A number of fisheries in Australia are characterised as being 'small scale', 'data ' and/or 'capacity' limited (hereafter small scale fisheries). Fisheries management within the context of small scale fisheries is often ad hoc and is resource intensive relative to the value of the fishery in question. An existing project (FRDC 2015-213) is developing guidelines for low cost and systematic management of small scale fisheries. A central component of those guidelines is the FishPath tool developed by CSIRO in partnership with a global consortium of experts.

The FishPath tool has significant potential for adoption as a 'standard' approach to small scale fisheries management in Australia and has strong stakeholder by-in at a theoretical level. However, the implementation of the guidelines and the FishPath tool would benefit from testing to optimise that potential. To be effective, the tool needs to provide a framework for participatory discussions about what management, harvest strategy and longer term monitoring and assessment options are best suited to a given fishery.

As a part of the existing project, a workshop has been scheduled to occur in Darwin on November 17 2017. At that workshop, a project team that will be led by Natalie Dowling (Principal Investigator 2015-213) and Kate Crosman (Evans School of Public Policy and Governance at the University of Washington) plan to introduce, test and improve the FishPath tool by focusing on stakeholder input. The existing project budget will enable the workshop to proceed with NT-based stakeholders in attendance. However, the potential value of the tool in a national context warrants broader participation. This proposal seeks support to fund the participation of key stakeholders from regional areas of the Northern Territory (e.g. Gove) and around Australia to ensure broad issues are considered and outcomes are provided against national priorities to improve productivity and profitability of small scale fisheries and in assistance to the Status of Australian Fish Stocks program.

The outcomes of the workshop are regarded as essential to determining the next phase of work in the implementation of the management guidelines and FishPath nationally.

In 2010, the Australian Fisheries Managers Forum (AFMF) listed fisheries access and allocation as one of the top priority policy issues to be addressed. Subsequently, FRDC formed a working group to examine possible approaches to access and allocation issues to assist fisheries managers as they undertook their associated policy development around allocation matters. They produced a report on the principles and guidelines for fisheries resource access and allocation, highlighting impediments to optimising fisheries resource access and allocation in Australia and the RD&E issues requiring investment.
Seven years on, there has been a lot of developments in this area in the various jurisdictions. To assist guide FRDC's future RD&E investment on these issues, the Board requested a review of the current state of fishery resouce access and allocation across the various jurisdictions.

The National Carp Control Plan (NCCP) is presently considering strategies that will effect widespread control of a dominant invasive freshwater fish, the Carp (Cyprinus carpio). Carp have a significant negative impact on social, environmental and economic ($500 million per year) outcomes in aspects of water quality, amenity and biodiversity. Carp dominate the Murray–Darling Basin, making up 80-90 per cent of the fish biomass in places. In Australia, the use of a biological control agent, the naturally occurring carp herpesvirus, could significantly reduce the number of carp in our freshwater systems [1-3]. The NCCP will map out the best approach to manage the required work safely with a key step towards the potential strategic release of carp herpesvirus being community consultation.

One common theme amongst community comments about carp control is “Can we fish them all out through overfishing?” Proponents cite examples of over-exploited commercial fisheries worldwide that have collapsed. This reaction is particularly prevalent amongst the commercial fishing sector of the community [4]. Similar arguments are made against investment in many ‘technologies’ for many vertebrate pest-control strategies; particularly where the pest-animals have a value in an exploitative industry or where effective alternatives are lacking. Other fish-examples include Asian carp species in the Mississippi Basin (Visser 2017), Lionfish in the Caribbean (Downey 2017) and Aripaima or Paiche invading Bolivia (Snyder 2017).
Existing studies of the feasibility of Carp control by removal are few in Australia [5, 6] particularly in peer reviewed literature [7]. There is a clear need for peer-reviewed evaluation (including a plain-speech, magazine article version) of the potential for commercial, or subsidised, fishery exploitation to effectively control carp populations in Australia. The proposed research will inform the community consultation process about the potential for deliberate overfishing to complement or to be an effective alternative to virus release.

The Australian Seafood Industry operates in a diverse and dynamic environment and although the volume produced in Australia is small by world standards, the value and quality of our product and sustainability of our practices are globally recognized. For the Seafood Industry to continue to be a world leader in seafood production and quality there must be an opportunity to learn from each other and plan for the future. The role of Seafood Directions is to provide a significant opportunity for fisheries researchers, fisheries managers and others who work in support of the industry, to examine key contemporary and strategic issues and develop blueprints that will ensure a sustainable, profitable and socially resilient seafood industry in Australia. The need for Seafood Directions is indicated by the ongoing support of key stakeholders of the seafood industry, as is evident by the level of industry sponsorship and attendance at the conference.