Last updated on 28 April 2017

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

IDENTIFICATION

SCIENTIFIC NAME(s)

Hoplostethus atlanticus

SPECIES NAME(s)

Orange roughy

Several studies (e.g. Oke et al. 1997; Varela et al. 2012) have been conducted using distinct techniques (microsatellites,  allozyme or mtDNA analysis, diet and behaviour, etc.) in different geographic scales (New Zealand, Australia, Namibia, and Chile, North Atlantic). In samples collected from Hebrides (NW Ireland) to Sedlo bank (near the Azores archipelago), a panmitic population was found in the NE Atlantic and significant differences with the Namibian population (White et al. 2009). Genetic studies also found differences among New Zealand and Australian stocks (Branch 2001). But the worldwide stock structure of orange roughy is still currently unknown and a lack of significant differentiation among far geographic samples is revealed (Varela et al. 2012). Main fisheries are conducted in New Zealand, Australia, NE Atlantic and Namibia, where different regional units are considered for assessment and management purposes:

  • Australia: four units are based on regional spawning grounds and migration patterns (Upston et al., 2014): Western Zone (Sandy Cape), Southern Zone (Maatsuyker and Pedra Branca), Southern Remote Zone (Cascade Plateau), Eastern Zone (St. Patricks Head and St. Helens Hill).
  • New Zealand: presumable biological stock structure is based on the spawning grounds identified but the nine assessment/management units here considered according to main fisheries operating in the region, not always coincide with the boundaries of the biological stocks (more details in MPI, 2014a).
    • Within the management unit Northern North Island (ORH 1) there are several biological stocks with unclear boundaries: Mercury-Colville is an assessment unit; there are other stocks that are not assessed
    • Within the management unit Cape Runaway to Banks Peninsula (ORH 2A, 2B, 3A) there are two biological stocks and correspondent assessment units: East Cape (ORH 2A North) and Mid-East Coast (ORH 2A South, 2B, 3A)
    • Within the management unit Chatham Rise and Puysegur (ORH 3B) there are at least two biological stocks with correspondent assessment units: NW Chatham Rise, East and South Rise, Puysegur and the remainder of the sub-Antarctic area
    • Within the management unit Challenger Plateau (ORH 7A) there is a biological stock which includes also the Westpac Bank outside the New Zealand EEZ, managed by the South Pacific RFMO.
    • West coast South Island (ORH 7B)
  • In the NE Atlantic there are 3 units recognized but considered as inadequate according to the species’ biology and sparse information available (ICES 2008, OSPAR Commission 2010): Rockall, NW Scotland and North Ireland (Subarea VI), Irish Sea, SW Ireland, Porcupine Bank, English Channel and Bristol Channel, Celtic Sea (Subarea VII) and NE Atlantic includes remaining areas (areas I, II, IIIa, IV, V, VIII, IX, X, XII, XIV). 
  • Off Namibia according to the last stock assessment report (South East Atlantic Fisheries Organization 2014;Bensch et al. 2009)

ANALYSIS

Strengths

The fishery was reopened in 2010 after a ten-year closure. Biomass has been increasing and is currently above all biomass reference points and fishing intensity is below the target. A Harvest Strategy (harvest control rule) is in place. The biomass target range and the harvest control rule were revised due to concerns raised by a MSC pre-assessment as to their appropriateness. Control and monitor of non-regulatory measures for protected species and catch limits in quota management areas is in force. A Vessel Monitoring System covers the entire fleet. A programme of observers’ onboard and a New Zealand Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unregulated & Unreported Fishing is in place. Technical measures are established to minimize and monitor the interaction of the fishery with sharks, seabirds and marine mammals. Both bycatch and discarding have been decreasing. Bycatch is at around 4% and bycatch species are known, quantified and the majority is managed by quotas. The annual footprint of the fishery (area of seafloor contacted by trawling operations) has been decreasing and in 2009/2010 was a third of the maximum peak of 1998/1999.

Weaknesses

Quantitative information is not available for Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing and there are signs of non-compliance; reported catches are slightly above limits. Distinct risk analysis studies determined different levels of impacts of the fishery on the seabed ecosystem and protected corals but both identified the lack of specific data to generate robust conclusions about the interaction. There are concerns about the expansion of trawling operations into new areas, the poor knowledge of corals in unfished areas and the lack of monitoring or management of the interaction of the fishery with the benthic ecosystem, especially in areas already closed to fishing.

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

≥ 8

Managers Compliance:

10

Fishers Compliance:

9.6

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

9.6

Future Health:

10


RECOMMENDATIONS

CATCHERS & REGULATORS

1. Implement a comprehensive data collection program, including fishery-dependent and fishery-independent methods, to reduce uncertainty in and increase the quantity of data available for stock assessments.
2. Improve bycatch data collection, especially on slow growing deep-sea corals.
3. Expand research on and monitoring of impacts on the seabed ecosystem in both fished and unfished (including closed) areas, and increase Benthic Protected Area coverage in orange roughy habitat.
4. Collect information on potential non-compliance issues such as misreporting of Quota Management Area, species and weights, and fishing in closed areas.

RETAILERS & SUPPLY CHAIN

1. Encourage your suppliers to continue the consultation process, begun with U.S. conservation organizations in October 2013, to identify sustainability concerns and establish a path to resolve these concerns.
2. Contact the New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries and encourage them to be highly precautionary in their management of this sensitive fishery, and request that they improve data collection and reduce uncertainty surrounding both the target species and the ecosystem impacts of harvest.
3. Request that your suppliers provide documentation of their compliance with Total Allowable Commercial Catch (this documentation should be available from the Ministry for Primary Industries).


FIPS

No related FIPs

CERTIFICATIONS

No related MSC fisheries

Fisheries

Within FishSource, the term "fishery" is used to indicate each unique combination of a flag country with a fishing gear, operating within a particular management unit, upon a resource. That resource may have a known biological stock structure and/or may be assessed at another level for practical or jurisdictional reasons. A fishery is the finest scale of resolution captured in FishSource profiles, as it is generally the scale at which sustainability can most fairly and practically be evaluated.

ASSESSMENT UNIT MANAGEMENT UNIT FLAG COUNTRY FISHING GEAR
Challenger Plateau NZ Challenger Plateau (ORH 7A) - Industrial New Zealand Bottom trawls
Westpac Bank Westpac Bank New Zealand Bottom trawls

Analysis

OVERVIEW

Last updated on 31 October 2014

Strengths

The fishery was reopened in 2010 after a ten-year closure. Biomass has been increasing and is currently above all biomass reference points and fishing intensity is below the target. A Harvest Strategy (harvest control rule) is in place. The biomass target range and the harvest control rule were revised due to concerns raised by a MSC pre-assessment as to their appropriateness. Control and monitor of non-regulatory measures for protected species and catch limits in quota management areas is in force. A Vessel Monitoring System covers the entire fleet. A programme of observers’ onboard and a New Zealand Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unregulated & Unreported Fishing is in place. Technical measures are established to minimize and monitor the interaction of the fishery with sharks, seabirds and marine mammals. Both bycatch and discarding have been decreasing. Bycatch is at around 4% and bycatch species are known, quantified and the majority is managed by quotas. The annual footprint of the fishery (area of seafloor contacted by trawling operations) has been decreasing and in 2009/2010 was a third of the maximum peak of 1998/1999.

Weaknesses

Quantitative information is not available for Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing and there are signs of non-compliance; reported catches are slightly above limits. Distinct risk analysis studies determined different levels of impacts of the fishery on the seabed ecosystem and protected corals but both identified the lack of specific data to generate robust conclusions about the interaction. There are concerns about the expansion of trawling operations into new areas, the poor knowledge of corals in unfished areas and the lack of monitoring or management of the interaction of the fishery with the benthic ecosystem, especially in areas already closed to fishing.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Last updated on 11 July 2016

Improvement Recommendations to Catchers & Regulators

1. Implement a comprehensive data collection program, including fishery-dependent and fishery-independent methods, to reduce uncertainty in and increase the quantity of data available for stock assessments.
2. Improve bycatch data collection, especially on slow growing deep-sea corals.
3. Expand research on and monitoring of impacts on the seabed ecosystem in both fished and unfished (including closed) areas, and increase Benthic Protected Area coverage in orange roughy habitat.
4. Collect information on potential non-compliance issues such as misreporting of Quota Management Area, species and weights, and fishing in closed areas.

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain

1. Encourage your suppliers to continue the consultation process, begun with U.S. conservation organizations in October 2013, to identify sustainability concerns and establish a path to resolve these concerns.
2. Contact the New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries and encourage them to be highly precautionary in their management of this sensitive fishery, and request that they improve data collection and reduce uncertainty surrounding both the target species and the ecosystem impacts of harvest.
3. Request that your suppliers provide documentation of their compliance with Total Allowable Commercial Catch (this documentation should be available from the Ministry for Primary Industries).

1.STOCK STATUS

STOCK ASSESSMENT

Last updated on 16 September 2014

In 2014 a model-based assessment was performed, the first since 2005. From 2010 to 2013, ad hoc assessments were performed using survey data. Combined acoustic and trawl-survey estimates (2006, 2009-2013) of the spawning stock (SSB), two trawl-survey time-series of SSB (1987-1989) and two trawl-survey age-frequencies (1987, 2006 and 2009) were fitted in an Age-structured CASAL model with Bayesian estimation. Input data are considered of “high quality”; “low” and “medium” quality data (e.g. catch per unit effort index) were not used. Besides, the assessment meets the New Zealand’s Science and Research Information Standard for New Zealand Fisheries in place since 2011 (MPI, 2014b). Natural mortality (M) was assumed as a constant at 0.045 and a Beverton-Holt stock-recruitment relationship. Uncertainties are related to the proportion of the stock that is indexed by the combined acoustic and trawl surveys and to the patterns of year class strengths that are based only on 3 years of age composition data (MPI, 2014a,b) as well as in the estimation of BMSY, due to uncertainty in steepness and in the form of the stock-recruitment relationship (Cordue, 2014; MPI, 2014d).
The biological stock and the stock assessment encompass inside and outside EEZ waters (Westpac Bank); fishing is mainly operated by domestic vessels (MPI, 2014a,b).

SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

Last updated on 16 September 2014

Stock assessments are conducted by independent researchers contracted by the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and the results are peer reviewed by the Deepwater Fisheries Assessment Working Group (DFAWG) which is composed by scientists of the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), the Ministry and the industry. The DFAWG, under MPI, evaluates the state of the fisheries and stocks and analyze management scenarios, not being responsible by management recommendations or decisions which are taken by the MPI. A final decision is discussed in a multi-stakeholder meeting.

Maintaining the Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC) at 500 tons, as in previous years, biomass is expected to increase or decrease in the next 5 years if annual catches are up to 2.100 tons (MPI, 2014a).

CURRENT STATUS

Last updated on 19 October 2014

Virgin biomass B0 is estimated at 90.000 tons. The spawning stock has been increasing since late 1990s and is estimated at 42% of B0 = 37.800 tons, above all biomass reference points. Is Very Likely (> 90% probability) to be at or above the lower bound of the management target range (30% B0) and About as Likely as Not (40-60% probability) to be at or above the previously defined upper bound of the management target range (40% B0). According to the HSS the stock is considered to be fully rebuilt. Fishing intensity in 2014 was estimated at U71% B0, meaning that fishing at the intensity of 71 will cause the SSB to reach deterministic equilibrium at 71% of B0; Overfishing is Very Unlikely (< 10%) to be occurring. Commercial catches decreased after the reopening of the fishery and in 2012/2013 were at 513 tons (MPI, 2014a).

2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

MANAGEMENT

Last updated on 31 October 2014

The New Zealand’s Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) manages the fishery under a Quota Management System (QMS) since 1986 in order to maintain stock biomass levels that support the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). Sub-Quota Management Areas (QMA) are agreed by the DWG. 5% of TAC is assigned to other sources of fishing related mortality, lost fish and discards (MFA, 2011; MPI, 2014a,b). Scientists and managers work in close relationship in the process of defining catch limits. The options recommended by the Minister/Ministry in the initial and final position papers, and in the letter for stakeholders are in line with the stock assessment developed and with the Harvest Standard Strategy (MoF, 2008).

A Harvest Strategy is in place, and the Harvest Control Rule (HCR) was revised in 2014 to a dynamic rule, where the functional relationship changes over time, with a management target range biomass (BMSY) at 30-50% of virgin biomass (B0) and a rescaling approach used to calculate catch limits, decreasing catch limits at lower stock sizes and allowing for larger catches at larger stock sizes. This is expected to result in a high probability of the stock fluctuating within the target range (Cordue, 2014, DWG, 2014c):

- When Bcurrent is at 40% B0, F is set at Fmid=0.045 (assumed to be M or 4.5% of Bcurrent).
- If Bcurrent is at 30% B0, F is set at 0.034.
- If Bcurrent is at 50% B0, F is set at 0.056.
- If Bcurrent is outside the management target range, the HCR rescales the catch limits to ensure the stock quickly moves back into the target range.

The revision of the harvest strategy intended to address concerns raised in the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) pre-assessment that specific choices and uncertainties of the HCR were not clearly understood and that the effectiveness in achieving objectives was not evident (Punt et al., 2013).

Deterministic estimates of BMSY are not regarded as appropriate to manage the stock because it assumes an unrealistic management strategy, perfect knowledge of the stock-recruit relationship and the difficulty to keep biomass above Blim (the previous “soft limit”) with such a low target biomass level (MPI, 2014d).

The National Fisheries Plan for Deepwater and Middle-depth Fisheries (NFPDMF), elaborated with stakeholders ‘describes the management objectives that will apply across all deepwater fisheries and will guide their management for the next five years’. The Annual Operational Plan for Deepwater Fisheries for 2013/14 (Part 2 of the NFPDMF) is an internal planning document that ‘provides the management actions scheduled for delivery during the financial year, the management services required to deliver the management actions, and up-to-date management overviews for fisheries’.

A Discussion Paper from MPI was presented to the Minister, with initial proposals of management measures for the fishery that, under the Fisheries Act 1996, are discussed with stakeholders in a consultation period (MPI, 2014b). The Final Advice Paper (FAP) summarizes recommendations to the Minister who publishes the final decision for the following fishing year (MPI, 2014b,d).
Based on the current stock status, three catch scenarios were considered at different catch limit levels, in accordance with the HSS, the NFPDMF, environmental interactions and identified threats (MPI, 2014b,d):
option 1: continue with the conservative limit set at 500 tons (TAC at 525 tons) set since 2007 (status quo); option 2: increase TACC to 900 tons (TAC at 945 tons), considering that the stock would support it and remain above the previous upper bound of the management target range for the next five years; option 3: increase TACC to 1,600 tons (TAC at 1,680 tons), considering that the stock would fluctuate around the previous upper bound of the management target range (MPI, 2014b). In agreement with stakeholders’ opinions the final position of the Minister (in the FAP) recommended the TAC at option 3 for the 2014/2015 fishing year (MPI, 2014d).

For OHR 7A, a TACC of 1 ton was assigned during the fishery moratorium between 2000/2001-2010/2011. Since 2011/2012, the fishery was re-opened with a TAC of 525 tons. For the 2014/2015 fishing year the Minister set a TAC at 1,680 tons including 80 tons for ‘other mortality allowance’ (MPI, 2014e) and includes catches from the Westpac Bank area by NZ vessels. The Westpac Bank fishery, outside the EEZ, is managed by the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO) (MPI, 2014b). In previous years a quota of1,852 tons was set for orange roughy in the whole of the SPRFMO (MPI, 2014d) but the value for the next fishing year is not yet clear.

COMPLIANCE

Last updated on 16 September 2014

Before 1992, the set TAC was exceeded on several occasions. No quantitative data is available (MPI, 2014a) but there may exist compliance issues like misreporting of QMA, species and weights, and fishing in closed areas. Observers coverage represent 29-42% of tows (in the most recent 5 years) and monitoring of fishing practices is considered as “robust and appropriate” (MPI, 2014d).

A Vessel Monitoring System (VMS), comprising the orange roughy fishery fleet, was established in 1994 and requires the use of an Automatic Location Communicator (ALC). A New Zealand Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unregulated & Unreported Fishing is in place since 2004 (MoF, 2004). Other measures such as Licensed Fish Receivers (LFR) and observers onboard contribute to the catch verification and compliance.

3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

BYCATCH
ETP Species

Last updated on 31 October 2014

All deepwater coral species are protected under Schedule 7A of the Wildlife Act 1953 (MPI, 2014a). All seabirds except Southern black-backed gull Larus dominicanus are protected as well as all marine mammals and reptiles, some sharks (e.g. great white shark Carcharodon carcharias, basking shark Cetorhinus maximus), rays (e.g. giant manta ray Manta birostris) and groupers (e.g. spotted black grouper Epinephelus daemelii).

Effects of the orange roughy fishery on PET species (fish, seabirds, sharks, and marine mammals) are reportedly minimal but the direct and indirect impacts on coral are not yet well understood (Punt et al., 2013). Solenosmilia variabilis, Madrepora oculata, Enallopsammia rostrate and Goniocorella dumosa occur at the trawling depth range (Clark and Anderson 2013) and are being assessed. Coral bycatch has been observed to occur in 10% of trawls in orange roughy fisheries. In northern waters, a higher proportion of tows included coral (MPI, 2014a). Between 2007-2009, observers reported over 50 tonnes of corals being taken in orange roughy target trawls (MPI, 2010).

Boyd (2013), an industry commissioned white paper, considered the risks of serious or irreversible harm as ‘low to moderate’ on Scleractinian and also gorgonian, golden and black corals (Punt et al., 2013) but some of the assumptions of this ecological risk analysis have been called into question – the geographical scale of QMA used for the habitat assessment; the definition of ‘habitat’ and habitat elements considered for the structure and function analysis; identification of limited data in some of the ecological categories assumed. An assumption that no more than 25% of underwater topographic features (UTF) are impacted was adopted to determine the impacts of each of the fisheries on the habitat, and the accuracy of this assumption was recommended to be checked after the workshop, but no further news on this could be found. A risk analysis developed by Campbell and Gallagher (2007) for the orange roughy fishery in New Zealand found that the fishery represents a “likely” likelihood, “significant” consequence and “extreme” risk to the “Habitat” and “Protected species (corals)”. The same authors considered the results as merely indicative and as an important basis to recommend further scientific research but note that the study “does not represent a true outcome of a risk analysis” or “the current state of NZ fisheries effects on the environment”.

The fishery interacts with sharks which, depending on life cycle characteristics, may be vulnerable to overfishing. In 2015, a formal quantitative analysis will be available for the most important species. There is an effort to properly identify ‘shark species’ caught and avoid the category ‘Sharks & Dogfish nei’ (MPI, 2014b). The risk of interaction at the species level with commercial fisheries, technical measures to minimize the interaction with sharks and seabirds are summarized in the New Zealand National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (NPOA-Sharks; MPI, 2013c), in the National Plan of Action to reduce the incidental catch of seabirds in New Zealand Fisheries and in the report New Zealand marine mammals and commercial fisheries (Berkenbusch et al., 2013; MPI, 2013d; MPI, 2014d). The Conservation Services Programme for 2014/2015 outlines goals, timelines and projects to determine the impact of NZ commercial fisheries (DoC, 2014). The interaction with other species will be monitored considering the increase in fishing effort related with the catch limit increase. Catch of marine mammals and seabirds is not expected to increase taking into account the occasional interaction (MPI, 2014b).

Several mitigation measures are in place to avoid seabird interactions: warp mitigation is mandatory since 2006, Brady bird bafflers, warp deflectors, offal management (MPI, 2012) and Vessel Management Plans (VMP) setting onboard practices (MFA, 2011). There are research projects underway to improve the efficiency of the mandatory measures (MPI, 2014b).

Other Species

Last updated on 16 October 2014

Based on Anderson (2011), a report about ‘fish and invertebrate bycatch and discards in orange roughy and oreo fisheries from 1990–91 until 2008–09’, the MPI (2014a) considers that the target species reached around 84% of the total catch. Bycatch decreased from 27.000 tons to 4.000 tons (2005/2006 and 2008/2009) and non-commercial species are 5-10% of the catch. Discards have also been decreasing from <3.400 tons (1990/1991) to around 300 tons (2007/2008) and are mostly composed of non-QMS species – rattails (Macrouridae Family), birdbeak dogfish (shovelnose dogfish) Deania calcia and chimaeras (Chimaeridae and Rhinochimaeridae). Squids, corals, echinoderms and crustaceans encompass the portion of invertebrates. After the re-opening of the fishery – with low catches and fishing effort, and operations during the spawning season – bycatch is considered to be at low levels, around 4% (MPI, 2014a).

In 2012/2013 fishing year, the most recent for which data could be found, orange roughy represented 92.65% of the catch in Challenger Plateau (based on observers’ onboard reports). Several bycatch species share the same habitat as orange roughy and the most commonly caught QMS species caught (required to be landed by law) are spiky oreo Neocyttus rhomboidalis (1.83%), common mora (ribaldo) Mora moro (0.70%) and southern hake Merluccius australis (0.14%). Of the non-QMS species leafscale gulper shark (deepwater dogfish) Centrophorus squamosus (0.79%) and common roughy (sandpaper fish) Paratrachichthys trailli (1.63%) are captured (DWG, 2014b).

The MSC pre-assessment (Punt et al., 2013), based on the ‘Assessment of ecological effects of four New Zealand orange roughy fisheries’ (Boyd, 2013) and other reports, concluded that the risks of serious or irreversible harm to bycatch species identified are ‘low to moderate’. All retained species analyzed are under the QMS, not all are subject to regular stock assessment, but Boyd (2013) considers the risks of serious or irreversible harm as ‘negligible or very low’. The risks of serious or irreversible harm to discarded species are at ‘low to moderate’ (Punt et al., 2013).

HABITAT

Last updated on 17 October 2014

Trawling for orange roughy, like trawling for other species, is likely to have effects on benthic community structure and functionand there may be consequences for benthic productivity (MPI, 2014a). The vulnerability (slow rate regeneration) of the seabed ecosystems and protected coral species is being studied in result of poor current knowledge (Ramm, 2012). According to Black et al. (2013), there have been no studies investigating whether current trawling frequencies have had adverse effects on the structure and function of benthic communities, or on the productivity of the associated fisheries.

However, according to Baird et al., (2013) the orange roughy fishery was found to be one of the fisheries posing the greatest risk to coral habitats in New Zealand. The annual footprint of the fishery (area of seafloor contacted by trawling operations) has been decreasing and in 2009/2010 was a third of the maximum peak of 1998/1999, however, some overlap is still recognized, which poses the risk of biogenic impact (Black et al, 2013).

The MSC pre-assessment raised concerns about the expansion of trawling operations into new areas, the poor knowledge of corals in unfished areas and the lack of monitoring or management of the interaction of the fishery with the benthic ecosystem, especially in closed areas already established (Punt et al., 2013).

Habitats of particular significance for fisheries management (HPSFM) is a policy definition in development regarding the impact of the fishing gears and sensitive coral species (MPI, 2014a) but although this has been a general practice by the fishery it is not a requirement (Punt et al., 2013).

FishSource Scores

MANAGEMENT QUALITY

As calculated for 2014 data.

The score is ≥ 8.

The fishery is regulated by quotas which are set based on a Harvest Strategy and harvest control rule which was revised based upon the determinations of a MSC pre-assessment. More conservative target and limit reference points were adopted, a dynamic rule was implemented which is expected to maintain the stock within its target range with a higher probability, and simulations were run to consider uncertainty and to test confidence in its performance.

As calculated for 2015 data.

The score is 10.0.

This measures the Set TACC as a percentage of the Advised TACC.

The Set TACC is 1.60 ('000 t). The Advised TACC is 1.60 ('000 t) .

The underlying Set TACC/Advised TACC for this index is 100%.

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 9.6.

This measures the Catch as a percentage of the Set TACC.

The Catch is 0.513 ('000 t). The Set TACC is 0.500 ('000 t) .

The underlying Catch/Set TACC for this index is 103%.

STOCK HEALTH:

As calculated for 2014 data.

The score is 9.6.

This measures the SSB as a percentage of the 30%B0.

The SSB is 37.8 ('000 t). The 30%B0 is 27.0 ('000 t) .

The underlying SSB/30%B0 for this index is 140%.

As calculated for 2014 data.

The score is 10.0.

This measures the Ratio F/F0.1 as a percentage of the Target harvest rate U.

The Ratio F/F0.1 is 28.9 . The Target harvest rate U is 60.0 .

The underlying Ratio F/F0.1/Target harvest rate U for this index is 48.2%.

To see data for biomass, please view this site on a desktop.
To see data for catch and tac, please view this site on a desktop.
To see data for fishing mortality, please view this site on a desktop.
No data available for recruitment
No data available for recruitment
To see data for management quality, please view this site on a desktop.
To see data for stock status, please view this site on a desktop.
DATA NOTES

1) The fishing season lasts 12 months until the end of September; accordingly, the 2015 data refers to the October 2014 – September 2015 season. 
2) The harvest control rule is defined in terms of exploitation rate (%) and not related to Fishing intensity. Score #1 was determined qualitatively and based on the available information (please mouse-over for further details). 
3) Scientific advice is provided annually in a plenary document (MPI, 2014a). Scientists and managers work in close relationship in the process of defining catch limits. The options recommended by the Minister/Ministry in the initial and final position papers, and in the letter for stakeholders are in line with the stock assessment developed and with the Harvest Standard Strategy (MoF, 2008). The set TACC for 2014/2015 is defined at 1.600 tons (plus 80 tons for other sources of fishing-related mortality) and includes catches from the Westpac Bank area by NZ vessels. In previous years a quota of 1.852 tons was defined for orange roughy in the whole of the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation but the value for the next fishing year is not clear so was not considered in the scores datasheet. As a single government agency (Ministry for Primary Industries) is responsible for both scientific advice and management of the stock, we are assuming that set TACC = advised TACC to compute score #2. 
4) The fishery was closed since 2000 with a TACC of 1 ton fixed until 2010, when was re-opened with a conservative TACC of 500 tons. A quota of 25 tons was set to research purposes, but was not included in the datasheet because available commercial catches do not include this portion (MPI, 2013a). 
5) The current (early September 2014) level of catches was not included because the 2013/2014 fishing year (available in the MPI website) was still open at the time of this update. Score #3 relies on the 2012/2013 fishing year. Landings includes captures inside and outside the EEZ. 
6) Fishing mortality (equivalent annual U) is represented through Equilibrium Stock Depletion (ESD), measuring fishing intensity in terms of the potential long-term effect on the stock (via 1–ESD). Spawning stock biomass time-series was estimated in relation to the virgin biomass (MPI, 2014a).
7) The lower end of the management target of 30-50% of B0 is used to compute score #4. The target range for fishing intensity was estimated considering the mid-point of the target range U30-50% of B0 (40% of B0) which is related to the biomass target: 30-50% of B0 and the Equilibrium Stock Depletion (ESD) (100-40=60) (more details in MPI, 2014a).

Download Source Data

Registered users can download the original data file for calculating the scores after logging in. If you wish, you can Register now.

Fishery Improvement Projects (FIPs)

No related FIPs

Certifications

Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)

No related MSC certifications

Sources

Credits
  1. Anderson, O. F. 2013. Fish and invertebrate bycatch in New Zealand deepwater fisheries from 1990–91 until 2010–11, New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 113, Ministry for Primary Industries, 57 pp.http://deepwater.hosting.outwide.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Anderson-2013-By-catch-DW-Fisheries-AEBR-113.pdf
  2. Baird, S.J., Tracey, D., Mormede, S., Clark., M., 2013. The distribution of protected corals in New Zealand waters. Prepared for DOC. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd, NIWA, February 2013. DOC12303 / POP2011-06. 96pphttp://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/conservation/marine-and-coastal/marine-conservation-services/pop-2011-06-coral-distribution.pdf
  3. Berkenbusch, K., Abraham, E.R., Torres, L.G. 2013. New Zealand marine mammals and commercial fisheries New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 119, 104pp.http://www.deepwater.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Berkenbusch-et-al.-2013-New-Zealand-marine-mammals-and-commercial-fisheries.-New-Zealand-Aquatic-Environment-and-Biodiversity-Report-No.-119.-113p.pdf
  4. BirdLife International 2012a. Thalassarche salvini. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.2 [Accessed 14 August 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22698388/0
  5. BirdLife International 2012b. Daption capense. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.2 [Accessed 14 August 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22697879/0
  6. Black, J., Wood, R., Berthelsen, T., Tilney, R. 2013. Monitoring New Zealand’s trawl footprint for deepwater fisheries: 1989–90 to 2009–10, New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No. 110, Ministry for Primary Industries, 57 pp.http://deepwater.hosting.outwide.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Black-et-al-2013-DeepwaterTrawl-Footprint-AEBR-1101.pdf
  7. Boyd, R. O. (2013) Assessment of ecological effects of four New Zealand orange roughy fisheries. Report for Deepwater Group Limited, Wellington (Unpublished report held by Deepwater Group Limited, Nelson) 39p. + Appendices.http://deepwatergroup.org//wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Boyd-2013-Assessment-of-ecological-effects-of-four-New-Zealand-orange-roughy-fisheries-Report.-21Aug-2013.pdf
  8. Campbell, M.L., Gallagher, C. (2007) Assessing the relative effects of fishing on the New Zealand marine environment through risk analysis - ICES Journal of Marine Science, 64, pp 256-270http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/64/2/256.full.pdf+html
  9. Clark, M. and Anderson, O. 2013. Information on the structure and function of “UTF” habitats, Revised presentation material for Deepwater Group Ltd Orange Roughy AEEF August 2013, 54pp.http://deepwater.hosting.outwide.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Clark-2013-Information-on-the-Structure-and-Function-of-UTF-habitats.pdf
  10. Cordue, P.L. 2014a. A Management Strategy Evaluation for orange roughy, ISL Client Report for Deepwater Group Ltd, 42pp.http://deepwater.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Cordue-2014-A-Management-Strategy-Evaluation-for-Orange-Roughy.-ISL-Re....pdf
  11. Cordue, P.L. 2014b. The 2014 orange roughy stock assessments. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report No. 2014/50. Ministry for Primary Industries, New Zealand 135 pp. http://www.mpi.govt.nz/document-vault/4399
  12. Cordue, P. L. (2012). Estimation of absolute biomass from the time series of trawl and acoustic surveys of Challenger orange roughy. ISL Client Report. For MAF. 30pp.
  13. Deepwater Group (DWG), 2014a. Summary paper: Orange roughy fur seal interactions, 3pp.http://www.deepwater.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/MPI-DWG-2014-Summary-paper-ORH-Fur-Seal-Interactions.-Dragonfly-Website-17-Jul-20141.pdf
  14. Deepwater Group (DWG), 2014b. ORH MSC Assessment: Orange Roughy Fish By-Catch Report: 2008-09 to 2012-13, 38pp.http://www.deepwater.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/MPI-2014-Orange-Roughy-Fish-Bycatch-Report.-Report-Prepared-for-MSC-Assessment.-38p.pdf
  15. Deepwater Group (DWG), 2014c. Summary Paper: Orange Roughy Harvest Strategy. Confidential Proposed Orange Roughy Harvest Strategy, August 2014. 3pp.http://deepwater.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/DWG-2014-Summary-Paper-ORH-Harvest-Strategy.pdf
  16. Department of Conservation (DoC), 2014. Conservation Services Programme – Annual plan 2014/2015, 51pp.http://www.deepwater.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/DOC-2014-Conservation-Services-Programme-Annual-Plan-2013-142014-15.pdf
  17. Goldsworthy, S. and Gales, N. (IUCN SSC Pinniped Specialist Group) 2008. Arctocephalus forsteri. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.2 [Accessed 14 August 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41664/0
  18. Leathwick, J., Moilanen, A., Francis, M., Elith, J., Taylor, P., Julian, K., Hastie, T., Duffy, C., 2008. Novel methods for the design and evaluation of marine protected areas in offshore waters. Conservation Letters 1: 91–102http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2008.00012.x
  19. Minister for Primary Industries (MPI), 2014e. Sustainability measures and other management controls for October 2014, 7pp.2014_Decision_letter_v2.pdf
  20. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2009. Habitat Protection and Research, Benthic protection areas [Accessed 15 August 2014]http://www.fish.govt.nz/en-nz/Environmental/Seabed+Protection+and+Research/Benthic+Protection+Areas.htm
  21. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2010. Orange roughy - Fisheries Plan. February 2010. 48pphttp://www.fish.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/9A1D6630-3B77-4739-82AB-DABCDE6FBE84/0/NFP_Deepwater_and_Middledepth_Fisheries_Part_1B_ORANGEROUGHY.pdf
  22. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2012b. Annual Operational Plan for Deepwater Fisheries for 2012/13, MPI Technical paper no. 2013/01, 71 pp.http://www.fish.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/4B1B7981-8BB4-450C-9DB1-B1D48430E863/0/AnnualOperationalPlanforDeepwaterFisheries201213.pdf
  23. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2012. Report from the Fisheries Assessment Plenary, May 2012: stock assessments and yield estimates. Compiled by the Fisheries Science Group, Ministry for Primary Industries, Wellington, New Zealand. 1194 p.http://fs.fish.govt.nz/Doc/23011/May%202012%20Plenary%20-%20Volume%202.pdf.ashx
  24. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2013a. Fisheries Assessment Plenary, May 2013: stock assessments and yield estimates – Volume 2. Compiled by the Fisheries Science Group, Ministry for Primary Industries, Wellington, New Zealand, 1357 pp.http://mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/publications.aspx?title=Fisheries%20Assessment%20Plenary%20May%202013
  25. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2013b. Annual Operational Plan for Deepwater Fisheries for 2013/14, MPI Technical Paper No: 2013/52, July, 76 pp.http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/publications.aspx
  26. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2013c. National Plan of Action the Conservation and Management of Sharks 2013, 32pp.http://www.mpi.govt.nz/Default.aspx?TabId=126&id=2126
  27. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2013d. National Plan of Action to reduce the incidental catch of seabirds in New Zealand Fisheries, 59pp.http://www.mpi.govt.nz/Default.aspx?TabId=126&id=1760
  28. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2014a. Fisheries Assessment Plenary, May 2014: stock assessments and stock status (volume 2: John Dory to Red Gurnard). Compiled by the Fisheries Science Group, Ministry for Primary Industries, Wellington, New Zealand. 1381 pp.http://fs.fish.govt.nz/Doc/23540/Fisheries%20Assessment%20Plenary%20May%202014%20Volume%202.pdf.ashx
  29. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2014b. Review of Management Controls for Orange Roughy on the Southwest Challenger Plateau (ORH 7A) MPI Discussion Paper No: 2014/20, New Zealand Government. 13pp.http://www.deepwater.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/MPI-2014-Review-of-Management-Controls-for-Orange-Roughy-7A.-MPI-Discussion-Paper-No-2014-20.pdf
  30. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2014c. Orange Roughy Challenger (North) (ORH7A) [Accessed 13 August 2014]http://fs.fish.govt.nz/Page.aspx?pk=8&stock=ORH7A&ey=2015
  31. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), 2014d. Review of Sustainability Measures and Other Management Controls for Selected Deepwater Fishstocks, Final Advice and Recommendations for the TAC, TACC, and Allowances and Deemed Value Rates for six fishstocks, 80pp.http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/publications
  32. Ministry of Fisheries, 2011b. Annual Operational Plan for Deepwater Fisheries for 2011/12, New Zealand Government, 75 p.http://www.deepwater.co.nz/f2111,104096/104096_129_MFish_2011_AOP.pdf
  33. Ministry of Fisheries (MoF), 2010a. New Zealand Orange Roughy fisheries are well managed, March 2010. [Accessed 10th July 2012] http://www.fish.govt.nz/en-nz/Press/Press+Releases+2010/March10/New+Zealand+orange+roughy+fisheries+are+well+managed.htm
  34. Ministry of Fisheries (MoF), 2010b. National Fisheries Plan for Deepwater and Middle-depth Fisherieshttp://www.fish.govt.nz/en-nz/Consultations/Archive/2010/National+Fisheries+Plan+for+Deepwater+and+Middle-Depth+Fisheries/default.htm
  35. Punt, A., Poiner, I., Trumble, R.J., 2013. Pre-assessment Report of four New Zealand Orange Roughy Fisheries. MRAG Americas, December 2013. 100pphttp://deepwater.hosting.outwide.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/MRAG-2013-Pre-assessment-Report-of-four-New-Zealand-Orange-Roughy-Fisheries.pdf
  36. Ramm, K. 2012. Conservation Services Programme, Observer Report: 1 July 2010 to 30 June 201, Final Report, Department of Conservation, Ministry for Primary Industries, 121 pp.http://deepwater.hosting.outwide.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Ramm-2012b-CSP-Observer-Report-2010-11.pdf
  37. Rieser, A., Watling, L., Guinotte, J. 2013. Trawl fisheries, catch shares and the protection of benthic marine ecosystems: Has ownership generated incentives for seafloor stewardship? Marine Policy 40: 75–83http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X12002692
  38. Tracey, D., Baird, S J., Sanders, B., Smith, M. H., 2011. DRAFT Final Report prepared for Marine Conservation Services (MCS), Department of Conservation. Identification of Protected Corals: distribution in relation to fishing effort and accuracy of observer identifications, 54 pp.http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/conservation/marine-and-coastal/marine-conservation-services/draft-coral-report.pdf
  39. White, W.T. (SSG Australia & Oceania Regional Workshop, March 2003) 2003. Centrophorus squamosus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.2 [Accessed 14 August 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41871/0
References

    Comments

    This tab will disappear in 5 seconds.

    Comments on:

    Orange roughy - Challenger Plateau and Westpac Bank, Challenger Plateau, NZ Challenger Plateau (ORH 7A), New Zealand, Bottom trawls

    comments powered by Disqus