 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Southern squid jig fishery | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Overview | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The southern squid jig fishery extends from Sandy Cape on Fraser Island to the South Australia – Western Australia border (map 19). It includes a small area of oceanic waters off southern Queensland and all Commonwealth waters further than 3 nautical miles from the territorial baselines of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia. A series of arrangements under the Offshore Constitutional Settlement (OCS) have been negotiated with the southern states on the management of squid resources in inshore waters. The fishery is managed using a total allowable effort system with a trigger catch limit. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Catch composition | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Most jigging occurs off Portland, Queenscliffe and Lakes Entrance in Victoria, although some vessels also operate off southern New South Wales, eastern Tasmania and south of Kangaroo Island. Catches are generally taken between January and June, with the highest catch levels occurring in March and April. Trawl catches of squid in the management area of the fishery are also reported throughout the year, but are most common during the autumn and winter months. Operators use very bright lights to illuminate the water around their vessels. Squid gather in the shaded area under the vessel and dart into the light to take barbless lures that are ‘jigged’ up and down on either side of the vessel. The line is hauled when the jigging machines register a change in the weight on the line. Arrow (or Gould’s) squid is the principal target species in the fishery. It is primarily caught by targeted squid jigging operations, but is also taken as byproduct by demersal trawlers targeting finfish on shelf grounds in the Commonwealth trawl and Great Australian Bight trawl sectors of the southern and eastern scalefish and shark fishery. Squid caught by the jigging method is generally considered to be of a higher quality, and therefore yields a higher price. There is considerable seasonal variability in terms of both the quantity and value of production in the fishery. Over the past ten years the total catch has varied between 300 and 1800 tonnes (figure 48). Catches are influenced by the abundance of squid and the performance of other Commonwealth and state fisheries. The gross value of production has also varied over this period (figure 49), reflecting changes in both catch levels and the per unit price received by fishers for squid. Very low levels of bycatch are associated with squid jigging. In the southern squid jig fishery other varieties of squid constitute less than 1 per cent of the total catch. Those of commercial interest most likely to be caught are the inshore southern calamari, the offshore red ocean squid, and the Southern Ocean arrow squid. Squid jigging permits for the southern squid jig fishery also allow operators to retain a maximum of 100 kilograms of any incidentally caught fish, with the exception of any tuna or tuna like species, marlin, billfish, blue eye trevalla, blue warehou, pink ling and gemfish. Small amounts of blue shark, barracouta, garfish, mirror dory and octopus have been reported as bycatch, but these species constitute less than 1 per cent of the total catch for the fishery. Box 5 discusses squid catch in other Commonwealth fisheries. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Trade | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Generally, operators in the southern squid jig fishery service domestic markets where they compete with large volumes of imports, the value of which is many times greater than the value of the fishery. For 2006-07, ABS trade data give the value of squid and cuttlefish imports as $48.7 million (figure 50). Principal sources are China, New Zealand and Thailand. The value of Australian cuttlefish and squid exports is very low. In 2006-07, $1 million worth of cuttlefish and squid was exported, mostly to China, Canada and Hong Kong. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Management arrangements | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Current management arrangements | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The fishery is managed by AFMA, with advice from the Southern Squid Jig Fishery Management Advisory Committee (SquidMAC). The Southern Squid Jig Fishery Research Advisory Group (SquidRAG) has also been established to provide advice to AFMA and SquidMAC on assessments relating to stock and environmental and economic conditions. A management plan was determined for the fishery in early 2005 and all gear statutory fishing rights (SFRs) were allocated by January 2006. In line with AFMA’s legislated objectives, the plan outlines objectives of maximising economic efficiency and ensuring the best use of the living resources of the fishery (table 41). Management is based on input controls in the form of jig-machine gear units. Before the start of each fishing year AFMA, in consultation with SquidMAC and SquidRAG, determines the total allowable effort (TAE) for the fishery for that season. The number of standard squid jigging machines allocated to a gear SFR is then calculated by dividing the TAE for the fishery by the total number of gear SFRs in force at the start of the fishing year. In 2006, the number of SFRs was reduced from 8000 to 6400 SFRs through a voluntary buy-back scheme conducted by the Australian Government (Rudzinskas and Davis 2007). The fishery also has a trigger catch level of 4000 tonnes (more than twice the annual catch in any year since 1995-96). The trigger level is part of an apportionment policy which shares the squid resource in southern waters between the Great Australian Bight trawl sector, the Commonwealth trawl sector and southern squid jig fishery. A review of the stock and the catch level resulted in a TAC being introduced across the fisheries. The Southern Squid Jig Fishery Management Plan 2005 is also supported by a Bycatch Action Plan (BAP), which contains objectives, strategies and actions relating to the management of bycatch in the fishery. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Financial performance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vessels operating in the southern squid jig fishery were surveyed in 2000-01 as part of ABARE’s ongoing series of Australian fisheries surveys reports. The seasonal nature of the fishery means many squid jig fishers also operate in other fisheries, often targeting scallops, sharks and finfish. In many cases, this requires vessels to be re-equipped. The activities in these other fisheries therefore have a major influence on the financial performance of the boats operating in the southern squid jig fishery. For the fleet as a whole, average cash receipts were estimated to be $355 960 per boat in 2000-01 (table 42). In the same year, crew costs, repairs and maintenance and fuel costs accounted for 75 per cent of total average cash costs, which were equal to $276 000 a vessel. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Economic performance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ABARE conducted surveys in the southern squid jig fishery in the late 1990s and early 2000s, but due to the limited activity in the fishery since then economic surveys have not recently been conducted. Estimates of the level of latent effort are available for the fishery. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Level of latency | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In recent years there has been high latent effort in the southern squid jig fishery (table 43). In 2006-07, 80 Commonwealth entitlements were issued for the fishery but only 17 vessels operated in that year. The existence of latent effort in the fishery is a reliable indicator that total effort is not being restricted, and the fishery is operating at close to the open access equilibrium. A high level of latent effort also prevents a fishery from recovering from low net economic returns, as any profit opportunities which arise will be quickly dissipated through the activation of latent permits. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net economic returns | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net economic returns for the fishery were estimated for 1997-98, 1998-99 and 2000-01 in Galeano et al. (2003). The real net economic returns for all estimated years are negative (figure 52). A number of factors have contributed to low participation numbers and investment in the fishery. These include relatively high set up and running costs for squid jigging operations, as well as consumer preferences for southern calamari. The most significant factors, however, have been the low market price received by fishers for squid and competition from low cost imports. The tendency for squid abundance levels to fluctuate from season to season also influences participation in the jig sector. The short-lived and fast-growing nature of the target species allows for rapid stock regeneration, often resulting in large, seasonal variations in stock abundance. In turn, the lack of a reliable supply for the domestic market has limited the development of processing facilities. Currently, the majority of boats operating in the fishery have no onboard refrigeration or processing equipment. The catch is chilled onboard but must be returned to port each morning for processing or freezing. Most of the vessels are also not equipped to operate in extreme weather conditions, and heavy winds and swells in Bass Strait effectively halt activity in the fishery during the winter months. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Management costs | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In 2006-07, the fishery’s allocated management costs of $180 000 were approximately equal to 17 per cent of its gross value of production. After taking into account fishing costs, a fishery’s profits can be expected to equal 10–25 per cent of revenue. Management costs for the fishery are therefore likely to be close to, or possibly even greater than, profits. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Overall economic performance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Based on the measures available, it is highly unlikely net economic returns in the southern squid jig fishery are being maximised. In recent seasons, more than 70 per cent of permits were left unused, implying fishers assess the fishery’s profitability as poor. This is verified by ABARE’s most recent economic survey of the fishery (in 2000-01), which showed economic costs were significantly greater than fishing revenue. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Small fisheries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
| objectives of the management plan are: | measures by which the objectives are to be obtained are: | performance criteria against which measures taken will be assessed are: | ||||
| To maximise economic efficiency in the exploitation of the resources of the fishery; | Developing and implementing a system for collecting data which can be used to assess the economic efficiency of the fishery; | Data about the current and potential net economic returns of the fishery has been collected and analysed to enable: | ||||
| To ensure the best use of the living resources of the fishery; |  assessment of whether the data is consistent with improvements in the economic efficiency of the fishery; |
|||||
| institutional arrangements to be modified, if necessary, to allow improvements in the economic efficiency of the fishery |
||||||
|
||||
| species | status | stock status indicator |
notes | |
|
||||
| Arrow squid (southern) |
Stock status is uncertain | Catch |
No stock assessment. Catch and effort trigger set at precautionary levels in the harvest strategy | |
| Source: Larcombe and Begg. (2008). | ||||
|
|||||
2000-01 |
|||||
|
|||||
| Scallop receipts | $ |
25 320 |
(43) |
||
| Squid receipts | $ |
146 386 |
(10) |
||
| Other fishing receipts | $ |
131 419 |
(40) |
||
| Non-fishing receipts | $ |
52 849 |
(50) |
||
|
|||||
| Total cash receipts | $ |
355 962 |
(17) |
||
|
|||||
| Administration | $ |
5 049 |
(20) |
||
| Crew costs | $ |
116 574 |
(10) |
||
| Food | $ |
6 421 |
(12) |
||
| Fuel | $ |
36 172 |
(13) |
||
| Insurance | $ |
12 454 |
(24) |
||
| Licence fees and levies | $ |
17 066 |
(24) |
||
| Repairs and maintenance | $ |
55 447 |
(24) |
||
| Other costs | $ |
26 850 |
(47) |
||
|
|||||
| Total cash costs | $ |
276 033 |
(13) |
||
|
|||||
| Boat cash income | $ |
79 930 |
(57) |
||
| less Depreciation a | $ |
37 883 |
(23) |
||
| Boat business profit | $ |
42 046 |
(107) |
||
| plus Interest, leasing and rent | $ |
1 639 |
(45) |
||
| Profit at full equity | $ |
43 685 |
(103) |
||
| Capital (excl. quota and lic.) | $ |
572 701 |
(17) |
||
| Capital (incl. quota and lic.) | $ |
1 377 895 |
(21) |
||
| Rate of return to boat capital b | % |
7.6 |
(104) |
||
| Rate of return to full equity c | % |
3.2 |
(90) |
||
| a Depreciation adjusted for profit or loss on capital items sold. b Excluding value of quota and licences. c Including value of quota and licences. na Not applicable. Note: Figures in parenthesis are relative standard errors. A guide to interpreting these is included in appendix A, ‘estimating the economic performance of Commonwealth managed fisheries’. |
|||||
|
|||||
active vessels |
concessions |
latency |
|||
% |
|||||
|
|||||
| 1997-98 | 32 |
84 |
62 |
||
| 1998-99 | 36 |
84 |
57 |
||
| 1999-00 | 30 |
84 |
64 |
||
| 2000-01 | 26 |
84 |
69 |
||
| 2001-02 | 11 |
84 |
87 |
||
| 2002-03 | 16 |
83 |
81 |
||
| 2003-04 | 14 |
83 |
83 |
||
| 2004-05 | 20 |
80 |
75 |
||
| 2005-06 | 21 |
80 |
74 |
||
| 2006-07 | 17 |
80 |
79 |
||
| Source: (Rudzinskas and Davis 2007). | |||||
