipods, bivalves and snails).
The report noted that, all these groups form a critical component of the estuarine environment, due to their roles
as food for fishes, crabs and prawns, major bioturbators (irrigators of the sediment, allowing oxygen and nutrients
to be recycled), and sediment stabilisers (stopping sediment resuspension through the formation of binding tube
mats).
Professor Skilleter said, in order to investigate these declines further, we repeated the 2018 sampling, at no
extra cost to NBRF, but resulting in some delays due to the costly nature of collecting and processing the sediments
to remove, count and identify the benthic infaunal animals. These samples have all been processed and final
checking of the identification of the fauna is being completed at present. Based on analysis of the quantitative
mapping data on threats from human activities within the shoreline of each major section of the estuary, we
sampled the benthic (living in sediments) and nektonic (fish, crabs and prawns) fauna to compare the animals
living adjacent to different types of human activity (control regions, canal estates, agricultural/forestry regions
and urban/residential regions).
19
Section 20
Early analyses have identified differences in the fauna associated with different human activities. The focus
of these analyses will be to:
• Identify if community composition and the numbers and types of animals varies in relation to different human
activities in the shoreline area, within 500m and 1000m, buffer zones;
• Identify which specific groups of animals are most affected and use information on their biology and life
history to infer likely explanations for how human activities are impacting those groups;
• Link environmental data (sediment parameters) and the quantitative threat data to variation in the
abundance of the fauna within different regions of human activity.
The report continues, Extensive trawling in the main regions of the estuary showed that there were very few
prawns present in the sediments and these were found in only a few places. Abundances of other nekton (fish
and crabs) were also small. Again, concern over this specific finding led us to repeat all the trawl sampling to
determine if the abundances of the nekton were still small later in the summer, after expected periods of
recruitment. This additional work was again done at no additional cost to NBRF, but has led to come delays with
progress of the work. These samples are being processed at present. Specimens from both periods of sampling of
the nekton will be used for stable isotope and gut contents analysis as part of the examination of the benthic food
webs within the Noosa River estuary.
A final report from Professor Greg Skilleter is due sometime in 2019. What the various studies show is that
human activity continues to have an impact on the health of the waterways. This is recognised by a local group
of conservation organisations have called on the Noosa Council to ban beam trawling in the relevant T5 fishery
area of Noosa. They see this as another step toward the recovery and restoration process in the rivers and lakes
and the best chance to give the system a break. These groups cite as one of their main reason the recent
interim report from Professor Greg Skilleter. The groups include the Noosa Parks Association, Noosa Shire
Residents and Ratepayers Association, Noosa District Landcare, Sunshine Coast Environment Council, Noosa
Integrated Catchment Association, the Friends of Lake Weyba and Friends of Kinaba. The T5 Beam Trawl
fishery is considered in more detail in the option two of this paper.
20
Section 21
OPTIONS FOR THE NOOSA COUNCIL AND THE QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT TO WORK MORE
CLOSELY ON FUTURE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS INCLUDING THE STATUS QUO,
SHORT-TERM, MEDIUM-TERM & LONGER-TERM
STATUS QUO
The Noosa Council have articulated in numerous submissions to the Queensland Government desire to have a
greater say in the permitted activities allowed in the Noosa River, estuary and beaches. To a large extent this
has not occurred in a meaningful way whereby change has been affected. The issues before Council include
the proliferation of moored vessels including house boats and holiday vessels, an increase in the volume of
traffic using the rivers and lakes, the continuation of commercial, recreational and charter fishing with virtually
no locally-initiated changes to management arrangements in an environment where population has continued
to grow and visitor numbers continue to increase. The 2011 Australian Census10 for the Noosa region listed
47,040 residents with 24,026 private dwellings compared to the 2016 Census11 counting 52,149 residents and
26,099 private dwellings. Overnight and day-trip visitor numbers since 2015 – 2018 have increased 18.5%. The
Noosa region welcomed 2 million overnight and day-trip visitors who spent almost $900 million in the year to
March 201812. These trends are likely to continue to impact the region and importantly, one of the top four
reasons people list as their reason to visit Noosa; the beach, the food, the national park and the natural beauty
and amenity of the region.
Whilst there is an expectation identified from the stakeholder analysis that at some point in the future there is
likely to be a change to the permitted activities on the Noosa waterways, the broader community has yet to
formally consulted on their views. Some of the reasons given for no change is to preserve what has always
been; that includes beam trawling on the rivers and catching a bag of mullet, bream or flathead to put food on
the table and there is a view from some commercial fishers that they do not want to see that change and
further, see no reason to change it. Other state a very different view, including the river is being loved too
death and commercial fishing in the waterways needs to stop. Local conservation groups have been very clear
in their message that profound change is required and the sooner the better. Other groups are ambivalent and
take only a passing interest in the health of the waterways in as much as it being a priority in the daily lives.
The Noosa Council seeks to identify and respond to community concerns regarding the health of the
waterways and beaches. The question is if the regulatory oversight of the permitted activities should be left to
others or whether there can be more local input into these activities that better reflects the Noosa community
values and expectations. There is little short-term cost to the status quo but there may be a longer-term cost
to doing nothing.
10
https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2011/quickstat/SED30065
11
https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/SED30065
12
https://www.visitnoosa.com.au/image/members/agm2018/Tourism-Noosa-Annual-Report-2018.pdf
21
Section 22
SHORT-TERM OPTION ONE
NOOSA COUNCIL MAKES A SUBMISSION TO THE QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT’S DISCUSSION PAPER
ON FUTURE HARVEST STRATEGIES TO BE RELEASED SOMETIME IN MAY OR JUNE 2019
For the following options, where possible, costs, benefits and risks of the various options are assessed
based on available specific data and information, or quantitative estimates, while some are more
qualitative, based on stakeholder consultation and feedback.
In January 2019, the Queensland Government under their Sustainable Fisheries Strategy 2017-2027 released a
Fisheries Directions Paper to outline the proposed direction of their future fisheries management reforms.
Then in March, Fisheries Queensland sent out to commercial fishers a Draft Allocation Approach Discussion
Paper for the East Coast Inshore Fishery seeking feedback from fishers to have their say on the preferred
management framework of a Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC) and Individual Transferable Quota
(ITQ). Fishers had until the 26th April to provide a response. This information will be used to inform a further
Discussion Paper to be released sometime in May or June on the Government’s proposed regulatory changes
based on feedback from fishers and stakeholders. Any subsequent regulatory changes will be completed by
the 1st September 2019. This is an important opportunity for the Noosa Council to continue to engage in the
short-term with the Queensland Government and to provide the Government with an update on the findings
of this paper.
PROHIBIT THE USE OF 1,500M NET IN LAKES COOTHARABA, COOROIBAH AND WEYBA
Division 4 - Use of mesh or seine nets in particular areas within the fishery area.
Section 474 - A mesh net may be used in Lake Cootharaba, Cooroibah or Weyba only if it is no longer than
1,500m and has a mesh size of at least 50mm but no more than 175mm.
The Fisheries Regulations 2008 provides for the holder of an N1 symbol to use up to 1500 metres of net in Lakes
Cootharaba, Cooroibah and Weyba. There are no other provisions in the Queensland Fisheries Regulations
that allow for the use of this length of net. The areas are habitat for commercial, recreational and Indigenous
fisheries including bass, bream, blue salmon, estuary cod, flathead, garfish, jewfish, luderick, mangrove jack,
sea mullet, tailor, whiting, mud and sand crabs, school, greasyback, bay and eastern king prawns13. Feedback
from fishers notes a fisher must shoot and haul the net (cannot soak the net14). Local fishers indicate there are
several N1 fishers currently using this length of net in the lakes. Under current fisheries management
arrangements anyone with an N1 can access the lakes for commercial fishing and there are currently 86 N1
symbol holders with access to the fishery. There are a variety of views put forward by stakeholders including
commercial net fishers, regarding possible changes to the management arrangements for the lakes including;
No change;
Reduce the net length to 800m or 600m;
Restrict the number of fishers on the lakes and rivers to the fishers with ten or more years of recorded
catch history in the lakes; and,
Prohibit the use of all nets in the Lakes.
13
https://parks.des.qld.gov.au/managing/area-summaries/noosa.html
14
Soak times, defined as the time elapsed from when the first of the mesh net is deployed into the water
until the net is fully retrieved from the water.
22
Section 23
POTENTIAL ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED
CHANGE
Commercial fishers with a significant proportion of their catch history from the Noosa lakes will likely suffer
economic loss and potentially some social impacts. However, the non-tangible benefits such as environmental
improvements to the lakes may have a community-wide benefit. Whilst these benefits may be more difficult
to measure and quantify at a local level, the long-term benefits of marine protected areas or aquatic reserves
or net free zones, whatever they may be described as, are well documented.15
INTRODUCE A WEEKEND CLOSURE FOR THE OCEAN BEACH NET FISHERY
Part 9, Division 3 – Possessing or using nets – regulated periods
Prohibited activities
A regulated person must not in the regulated waters—
(a) possess a net for taking fish for trade or commerce; or
(b) use a net for taking a fish for trade or commerce; or
(c) possess a fish taken in contravention of paragraph (b).
A regulated closure in waterways south of Double Island Point from 6pm on Friday to 6pm on Sunday currently
applies to Weyba Creek, the Noosa River and Noosa’s main beach, Lake Como, Kin Kin Creek, the upper Noosa
River and Lake Cootharaba. The closure applies to the river, estuary and lakes and Noosa main beach, not
Noosa North Shore and refers to netting during this period (every weekend) however commercial fishers are
permitted to crab and line fish during this period. Feedback from some stakeholders and commercial fishers
notes this regulation should also be applied to the Ocean Beach Fishery north of the mouth of the Noosa River
in Laguna Bay. The basis for these views is principally to address conflict issues between recreational and
commercial fishers and tourists and commercial fishers, particularly when greater numbers of tourists are
visiting during weekends and peak tourist periods.
POTENTIAL ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED
CHANGE
The potential benefits of introducing a regulated closure on weekends to the ocean beach net fishery according
to some commercial N1 net fishers and other key stakeholders would be to further reduce conflict in the fishery
that has historically been a source of concern for commercial fishers and the community. Whilst anecdotally
this conflict has subsided somewhat due to a range of factors, it has the potential to continue into the future if
left unchecked. Removing commercial fishing operations from Laguna Bay (Noosa North Shore) for the same
time period as the closure that applies to the rivers and lakes would lessen the likelihood of interactions
between commercial fishers, recreational fishers, tourists and the wider community.
Measuring the costs of such a closure would require analysis of recorded catch history on weekends from
logbook data. The two months of June and July that record a high concentration of catch history in the whole
mullet ocean beach fishery may be impacted however this is an unknown until a deeper analysis is undertaken
on peak catch days during this period.
The tangible benefits are less potential conflict for the aforementioned groups, but importantly, this was raised
by numerous stakeholders during the consultation phase of this paper as being one of the major issues and
sources of conflict between commercial fishers and the community. This issue was discussed in the context of
contributing to the long term ‘bad image’ that has continued to prevail in the community and that no one
group or authority had been able to change. By giving consideration to the Rules around priority of shot may
go some way to addressing conflict and this is something Fisheries Queensland have advised they are willing
to consider, however removing commercial fishing from the Noosa North Shore during periods of high
exposure to visitors and the community is worth considering based on stakeholder feedback. The economic
impact of a weekend closure in the river and lakes would be subject to closer analysis.
15
https://www.coastalconference.com/2014/papers2014/Julia%20Mayo-Ramsay%20Full%20Paper.pdf
23
Section 24
MOVE THE FISHING CLOSURE LINE FROM MUNNA POINT
Part 9, Division 2 – Possessing or using nets – no regulated periods
Prohibited activities
A regulated person must not in the regulated waters—
(a) possess a net for taking fish for trade or commerce; or
(b) use a net for taking a fish for trade or commerce; or
(c) possess a fish taken in contravention of paragraph (b).
Feedback from some commercial fishers is to consult with Fisheries Queensland on moving the closure line at
Munna Point back up the river closer to the cable ferries at Makepeace Island or up to the entrance to Lake
Cooroibah. This suggestion is to prohibit the use of regulated nets in an area that is highly visual to locals and
tourists and further reduce the risk of conflict and interactions between commercial and recreational fishers
and tourists. The current closure applies to north of a line joining the following points;
from FB (Fishing Boat) sign on Lake Cootharaba’s north western shore;
to FB sign on the southern tip of the peninsula on the eastern side of Shark bay (which is part of the
Lake);
to the FB sign at the southern tip of Kinaba Island;
to an FB sign on Lake Cootharaba’s eastern shore.
Whilst there were not specific incidents of conflict sited by stakeholders during consultation, this is an issue
that was raised by a commercial fisher and a recreational fisher to have the issue be considered, but as a part
of a suite of possible changes to further improve the image of the commercial sector in the community.
POTENTIAL ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED
CHANGE
A possible benefit of changing the closure line further up river would be to remove commercial net fishing from
a busy section of the Noosa River and remove any potential for conflict and out of sight from community views.
There is a closure in place during the weekends however during peak tourist season there is no prohibition on
commercial netting in this busy section of the river. The issue is likely to receive support from the local
recreational fishing body, the Queensland Recreational Fishing Network, along with support from
conservation groups.
ALLOCATE INDIVIDUAL TRANSFERRABLE QUOTA (ITQ) FOR MULLET
There is an opportunity to engage with the Queensland Government on the future harvest strategy for the
Queensland mullet fishery. Commercial fishers are operating on the beach in Laguna Bay in the Ocean Beach
Net Fishery targeting spawning mullet, during the K8 season from 1st April to the 31st August. This fishery is a
large volume net fishery in the Noosa area with peak catch during June and July.
The preferred management framework for Queensland’s commercial east coast inshore fishery is a
combination of Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC) allocated through Individual Transferable Quota
(ITQ). The key reforms include:
. divide the fishery into six management regions based on key fish species
. allocate ITQ on priority species (e.g. barramundi, king threadfin, grey mackerel, school mackerel,
whiting)
. set competitive TACCs (which are not allocated to individuals) for other key species (e.g. mullet, tailor,
bream, flathead, shark); and
. monitor the remainder of inshore species and establish triggers in harvest strategy for review.
24
Section 25
Some commercial fishers consulted during the stakeholder engagement considered an ITQ would benefit
them significantly more than management via a TACC. However, there is also significant opposition to ITQs
for the key species, based on the lower than expected allocation by Fisheries Queensland as determined by log
book catch records.
POTENTIAL ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED
CHANGE
The economic benefits of an ITQ management regime is that it provides the freedom to fish at an optimum
time to maximise economic yield to the commercial fisher. This is less likely to occur under a TACC as the
imperative to fish will be driven by the need to ‘not miss out’ on a catch. This may result in fishing for less return
and identifies some of the key drivers of fisher’s behaviour. An ITQ management regime allocates quota to
individual fishers which infers a type of security of ownership that is not currently present.
The imperative to fish is in the K8 fishery is by and large driven by the two major seafood processors who are
active in the Noosa North Shore (NNS) during the peak catch period in June and July. They employ crews
stationed on the Noosa North Shore and all efforts are applied to fish during this period when the spawning
mullet are present. Advice from local commercial fishers is they receive between $2 and $4/kg for the whole
mullet. This is known as the beach price and it can influence the price for the entire mullet fishery.
The processors follow the fishery in its migratory path north so in effect are catching fish from northern NSW
well up the Queensland coast as far north as Fraser Island. Local K8 fishers will often fish for the processors
and ‘team up’ with their crews to fish the NNS. The introduction of an ITQ management arrangement would
likely be a significant driver of behavioural change in the fishery.
Additional benefits to an ITQ management regime is that changed patterns of behaviour will reduce the
likelihood of conflict between stakeholders. Feedback from local stakeholders and commercial fishers suggest
the behaviour of some of the crews on the beach has been less than what the community would expect at
times, with conflict between the crews over priority of shot issues. The community would welcome improved
rules and management arrangements that address this issue.
Noosa Council’s submission to the Queensland Fisheries Management Review in 2014 first noted the conflict
issues in the Ocean Beach Net Fishery targeting mullet. The Noosa North Shore (NNS) is part of the Cooloola
Recreation Area and is easily accessed by locals and visitors for recreational purposes by day trippers, beach
campers and recreational fishers.
Appropriate harvest strategy management arrangements for the mullet fishery that are based on the
principles of science and sustainability of the stock with an ITQ that is set at realistic levels would be supported
by many local N1 fishers however this support may not be universal among stakeholders.
25
Section 26
DEVELOP A CODE OF PRACTICE FOR THE MULLET FISHERY & ADDRESSING THE AUTHORISATION
FISHING PRIORITY ISSUES PREVALENT IN THE OCEAN BEACH MULLET FISHERY
Chapter 5, Division 2, Subdivision 1, 2, and 3
235, Meaning of ready to fish;
236, Fishing Priority, Ocean Beach Fisheries;
237, Fishing Priority, Other Commercial Fishers;
238, Duration of Fishing Priority;
239, Joint Fishers Taken to be 1 Fisher;
The development of a Code of Practice for the mullet fishery in Region 616 (between the NSW QLD border and
just north of Bundaberg) once the fisheries allocation process has been completed that seeks to address
longer-term management issues for this key species would benefit the participants of the fishery. This would
include regular stock assessment and scientific research to determine the long-term ecosystem impacts of
removing large quantities of spawning fish from the biomass every year. As species populations decline due
to a combination of harvesting, recovery of affected species populations becomes increasingly less possible. A
Code of Practice would also ideally be the platform to address any remaining conflict issues that are not
addressed by the outcome of the harvest strategy, including a proposal for a weekend closure and possibly
even moving the fishery off the beaches on the NNS to a location inside the Noosa River mouth as suggested
by a local recreational fishing group representative. A Code of Practice would be a living breathing document
and establish a process to validate any future changes to mullet netting practises during the autumn/winter
spawning migration and beyond with local net fishers driving the process.
16
https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/1438865/inshore-allocation-discussion-paper.pdf
26
Section 27
SHORT-TERM OPTION TWO
A BUYOUT OF THE T5 BEAM TRAWL SYMBOLS THAT HAVE HISTORY IN THE T5 AREA FOR THE NOOSA
RIVER AND LAKES CONNECTED TO THE NOOSA RIVER AND LAGUNA BAY AREA
Consistent with Noosa Council’s submission to the Queensland Government Green Paper on Fisheries
Management Reform in 2016, Noosa Council has continued to express concerns over the compatibility of
trawling in the Noosa River and lakes, particularly due to current projects underway aimed at the restoration
of the waterways, such as Bring Back the Fish. Council’s concerns have resulted in the commissioning of
numerous studies into the health of the Noosa River. Recent studies include the 2014 Historical Ecology of
the Noosa Estuary Fisheries Report by Dr Ruth Thurstan. Dr Thurstan’s report examined historical fisheries
productivity in the Noosa Estuary to better inform the Noosa community about ecological changes that
occurred prior to their lifetimes, and to provide insights into the species that inhabited the Noosa River and
their changing abundance over time. The historical analysis of prawn trawling records shows fishing effort
declining from 1990 – 2015. The year 1991 showed 26 licenses recording catch for a total of 1,103 fishing days
down to a low of just 63 fishing days recorded in 2014.
What is clear from numerous studies over time is that human activity and population concentrations in coastal
areas have an impact on water quality and the abundance of plant and animal life present in coastal waterways.
In Australia where more than 80% of the population live within 50km of the coast and in South east
Queensland, one of Australia’s fastest growing regions, governments of all levels will seek to ensure natural
resources and areas of high conservation value are protected for future generations.
The Noosa Council has consistently flagged that it is a high priority for Council to protect what is arguably its
greatest community asset, the rivers, lakes and beaches. The option to cease beam trawling in the relevant T5
fishery area of Noosa is seen by many groups17 as another step toward the recovery and restoration process in
the rivers and lakes and the best chance to give the system a break. These groups have requested the Noosa
Council support a ban on beam trawling in the river system and cite as one of their main reason the recent
interim report from Professor Greg Skilleter. The groups include the Noosa Parks Association, Noosa Shire
Residents and Ratepayers Association, Noosa District Landcare, Sunshine Coast Environment Council, Noosa
Integrated Catchment Association, the Friends of Lake Weyba and Friends of Kinaba. Professor Skilleter’s
report points to a decline in biodiversity in the rivers and lakes and these conservation groups have attributed
this decline in biodiversity to activities such as beam trawling, damaging the habitats of the benthic
communities the fish and prawns feed on.
There is also a view prevalent among many commercial fishers who have said ‘the river is being loved to death’.
There are some opposing views notably from T5 fishers that the low incidence of beam trawl activity over the
last six years since major flood events in south east Queensland in 2010/11 as a reason not to shut the fishery.
Flooding was widespread across Queensland and New South Wales from the end of December 2010 to
January 2011 with several separate rain events causing rivers to rise over a lengthy period. Again in January
2013, much of southern Queensland suffered from major flooding, including in the Burnett and Mary River
catchments. In the six years that followed these major flood events, there has been a significant drop-off of in
effort in the T5 fishery with no more than 6 boats active in any given year. Initial conversations with fishers
have identified that in some years, no more than two boats have been active in the fishery. The average annual
catch over this 6-year period was 4.35 tonnes. By any historical measure of catch rates18, this is very low.
Ironically, this is also sighted as a reason not to close the fishery. Fisheries Queensland data for the T5 fishery,
effort and days fished information is validated when discussed with local T5 fishers, that for the past 6 years
the beam trawl fishery has been the worst observed for a long time. The data for T5 Beam Trawl – aggregated
method by year shows low volumes of prawns caught for the data period 2013 – 2018.
17
https://www.noosanews.com.au/news/groups-combine-to-ban-noosa-river-trawling/3670634/
18
Historical ecology of the Noosa Estuary Fisheries, Dr Ruth Thurstan
27
Section 28
Year Fishing Method Group Catch (t)
2013 Beam trawling 6.48
2014 Beam trawling 3.68
2015 Beam trawling 2.98
2016 Beam trawling 0.01
2017 Beam trawling 2.13
2018 Beam trawling 10.84
The fishery is a low value fishery. The school prawn is the most common species caught making up a significant
portion (approximately 75%) of the catch. The remainder of the catch is king, banana and tiger prawns. Much
of the catch is sold as bait to local businesses including Sea Queen Marine in Noosa and Tweed Bait in South
Tweed Heads.
Commercial fishers have confirmed prices achieved19 for school prawns averaged between $7 and $12 per
kilogram. In addition to school prawns, the cooked king, banana and tiger prawns that account for up to 25%
of the catch sold for human consumption, have achieved between $15 and $25 per kilogram. The current
market value of a Beam Trawl T5 symbol according to listings available on any of the five major Queensland
fishing brokerage online platforms (based on the dates of inquiry over the four-month period from January to
April in 2019) is low. During this period only one T5 symbol was listed for sale on one the five brokerage sites,
valued at $25,000.
There are 36 T5 symbol holders that have the authority to fish in the Noosa river and waterways (the T5 beam
trawl fishery also includes the Brisbane and Logan Rivers area) however many of these fishers are not active in
the Noosa waterways and may have never been active in the Noosa area. Local commercial fishers have
identified the T5 fishers who have historically fished the Noosa area being no more than eight fishers with as
little as just two being active in recent years. The fishing is open all year. The Fisheries Queensland data shows
that 6 fishers were active in the T5 fishery in 2013, less than 5 in 2014, 6 in 2015 and less than 5 in 2016 and 2017
and 6 in 2018. Where there are less than 5 fishers active in a year, only the aggregated data by method and
region will be identified.
COSTS, BENEFITS AND RISKS OF A BUYOUT
A buy out of the Beam Trawl fishery in the Noosa River and waterways would trigger the Queensland
government Fisheries Reallocation Policy. The Fisheries Reallocation Policy is intended to guide decisions
about reallocation of access to fisheries resources. The policy scope includes requests to reallocate access from
one or more fishing sectors to a non-extractive use. A cost-benefit analysis will be used by the Queensland
Government to quantify the benefits to the community of reallocation proposals. Collection of additional data
may be required if existing information is insufficient for such an analysis. In general, analyses will need to be
evidence- based and must provide facts to substantiate any claims. Information supporting the application
must be sufficient to enable a cost-benefit analysis.
The objective of the reallocation proposal would result in an investment of funds to purchase the T5 symbols,
and would only be available to commercial fishers who have recorded catch history in the T5 fishery in the
Noosa River and lakes between the years 2013 and 2018. There are no other fishing sectors that access the T5
fishery so sectoral allocation is not relevant. The size of the fishery is small and operates exclusively for those
commercial fishers with a commercial fishing boat license with a T5 symbol. The area of the T5 Trawl Fishery
19
Prices quoted are for 2017 and 2018
28
Section 29
Symbol20 relevant to the reallocation proposal is the Noosa River and lakes connected to the Noosa River and
Laguna Bay area as defined in the Fisheries Regulations 2008.
The environmental benefits of the proposal are considered by many in the community to be significant. This is
also consistent with the Noosa Shire Council submission to the Green Paper on Fisheries Management Reform
in 2016 that identified Council’s concerns relating to commercial fishing and the compatibility of prawn
trawling in the Noosa River and Lakes. There is potential for an increase in abundance of local prawn stocks as
a result of the removal of beam trawl activity. Prawns clean up the beds of rivers and lakes, oysters filter water
(a single oyster sieving a bathtub of water daily). Both species secrete essential food for fish. They are
fundamental to a healthy marine environment and the project aims to ensure these fundamentals are
maintained.
Based on the historical data from the last few decades, it is possible to draw the conclusion that the abundance
of prawns in the rivers and lakes has been diminishing over time. What is evident from the last 6 years of data
is the practice of beam trawling is economically unviable as a stand-alone business as not one of the T5 symbol
holders earns a sustainable annual income from the fishery. Since 2013, total recorded catch was just 26.38
tonnes. Averaged over the six years that’s 4.39 tonnes per year between 6 active boats. This data, combined
with recent stakeholder feedback suggest the conditions for a buyout of the T5 symbols for Areas D and E are
present and represent an opportunity for Noosa Council to work with the Queensland Government to close
the Beam Trawl T5 Fishery in areas D and E, as soon as practicable.
In summary, the Reallocation Policy requires a proposal to demonstrate community support (all applications
must be accompanied by evidence of adequate stakeholder consultation, including written feedback from
potentially affected stakeholders. Consultation on the proposal including payment of all costs incurred is the
responsibility of the proponent).
20
https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/61844/t5-fishery.pdf
29
Section 30
30
153°E 153°30'E 154°E 154°30'E
| \
sa Trawl Fishery Symbol
2 2
© ©
N N
2 Q
° So
° 9?
o ©
N N
> 7
YZ St
Vo
x
» r ~
Si } < B , Si
. 2
ih
J Les
AS 4
4 f 4 ~ : A YD
n \ Bri on
z . risbane e
3 BRISBA ¥ P, e a
KR , ~
N W Sy N
2 ae
se
ef
. Neha fd
vA The area for the ‘T5’ fishery symbol consists of all tidal waters
Fi of the following—
r.3 ‘ (a) the Brisbane River-Victoria Bridge to Juno Point area;
> ah (b) the Brisbane River mouth area-north;
ty (c) the Brisbane River mouth area—south;
i) 4 (d) the Noosa River and lakes connected to the Noosa River; a
g (e) the Laguna Bay area; a
(f) the Logan River area;
2 J (g) other rivers or creeks south of Double Island Point.
/ 7 South of Double Island Point —
© State of Queensland 2015 This map incorporates data which is: © Commonwealth of Australia . .
ARES Department of Agriculture (Geoscience Australia) 2011; and © Pitney Bowes Mapinfo. These This map represents the approximate
uw » d Fisheri datasets are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution- . .
Ra Y and Fisheries NoDerns 3.0Ausala Lice. To ew acopy atts Scens, fishery area where fishing operations
Lega 5 Co-ord Sys: GCS GDA 1994 Niro cere wrnin wasenracy sttuee deta anda are Permitted under the fishery symbol.
Sa it hitp:iereati icenses/by/3.O/aul . >
ie ile every care is taken to ensure the accuracy of these data, all da 4
eee Datum: GDA 1994 castodans andor the Stale of Queensiand makes no representations Please refer to the relevant fisheries
GOVERNMENT 9 N fry patiewarpumoesand decane siasonbatyantaliauty legislation (eg Regulation or Management
Inits: Degree ji . : q
Green, damages (hrcuciny indvertor echecquerdieldaneega) and’ Plan) for the exact boundaries of an area.
o 10 20 ‘costs to which you might incur as a result of the data being inaccurate
————— or incomplete in any way and for any reason
30Section 31
MEDIUM TERM – OPTION ONE
ESTABLISH A PROCESS TO REMOVE NETS FROM THE NOOSA RIVER AND LAKES
A medium-term option includes establishing a process of removing netting from the Noosa River and Lakes
Cootharaba, Cooroibah and Weyba. If Council were to support this approach the support of the Queensland
Government is required;
1. Acceptance by the Queensland Government of the numerous initiatives included in Council’s
submission that focus on addressing N1 net fishery issues in the rivers and lakes;
2. Noosa Council builds on those initiatives with further proposed reforms that achieve a higher
conservation value outcome that begins the process of removing nets from the three lakes and the
Noosa River; and,
3. Addresses the finer scale spatial data collection and more granular economic analysis required to
accurately measure the fishing effort and the costs of removing the N1 nets from the system, over the
next three years.
The N1 mullet component of the net fishery in the lakes and rivers (W35, Site 16) is the key data point which
records the catch for the river and lakes, however, there is an issue with this data set. The issue is Site 16 also
includes some N1 ocean beach catch and there’s no way of identifying the river and lakes catch as distinct from
the recorded catch offshore. To indicate this, the following diagram shows the Method, Grid, Site, Number of
Boats, Species and Catch Volume in tonnes for Site 16 since 2015. Data for 2014 is not provided as there were
less than 5 boats active in Site 16.
The ring netting data from Site 16 only suggests the total catch is not significant however much finer scale
examination is required to get a very accurate estimate of the overall catch and effort for the purposes of
progressing a proposal that would meet the Fisheries Reallocation Policy requirements.
2015 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 6 Mullet - unspecified 106.48
2015 Ring Netting W35 16 5 Bream - unspecified 0.21
2015 Ring Netting W35 16 5 Mullet - unspecified 17.33
2016 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 7 Bream - unspecified 0.13
2016 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 7 Milkfish 0.09
2016 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 8 Mullet - unspecified 144.53
2016 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 7 Queenfish - unspecified 0.02
2016 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 7 Tailor 0.08
2016 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 7 Whiting - unspecified 0.09
2016 Ring Netting W35 16 11 Bream - unspecified 0.73
2016 Ring Netting W35 16 5 Eel (marine) 0.16
2016 Ring Netting W35 16 8 Flathead - unspecified 0.66
2016 Ring Netting W35 16 12 Mullet - unspecified 50.24
2016 Ring Netting W35 16 8 Trevally - unspecified 1.88
2016 Ring Netting W35 16 6 Whiting - unspecified 0.57
2017 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 5 Dart - unspecified 0.11
2017 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 8 Mullet - unspecified 70.35
2017 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 5 Shark - whaler unspecified 0.13
2017 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 5 Trevally - unspecified 0.70
2017 Ring Netting W35 16 6 Flathead - unspecified 0.26
2017 Ring Netting W35 16 5 Grunter - unspecified 0.16
2017 Ring Netting W35 16 5 John dory 0.03
2017 Ring Netting W35 16 12 Mullet - unspecified 26.32
31
Section 32
2017 Ring Netting W35 16 7 Trevally - unspecified 3.40
2017 Ring Netting W35 16 6 Whiting - unspecified 2.16
2018 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 5 Bream - unspecified 0.03
2018 Ocean Beach Netting W35 16 8 Mullet - unspecified 135.32
2018 Ring Netting W35 16 5 Bream - unspecified 0.27
2018 Ring Netting W35 16 5 Flathead - unspecified 0.44
2018 Ring Netting W35 16 8 Mullet - unspecified 33.90
2018 Ring Netting W35 16 5 ponyfishes 1.48
2018 Ring Netting W35 16 6 Trevally - unspecified 1.52
To accurately establish the catch data would require direct conversations with the active commercial fishers
to closely identify their fishing activity and recorded catch in the lakes. Some local stakeholders have indicated
the process to remove nets from the lakes commence with the least fished of the lakes, Lake Weyba however
this requires logbook data validation and confirmation from local fishers. Coupled with the advent of VMS21,
over the next three years FQ will have a more robust catch record data set of the commercial fishing activity in
the river and lakes that will benefit an application to apply the Reallocation Policy framework should this option
receive support.
MEDIUM TERM – OPTION TWO
WORK WITH THE QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT ON A NOOSA REGIONAL MANAGEMENT TRIAL
The Moreton Bay Regional Management Trial is now well underway and has identified some significant
challenges and complexities associated with achieving agreement on future fisheries management
arrangements under a regional management model with a diverse cohort of stakeholders and user groups.
Council has for some time noted a desire to have a greater level of involvement in the future management of
the permitted activities in its waterways and a regional management model could be a vehicle in which to
achieve this objective. The Noosa Council already supports projects that aim to deliver improvements in
aquatic biodiversity and fish abundance that will assist the restoration of the rivers, estuaries and lakes. Council
recognises the commercial fishing sector provides an income producing resource to local fishers who also seek
to continue to harvest this resource sustainably. Council also recognises there must be a balance between the
extractive activities permitted in the waterways and the communities desire to preserve the aquatic resources
and fish abundance for future generations.
This option proposes that Noosa Council identifies a framework and set of objectives for a regional
management trial for Noosa’s rivers, lakes and beaches and establish a stakeholder working group to bring
together representatives from key user groups of the river, lakes and beaches to provide a Regional
Management Trial Plan to submit to the Queensland Government for consideration.
The aim of the Noosa Stakeholder Working Group would be to develop a plan for future management priorities
for the sustainable use of aquatic resources including commercial, charter, recreational and indigenous fishing.
These objectives would ideally include consideration of some of the following principles;
Ecological Objectives
Advocate for habitat protection and rehabilitation
Minimise the risk of localised depletion of fish stocks and reduce bycatch
Advocate for continuous data collection and scientific knowledge assessments of fish stocks and water
monitoring
Protect vulnerable spawning aggregations
21
Vessel Monitoring System
32
Section 33
Economic Objectives
Maintain viable commercial, charter and recreational fishing businesses and associated businesses
that rely on these activities
Optimise the value of the recreational fishing experience
Social Objectives
Reduce conflict (both inter- and intra-sectoral, as well as with community)
Promote a shared responsibility to sustainably manage fisheries resources
Improve stewardship and compliance
Improve community understandings of allowable practices
Enhance the recreational fishing experience
Cultural Objectives
Improve stakeholder and community understanding of Traditional Owner connection to country and
Native Title rights
Improve the role of Traditional Owners in planning and management of fisheries in Traditional Owner
waters
Minimise impacts on cultural sites of high significance by high impact fishing activities
Rather than a one-size-fits-all approach to resource management the Queensland Government and Noosa
Shire Council could partner to establish a Noosa Stakeholder Working Group for a regional management trial
in Noosa. The Working Group would consider localised or regional fisheries issues within the broader scope of
the Queensland Government’s Sustainable Fisheries Strategy 2017-27.
The working group would ideally include representatives from the ocean beach net fishery, the rivers and lakes
net fisheries, the T5 Beam Trawl Fishery, recreational and charter fisheries, seafood retail including bait
sectors, indigenous group, conservation and land care sector reps, tourism and business sectors and
government representatives. The purpose of the regional management trial would be to consider how local
fisheries management issues can be introduced via the required changes to the general fisheries rules that will
better suit the Noosa coastal regions and communities. This approach recognises that local people have a
greater interest in protecting and fairly-allocating resources in their region.
To-date, there has not been a successful regional management framework introduced into fisheries
management arrangements in Queensland so it is difficult to undertake a cost benefit analysis until such a trial
is completed. For example, the regional management framework in Moreton Bay is significantly more complex
than it would be for Noosa and hence costs incurred may vary greatly.
Previously, the State Government commenced a regional co-management trial in the Burdekin in 2010/11. The
proposed reforms enjoyed wide spread local support however the trial was ultimately not successful in part
due to influences outside of the region. The proposed changes were designed to achieve the following
objectives;
Recreational fishers will enjoy net free fishing in a popular recreational fishing area;
Commercial fishers will be able to supply a range of fish species to local markets and avoid conflict with
recreational fishers; and,
Dugong will have greater levels of protection
The objectives described could be applied to any region across Queensland.
33
Section 34
LONGER-TERM OPTIONS
ESTABLISH A NET FREE ZONE IN THE NOOSA RIVER, ESTUARIES AND LAKES.
The establishment of Net Free Zones in Cairns, Mackay and Rockhampton on the 1st November 2015 was to
increase recreational fishing opportunities in Queensland, thereby supporting tourism and economic growth.
The cost to the Queensland Government was $3.318 million for the Buyback Scheme, $1.026 million for the
Settlement Scheme and $1.5 million for the Alleviation Scheme. The total funds set aside to administer the
Scheme and for the purposes of buying back commercial fishing boat licenses and allocate compensation was
$10 million.
The establishment of a net free zone in the Noosa River and lakes connected to the river is a medium to long
term option and would require support for the Queensland Government. A proposal will require significant fine
scale fisheries data and further detailed investigation into the current activities of all commercial net fishers
that have recorded catch history in the Noosa region. As the effects of a NFZ will be considered to impact all
authority holders of a net endorsement, a detailed compensation plan will also need to be constructed. There
would be considerable benefits to the establishment of a net free zone in Noosa and many of these benefits
are recognised in the Government’s monitoring of the net free zones22 since their introduction in Cairns,
Mackay and Rockhampton. It would also assist an application to the Queensland Government if the Noosa
Council consider the development of a Recreational Fishing Strategy similar to those initiated by other
jurisdictions in Queensland to support the case for a NFZ.
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A ‘NOOSA MARINE PARK’ FOR THE REGION THAT ADJOINS THE GREAT
SANDY MARINE PARK AND COMPLEMENTS THE EXISTING NOOSA NATIONAL PARK
Noosa Shire Council could work with the Queensland government to establish a multi-use Noosa Marine Park
that provides legislated protection for conservation values while allowing for ongoing sustainable use. The
establishment of a marine park will typically require a Public Benefit Test Report, usually prepared by the
Queensland Government Environment Protection Agency. This process includes a set of scientific guiding
principles that underpins the development of a new zoning plan in addition to extensive community
consultation to seek public support, without which a zoning plan is unlikely to progress.
It is important to acknowledge the establishment of a new zoning plan for the purposes of developing a new
marine park is a comprehensive process that will require government support from the commencement of the
process. Should Noosa Shire Council consider this objective as an option, sowing the seeds of the intent to
work with the government to seek marine park status for the Noosa area would ideally commence in parallel
to the medium-term options in this paper. It is also important to note that up front the costs of this option will
be significant and would require a substantial commitment from the Queensland government. For example,
the structural adjustment component of the Moreton Bay Marine Park introduced in 2008 was $16.5 million.
Additionally, there are other significant administrative costs such as the preliminary scientific works in
developing the Public Benefit Test, along with community consultation process. The establishment of a
Marine Park for Noosa would require the commitment of the local state Member of Parliament and many other
key stakeholders, including the two major political parties. Establishing an internal Noosa Council committee
to explore the opportunity may assist Council to consider the costs and benefits as a way to identify if this is a
realistic long term option for Council to pursue.
22
https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/business-priorities/fisheries/monitoring-compliance/monitoring-reporting/recreational-
fishing/net-free-fishing-zones-monitoring
34
Section 35
Background
Marine parks are established to protect tidal lands and waters and conserve the natural marine environment
while allowing for its sustainable use. They protect habitats, including mangrove wetlands, seagrass beds,
mudflats, sandbanks, beaches, rocky outcrops and fringing reefs. These parks include the subsoil below and
airspace above their boundaries, and the plants and animals within them. There are three state marine parks
in Queensland:
Great Barrier Reef Coast Marine Park
Great Sandy Marine Park
Moreton Bay Marine Park
The three Queensland marine parks are all multiple use marine parks. The Great Sandy Marine Park (GSMP)
was established in 2006 and covers approximately 6000 km2 extending from Baffle Creek in the north to
Double Island Point in the south. Like all Queensland marine parks, the GSMP is a multiple use area supporting
conservation while providing opportunities for a range of recreational, commercial and tourism opportunities.
The Great Sandy Marine Park Zones include;
Marine national park zone (referred to as a Green Zone)
Marine national park (green) zones or no-take zones provide the highest level of
protection in the marine park. They support conservation of areas containing high
natural or ecological value/s and enable a mix of habitats, plus their supporting species
to be represented in highly protected areas. Green zones are look, but don’t take areas
where non-extractive activities such as boating, diving and photography are allowed.
Activities such as fishing and collecting are prohibited.
Conservation park zone
Conservation park (yellow) zones protect significant marine habitats.
Commercial netting, trawling, and harvest fishing are prohibited within a
conservation park zone. Some exemptions apply in the Great Sandy Marine
Park.
Habitat protection zone
Habitat protection (dark blue) zones are located over areas that contain
sensitive habitats. Trawling is prohibited in these zones, but most other
activities are allowed.
General use zone
General use (light blue) zones provide both conservation and reasonable use of
the marine park. A wide range of activities are allowed to occur in these zones.
35
Section 36
Buffer zone
Buffer (olive-green) zones have the same entry and use provisions as a green
zone with the exception of allowing trolling for pelagic species. In the Great
Sandy Marine Park there is only one buffer zone and this is located around Wolf
Rock to support the protection of the endangered grey nurse shark.
A proposal for a Noosa Marine Park may seek to include any or all of the above zones and would be a
management opportunity for moored vessels, particular developments and recreational fishing. A marine park
would also be a mechanism to work more closely with traditional owners on management issues they view as
important. The marine park framework would embrace best practice conservation similar to the conservation
values of land-based national parks. This is particularly important to the area given the high value placed on
Noosa’s national park and its status as a reason for tourists visits.
This is a long-term process however if adopted as an option the process would ideally commence in the near
term with Council considering the cost benefit analysis of a Noosa Marine Park.
36
Section 37
COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN AND STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN
As part of the development of the Noosa River Management Plan, the Noosa Shire Council have commissioned
an evidence-based desktop study of the Noosa River, estuary and beach fisheries. The information gathered
will be used to inform the River Plan. The focus of this paper is on the commercial fisheries that operate in the
Noosa region to better understand the activities of fishermen and current management arrangements that
regulate these activities. From this, the paper provides Council with a number of options on how it can more
closely work with the Queensland Government to have greater input into the activities in the Noosa River,
estuary and beaches.
Following consultation with key stakeholders including commercial fishers from the Noosa region, a
community and stakeholder engagement plan has been developed to inform residents of Council’s preferred
options from the paper and seek to their views on those options.
The community and stakeholder engagement plan is developed based on the views of those engaged with
during this project and represents the next stage of a process Noosa Council can utilise following agreement
on preferred options to measure community support for those options.
KEY MESSAGES FROM THE STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
In the time it has taken to prepare this paper, a consistent message from stakeholders has identified time and
again; there is a recognition that the waterways are under significant pressure from multiple user groups, who
have some strongly held and divergent views over the activities currently permitted in the Noosa River,
estuaries and beaches. Further, there is an expectation that at some time in the future, Council is likely to seek
support from the community to more closely control the permitted activities allowable in the Noosa
waterways and beaches.
Feedback ranged from ‘the river is being loved to death and it needs a break’ through to ‘the biggest contributor
to the degradation of the Noosa waterways is over development and sediment run off’ and ‘commercial fishing
needs to be removed from the lakes and waterways’. These views are permeated by a common theme that there
is an expectation that ‘someone’ needs to do ‘something’ about it.
This community and stakeholder engagement plan is in response to this feedback and provides the Noosa
Council with a pathway to hear the views of the broader community and measure support for Council’s
preferred options. Council’s preferred options are included in the plan and seek feedback from the community
to implement the proposed changes to the permitted activities in the Noosa River, estuaries and beaches.
Importantly, the community and stakeholder engagement plan identifies the current regulatory framework
for the management of commercial, recreational and charter fisheries does not provide Council with the
authority to alter or change the permitted activities in the waterways. This authority lies with the Queensland
Government. The community and stakeholder engagement plan is informed by the stakeholder analysis
conducted over the months of January through to April 2019, with select key stakeholders who have been
assessed as having a high level of interest in the Noosa waterways and that if change was initiated, would also
have a medium to high level of impact on those individuals and groups.
37
Section 38
COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN - OVERVIEW
Continue to engage with the Queensland Government on the implementation of the Sustainable Fisheries
Strategy 2017-2027 and make a submission on some identified regulatory changes based on feedback from
key local stakeholders contained in this paper. Some of the proposed regulatory changes included in the
Council submission be included in the broader community consultation as part of the final River Plan. Council
writes to the Queensland Government to inform them of the outcomes of this Report and to seek their support
to work together on the permitted activities in the Noosa River, estuary and beaches to achieve the reforms
Council has identified. Once Council gains agreement from the Queensland Government to partner with
Council on a pathway to implementation of some fisheries management reforms, the community consultation
process occurs in stages.
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION – STAGE ONE
Notify the community of Council’s preferred options on the proposed permitted activities in the Noosa River
and waterways and seek community and stakeholder support as part of the Noosa Council River Plan. Once
feedback is received from the community and the level of community support has been identified, informs the
community of the outcome via the Noosa Council Website and amends the Draft River Plan to include the
proposed reforms.
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION – STAGE TWO
Council engages directly with stakeholders that are assessed as HIGH IMPACT HIGH INTEREST and HIGH
IMPACT LOW INTEREST and LOW IMPACT HIGH INTEREST23 to inform them that Council intends to
implement the reforms agreed in the community consultation, in partnership with the State Government.
ESTABLISH THE NOOSA FISHING FUTURES WORKING GROUP
Noosa Council establishes a Working Group of key stakeholders to work through the proposed reforms and
work with the Queensland Government to implement the reforms ensuring all legislative and regulatory
amendments are secured. The Noosa Fishing Futures Working Group will facilitate implementation of Noosa
Council’s short term options. The plan also allows for community announcements as the preferred options
issues are considered and completed.
THE PLAN
The Noosa Council community stakeholder and engagement plan will conduct a range of community
engagement activities to understand community views regarding the future permitted activities in the Noosa
River, lakes and beaches. The final Noosa Council Fishing Futures Report will note Council’s preferred options
for the future management of Noosa waterways to ensure these unique community assets is protected for
future generations. More detail to be provided once Council decides on the options it is going to pursue.
ENGAGEMENT PURPOSE
Noosa Council has received the Noosa Fishing Futures Report that provided insights previously not well
understood by Council into the current commercial fishing activities conducted in our waterways and beaches
to inform the River Plan. The Report provides some context to Noosa Council’s proposed preferred options
that is the basis for this engagement process, to seek community support to have a greater level of input into
the permitted activities allowed in the Noosa waterways. This includes the commercial fishing activities
currently allowed in the Noosa region. The affected stakeholders are Noosa residents and those assessed in
the stakeholder analysis as high impact high interest, low impact high interest and high interest low impact.
23
Refer Stakeholder Spreadsheet
38
Section 39
ENGAGEMENT SCOPE
The scope of Noosa Council’s preferred options is outlined in the community engagement plan and Council
will seek views on these options for commercial fishing in the Noosa waterways and beaches.
ENGAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this engagement process is to hear residents views on Council’s desire to achieve greater
levels input into the future allowable uses of the Noosa waterways to;
Better protect the aquatic habitat and marine ecosystem biodiversity;
Extend protections similar to land based protections afforded to the Noosa National Park to our
waterways and beaches; and,
Ensure the status of the top four reasons tourists visit Noosa (the beach; the food; the National Park
and, the regions natural beauty and amenity) is maintained for the future.
STAKEHOLDER AND ISSUES ANALYSIS
Noosa Council has conducted an initial engagement and a stakeholder analysis with some key stakeholders
including those assessed as high impact high interest. This included commercial and recreational fishers,
seafood retail and wholesalers, community conservation groups, Kabi Kabi, business and tourism groups and
individuals with a high level of interest in the Noosa waterways. Noosa Council will consider the community
feedback and further engagement with these key stakeholders to ensure all impacted and interested groups
views are considered in an open and transparent way.
LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT
Noosa Council will consult and engage with key stakeholders and the community on the revised Draft River
Plan through various methods. It will also inform the community of the outcomes of this engagement process
in the final River Plan.
INFORMATION COLLECTION
Noosa Council will engage with the community with communication materials including fact sheets, key
messages and FAQs, social media website content and face-to-face briefings for key stakeholders (directly
impacted groups). All information collected will be used to inform the decision outcome.
RESOURCES REQUIRED
Council will allocate the resources including financial and human resources that are available and required to
meet defined engagement methods.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Community and stakeholder engagement will commence upon agreement from the Queensland Government
to work with Noosa Council to have a greater say over the permitted activities in the Noosa River, lakes and
beaches.
NEXT STEPS
Design the community and stakeholder engagement plan framing relevant questions and supporting
information with Council officers once Council has agreed on preferred options.
39
Section 40
PROPOSED TIMELINE of ENGAGEMENT PLAN
Community
MAY 2019 consultation closes AUGUST 2019
Seek agreement Inform community
with Queensland of stakeholder
Government to JULY 2019 engagement
work together on outcomes - final
fisheries reform River Plan
Community &
stakeholder
engagement
JUNE 2019 commences as part OCTOBER 2019
of revised River
Plan
Submission to Establish Noosa
Noosa Council
Fisheries Fishing Futures
agrees on preferred
Queensland Working Group to
options
consultation paper implement options
40
Section 41
PRECIS OF OTHER SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
The Initial Findings Working Paper presented to Council in February provided some insights into examples of
fisheries management reforms undertaken in other jurisdictions around Australia. This is a precis of those
options.
CASE STUDY ONE - INTRODUCTION of NET FREE ZONES
The Queensland Government introduced net-free fishing zones in Cairns, Mackay and Rockhampton on 1st
November 2015. At the time of introduction, the government said, “the net-free fishing zones will increase
recreational fishing opportunities in Queensland, thereby supporting tourism and economic growth. By
recognising the total value of spending by recreational fishers, the net-free fishing zones improve the potential
for fishing-based tourism in our regional areas”. The net free zones were opposed by the commercial sector
but well supported by the recreational fishing sector. The net-free zones exclude the use of any commercial
nets by commercial fishers, including for the purpose of collecting bait for personal use. Activities allowed in
the net-free zones includes commercial crabbing, line fishing and trawling where it was permitted previously
and recreational fishers can use cast nets and bait nets where they were permitted previously, as long as these
nets are lawful and comply with current length and mesh size restrictions.
To assist commercial fishers adjust to the changes, a Structured Buyback Scheme for commercial fishing boat
licence holders who were directly affected by the net-free zones was established and has now been completed.
This scheme was established in 2015. The Buyback Scheme was targeted at the holders of the commercial
fishing boat licences used in the zones between 2012 and 2014. The scheme sought to buy back up to 46
licences voluntarily to minimise commercial fishing effort moving into other areas or other fisheries (displaced
effort). Twenty-seven offers were received at a cost of $3,318M. This equates to an average payment of
$122,888 per license holder. A voluntary Licence Buyback Scheme was also available to holders of a
commercial fishing vessel licence that had recorded net fishing effort in one or more of the Zones in the period
between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2014. To reduce the possibility of displaced fishing effort, the
voluntary buyback scheme aimed to remove 46 commercial fishing vessel licences of the total of 78
commercial fishing vessel licences that were eligible for the scheme. Licence holders were offered a fixed price
for the entire licence package. The value of the offer varied from licence to licence depending on the fishery
symbols attached to the licence.
The remaining 2 schemes, the Settlement Scheme and the Impact Alleviation Scheme, were targeted at
impacted commercial fishers who were offered a cash payment based on the level of commercial netting
undertaken in each of the zones. There were 95 fishers eligible for the Settlement Scheme, and 87 fishers chose
to accept the offer at a total cost $1.026M. This equates to an average payment to commercial fishers of
$11,793 each. The Settlement Scheme was available to commercial fishers who had been in control of a
licensed commercial fishing boat that undertook commercial net fishing within one or more the Zones. To be
eligible for the settlement scheme evidence had to be provided, in the form of commercial logbooks, that
demonstrated that the fisher was in charge of a commercial vessel operating in the Zones between 1 January
2012 and 31 December 2014. Fishers were offered a set amount based on a formula which used the number of
days they had fished in the Zones between 2012 and 2014 and a daily rate. There were 30 fishers eligible for
the Impact Alleviation Scheme and all fishers chose to accept the offer made at a total cost of $1.5M. This
equates to an average payment of $50,000 per fisher. The Impact Alleviation Scheme was available to
commercial fishers most impacted as a result of the introduction of the Zones. Fishers who had recorded at
least 60 days net fishing effort in the Zones (as recorded in logbooks received before 1 April 2015) and where
that effort was at least 50% of their total net fishing effort were eligible for payments under this scheme.
NOTE: Fisheries Queensland have noted that post the buy-out scheme being completed, the noticeable
changes in the sector are the departure of some commercial fishers from the sector resulting in the catch effort
days is down from levels prior to the scheme however the overall fishing effort has remained steady.
Importantly, the effort has moved to other coastal waters now there is no net fishing allowed in the NFZs. Early
indications are some of this effort has shifted to the areas adjacent to the NFZs.
41
Section 42
Recreational Fishers’ Satisfaction and Expectations of Queensland’s Net Free Zones
Following the introduction of Net Free Zones in 2015, the Queensland Government have undertaken surveys
to determine if the satisfaction and expectations of recreational fishers changed following the establishment
of the NFZs. The surveys identified that satisfaction with fishing is generally positive and appears to be
increasing. The overall satisfaction over the previous 12 months was greater in 2016 than 2015. In Cairns and
Rockhampton, satisfaction was similar between years but in Mackay satisfaction was significantly greater in
2016. Recreational fishers were more satisfied with the number of big fish caught, the number of fish caught,
the size of the fish caught and the overall fishing in the area. All three Councils have developed recreational
fishing strategies since the introduction of NFZs. By way of example, the Mackay Region Recreational Fishing
Strategy 2017-202224 seeks to maximise economic benefits and opportunities from what it considers to be a
position of strength – its varied range of fish species and diverse range of freshwater and marine fishing
locations provide the core attributes necessary for the region to become a premier recreational fishing
destination. Designation of the Net Free Zone has provided the additional impetus necessary to take the next
step – it can be a gamechanger for the region. The Mackay Council is aiming to offer a recreational fishing
experience 365 days of the year by nurturing our fish stocks and habitats, and targeted investment in
infrastructure provide the basis for sustainable growth.
The key element of the strategy is collaboration between Council, State Government and the volunteer sector.
The Mackay Council recognises they will require external funding and partnership opportunities to invest in
recreational fishing infrastructure, and work to improve ecology and fisheries management whilst working
with the existing community resources available to them. This means utilising some of their inherent
strengths; education, accessibility, conservation, environment, sport and recreation, marketing and events,
tourism and business development. This is a success story in all three jurisdictions. The data for the most recent
Fisheries Queensland survey for 2018 is not yet available but early indicators are the feedback from survey
participants is very positive. These most recent surveys and further data from each jurisdiction will be provided
later in the report.
CASE STUDY TWO - THE REMOVAL of NET FISHING from PORT PHILLIP BAY
In 2014, the Victorian government committed to phase out netting in Port Phillip Bay to improve recreational
fishing opportunities and contribute to the government’s aim to increase the number of anglers in Victoria to
1 million. The plan commenced in 2014 and will end on 1st April 2022. To date, 33 fishers have elected to exit
the fishery and 8 have decided to remain in the Bay are restricted to using non-net gear types and methods.
Two types of compensation packages have been provided to those whose fishery licenses are surrendered or
restricted by the scheme;
a surrender package for license holders exiting the fishery, payable in the year in which they exit; and,
an adjustment package for the license holders eligible to remain in the non-net fishery.
Under the Victorian plan the scheme provided $27M for compensation, depending on when a license holder
exits the fishery. A surrender package compensation scheme consisted of;
the assessed market value of the license, assessed by the Victorian Valuer General as being $310,000;
an allowance of $75,000 for commercial fishing equipment such as vessels and nets; and,
an amount to provide compensation for loss of income based on 3 times the average annual catch
value taken over 5 fishing years from1 April 2009 to 31 March 2014 under the license.
24
https://www.connectingmackay.com.au/25549/documents/55616
42
Section 43
An adjustment package for the 8 fishers who chose to remain license holders in non-net fishery after 1 April
2022 to be paid on 1 April 2022 will receive;
50% of the assessed market value of the license, in recognition of the reduced utility and earning
capacity of the license without the authority to use nets; and,
an allowance of $50,000 to account for the reduced market value of specialised gear given the
prohibition on netting.
Incentivised payments or increased up-front funding was provided to provide greater recognition and
compensation to fishers if they exit early. This meant that for fishers that did exit early received a more
valuable package or stay in the fishery and continue to earn an income from their license over the remaining 7
years. The increased management mechanisms placed on the recreational sector included a new state wide
recreational catch survey and to expand the Victorian Angler program combined with size, bag and possession
limits. Nets were removed from Port Phillip Bay to improve recreational fishing plus to remove conflict from
the fishery. It was recorded at the time that the percentage of seafood consumed in Victoria that came out of
Port Phillip Bay was 1%.
CASE STUDY THREE – THE BURDEKIN REGIONAL MANAGEMENT TRIAL
In 2010-11 the Queensland Government established a trial of regional co-management in the Burdekin. The
Burdekin Regional Fisheries Management Committee was formed to consider regional fisheries issues. The
committee included recreational fishers, commercial fishers, fish shop owners and government
representatives. The purpose of the trial was to consider how changes to the general fisheries rules may be
introduced to better suit local coastal regions and communities. Effectively introduce a regime of regional co-
management where the responsibilities for sustainable fisheries management are negotiated and shared
between the government, fishers and other groups and stakeholders. This approach recognises that local
people have a greater interest in protecting and fairly allocating resources in their region. After many months
of working through the localised issues with excellent knowledge between the recreational, commercial and
some indigenous fishers being shared a number of proposed changes were put forward to the community for
consideration. This was done in the form of a two-page survey seeking community and stakeholder feedback.
The proposed changes to netting closures were as follows;
Commercial netting occurs in the lower stretches of the Burdekin River. Species targeted include
barramundi, blue salmon, king salmon, diamond scale mullet and shark. Commercial netting also
occurs in the foreshores of Home Hill Beach, targeting the same species and occasionally bream,
whiting and flathead when in season. The proposal is to close Home Hill Beach to commercial netting,
but compensate by extending the commercial netting area in the Burdekin River. The proposed
commercial netting area of the Burdekin River is only lightly fished by recreational fishers. In contrast,
Home Hill Beach is heavily fished by recreational fishers.
The proposed changes were designed to achieve the following benefits;
Recreational fishers will enjoy net free fishing in a popular recreational fishing area;
Commercial fishers will be able to supply a range of fish species to local markets and avoid conflict with
recreational fishers; and,
Dugong will have greater levels of protection
The proposed reforms enjoyed wide spread local support however the trial was ultimately not successful in
part due to influences outside of the region.
CASE STUDY FOUR – THE MORETON BAY REGIONAL MANAGEMENT TRIAL
The Sustainable Fisheries Strategy commits to piloting regional management in a key location e.g. Moreton
Bay to assess the benefits and limitations of regionally specific management arrangements. Management
43
Section 44
arrangements for many fisheries are currently set at a state-wide level (e.g. recreational bag and size limits,
commercial endorsements accessing entire east coast). Many stakeholders, however, are seeking a more
regional approach to fisheries management. This is often seen as a way to address localised social, economic
or environmental issues, which are difficult to address at a state-wide level (e.g. regional quotas and zoning to
address resource sharing within and between sectors). Moreton Bay is a popular adjacent to the primary
population area of South East Queensland. The commercial catch from Moreton Bay comes from a variety of
different methods including otter trawl, beam trawl, tunnel netting, gill netting, line and stocks a range of local
markets and fish and chip shops. There is also a significant worm and crab fishery operating within the
Bay. Many of the commercially targeted species are also taken by recreational fishers so there is significant
competition for access to fisheries resources. The fishery is also home to important traditional fishing by
Aboriginal groups. Given the demand for fisheries resources from this area, it is also susceptible to localised
depletion issues. The Working Group has met three times since the meetings commenced in September 2018
so it is early days. The outcomes of the WG process will be important to Noosa Council in determining if
regional management is a valid option at some point in the future. For more information on the Working Group
including the membership go to:
https://www.daf.qld.gov.au/business-priorities/fisheries/sustainable/sustainable-fisheries-strategy/fishery-
working-groups/moreton-bay-working-group/mbwg-terms-of-reference
44