CCAMLR

The current season (2014/15) is the final one of the first three-season research which began in 2013 in data-poor fisheries. In the present report, the next three-season (2016-18) research plan in Subarea 48.6 was revised using the updated CCAMLR C2 and Observer data.

The stock sizes for five research blocks (48.6_1, 48.6_2, 48.6_3, 48.6_4 and 48.6_5) were estimated by the Petersen estimator and the CPUE x seabed analogy method. The stock size estimate using the Petersen estimator was relatively consistent with that using the CPUE method (using Division 88.2H as a reference area) for Dissostichus mawsoni in block 48.6_2. However, the estimates using the Petersen estimator were two-three times larger than those using the CPUE method in the block 48.6_3 and 48.6_4. Predicted numbers of tag recaptures from the estimated stock sizes using the both Petersen and CPUE methods (using Division 88.2H as a reference area) were relatively consistent with the observed numbers for D. mawsoni in the block 48.6_2 for 2012/13 and 2013/14 seasons. The predicted and observed numbers using either method were generally inconsistent for Dissostichus spp. in other blocks.

In the current season three Dissostichus mawsoni tagged and released in the previous seasons in the ice shelf block 48.6_4 were recaptured in the same block, which made it possible to estimate the stock size using the Petersen method for the block for the first time.

Understanding of the resource structure through clarification of their life history is essential to establish stock assessment and robust stock/ fisheries management of Dissostichus spp. population(s) in data- poor exploratory fisheries. During the second three-season research, we will continue enhanced tagging program, and collection and analysis of biological data including otoliths and gonads to clarify migration route and associated life stages of the fish.

To this end, we propose to follow the current research style in the current research blocks for the second three-season research with the sample sizes re-estimated following the procedure recommended at the WG-FSA in 2013 in order to maximize the expectation of tag-recapture to the extent possible under the precautionary exploitation rate. We expect further progress of tagging research in the southern research blocks during the next three-season research because several fish tagged and released in the preceding seasons began to be recaptured.

In addition we propose the westward extension of the research block 48.6_4. The expanding the boundaries of the research block may promote sufficient utilization of the catch limit, which enables us to make more reliable stock estimation, and also be more likely to detect tagged fish that had moved off research block to the continual slope/shelf.

CCAMLR has been managing the krill fishery without sufficient measures needed to meet the requirements of Article II of the Convention. To meet these requirements ASOC seeks key improvements in the management of Antarctic krill fisheries, including establishing feedback management procedures, requiring 100% scientific observer coverage on board krill vessels, and implementing further protective measures to prevent excessive concentration of krill fishing in coastal areas close to predator colonies in Subarea 48.1. This is of particular relevance since fishing has in recent years been concentrated in coastal locations in 48.1.

In 2014 the  Commission acknowledged the extensive developments that have taken place in recent years in relation to research fishing in exploratory fisheries, closed fisheries and other areas and  requested a review of the requirements of CM 21-02 and related measures (e.g., CMs 21-01 and 24-01) in light of these developments.  It is apparent that the nomenclature and working ‘status’ of individual fisheries and the regulatory framework have become somewhat disconnected, and the Scientific Committee and Commission may wish to review the current status and nomenclature of exploratory and closed fisheries, with a view to  realign these fisheries with their status within the context of the  regulatory framework. There may also be a need to review the relevant Conservation Measures to determine the information requirements, and the process for obtaining that information, for all fisheries targeting toothfish that are not established fisheries. One option may be to consider decoupling  the Research Plan pro-forma from CM 24-01 (Annex A, Format 2) and make it an annex to CM 41-01 noting that this would require a change in the status of some fisheries  from ‘Closed’ to ‘Exploratory’ and would require new/revised  CM(s) that includes a specific research catch limit.