CCAMLR

This paper summarises recent, fishery-related scientific research notified in accordance with Conservation Measure 24-01. Four notifications were received by the Secretariat for research in 2009/10, and five notifications have been received to date for research in 2010/11. Details of the notifications for 2010/11 are appended.

This paper summarises the information collected by observers for the 2009/10 season relating to compliance with Conservation Measures 24-02 (2008), 25-02 (2009), 25-03 (2009) and 26-01 (2009).

The Secretariat has proposed a work plan and budget for the development of a VME registry to manage, store, process and summarise data notified under CMs 22-06 and 22-07 (SC-CAMLR-XXVIII, paragraph 4.251(xvi)). This registry would include a secure database for holding notification details and related data, for generating web-based lists of VMEs notified under CM 22-06 and VME risk areas and fine-scale rectangles notified under CM 22-07, and for holding documents outlining CCAMLR’s management advice and information related to VMEs and risk areas and a selection of maps of VMEs, risk areas, and associated features. In this proposal, summary information on VMEs and VME risk areas and fine-scale rectangles, including locations and taxonomic composition, is intended to be posted on the public section of the CCAMLR website. The registry will be based on the database structure and routines established for the interim VME registry, for which much of the database work has been completed. The development of the web-based lists, document archive and basic maps will be completed by early 2011. Further work would be required in subsequent years to maintain the registry and implement transition to future software and system requirements. The Secretariat is investigating options for the development of its mapping capacity to support enhanced mapping functionality, including multi-layer maps. Options and their budget implications will be forwarded to the Scientific Commission and Commission for consideration in 2011. WG-FSA and the Scientific Committee are invited to consider the development of the VME registry, and review and approve the work plan and budget, as appropriate.

The paper presents an estimate of IUU catches of toothfish during the 2009/10 fishing season, using the standard, compliance derived methodology. The paper was revised on 4 October 2010 to take into account new information submitted in respect of two vessels fishing in Divisions 58.4.1 and 58.4.4a. Changes from version 1 are highlighted in bold.

This paper summarises the data collected by National and International Scientific Observers operating in the Convention Area on board longline, trawl and pot fishing vessels during the 2009/10 season.

Summary (road-map) of fishery-related information for WG-FSA including availability of data, catches in assessed and exploratory fisheries, notifications (fisheries, research and VMEs) and estimates of IUU fishing. Where applicable, WG-FSA’s draft 2010 fishery reports have been updated with this information.

During three summer surveys at Prince Edward Island (PEI), southern Indian Ocean (2001, 2004 and 2008), 416 southern elephant seals Mirounga leonina were inspected for identification tags. In all, 42 seals that had been tagged as weaned pups at their natal site were found on Marion Island (MI), 38 of which could be individually identified by resighting their tag numbers. The majority of the MI-tagged seals were yearlings or subadults, and all but one were hauled out at PEI for the annual moult. The attendance rate of the known individuals at their natal island during the annual moult was only 40%, based on their resighting histories. This was significantly lower than the 77 ± 6% moult attendance rate estimated for a random MI population sample drawn from the same cohorts (based on 10 000 replications). Annual resight probabilities (considering all haulout phases) was 58% per annum for the MI seals seen at PEI, and 80 ± 4% for the simulation. Seasonal and annual absences of seals from MI violate the ‘homogeneity of capture’ assumption of mark–recapture models. When multiple sightings during any year are treated as a single sighting, resights during other haulouts (e.g. breeding) compensate only partially for absences during the moult. Therefore, mark–recapture studies undertaken in archipelagos should ideally include both marking and resighting of individuals on all islands which will allow discrimination between mortality and local migration. (Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 31 (3) (2009): 457–462)