Snapper Pagrus auratus

Gary Jacksona, Anthony Fowlerb, Bonnie Holmesc, Jodie Kempd and John Stewarte


Snapper

Table 1: Stock status determination for Snapper

Jurisdiction

Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria

Victoria

South Australia

Western Australia

Stock

East coast (CIF, OF, OTLF, RRFFF)

Western Victorian (OF, PPBF, WPF)

SEF

GSVF

SSGF

NSGF

WCF

South coast (BBRF, SDGLF, SCWLF)

Shark Bay oceanic
(BBRF, GDSMF)

Shark Bay inshore— eastern gulf
(BBRF)

Shark Bay inshore— Denham Sound
(BBRF)

Shark Bay inshore— Freycinet Estuary
(BBRF)

West coast (BBRF, WCDGDLF, WCDSF)

Stock status

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Undefined

Sustainable

Undefined

Sustainable

Transitional–
depleting

Transitional–
depleting

Undefined

Undefined

Transitional- recovering

Sustainable

Sustainable

Transitional–
recovering

Transitional–
recovering

Indicators

Catch,
CPUE, fishing mortality, age composition

Catch, CPUE,
pre-recruit surveys, age and length composition

None

Biomass

Biomass

Biomass

None

Catch

Biomass

Biomass

Biomass

Biomass

Catch, fishing mortality

CIF = Corner Inlet Fishery (Victoria); CPUE = catch per unit effort; GSVF = Gulf St Vincent Fishery (South Australia); NSGF = Northern Spencer Gulf Fishery (South Australia); OF = Ocean Fishery (Victoria); OTLF = Ocean Trap and Line Fishery (New South Wales); PPBF = Port Phillip Bay Fishery (Victoria); RRFFF = Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery (Queensland); SEF = South East Fishery (South Australia); SSGF = Southern Spencer Gulf Fishery (South Australia); WCF = West Coast Fishery (South Australia); WPF = Western Port Fishery (Victoria); BBRF = Boat Based Recreational Fishery (Western Australia); GDSMF = Gascoyne Demersal Scalefish Managed Fishery (Western Australia); SCWLF = South Coast Wetline Fishery (Western Australia); SDGLF = Southern Demersal Gillnet and Longline Fishery (Western Australia); WCDGDLF = West Coast Demersal Gillnet and Demersal Longline Fishery (Joint Authority); WCDSF = West Coast Demersal Scalefish Fishery (Western Australia)


Stock Structure

Snapper has a wide distribution in Australia, from the Gascoyne region on the west coast of Western Australia, around the south of the continent, and up to northern Queensland around Hinchinbrook Island1. Within this broad distribution, the biological stock structure is complex.

Snapper on the east coast of Australia, from Proserpine in north Queensland to around Wilsons Promontory (Victoria), show little genetic differentiation and are considered to represent a single genetic stock2. In Victoria, little genetic variation has been found in Snapper3. However, tagging and otolith chemistry data have indicated some separation between Snapper to the east of Wilsons Promontory (the 'east coast biological stock') and those in waters to the west, including Port Phillip Bay and Western Port ('western Victorian biological stock') and extending across western Victoria to near the Murray River mouth in South Australia4–5. Snapper to the east and west of Wilsons Promontory are managed separately. Further research is required on the relationship between Snapper in western Victoria and beyond.

Five biological stocks are recognised as occupying South Australian waters. The level of genetic differentiation between the biological stock in the south-east (South East Fishery [South Australia] biological stock) and the other biological stocks to the west remains unresolved6. Nevertheless, the remaining South Australian biological stocks (Gulf St Vincent Fishery, Southern Spencer Gulf Fishery, Northern Spencer Gulf Fishery and West Coast Fishery) are genetically homogeneous, but demonstrate some phenotypic differences7. From recent stock assessments8, most of the biomass is thought to exist in three biological stocks: in the Gulf St Vincent Fishery, Southern Spencer Gulf Fishery and Northern Spencer Gulf Fishery. The remaining biological stock, in the West Coast Fishery, has generally produced relatively low catches.

In Western Australia, there are six separate biological stocks, some at small geographic scales (e.g. four biological stocks located inside and near Shark Bay), while others cover greater lengths of the west and south coast regions9–13. The inshore Shark Bay biological stocks in the inner gulfs are predominantly fished by the recreational and charter sectors.

Since the biological stock structure for this species is generally understood, status is reported at the level of individual biological stocks.


Stock Status

East coast biological stock

Components of this biological stock in both Queensland and New South Wales have been heavily fished for many years, under different management arrangements. However, the status of the biological stock has never been assessed on a whole-stock basis; rather, the state components have been assessed using different methodologies. These assessments have arrived at different outcomes.

Queensland assessed the part of the biological stock based on a sex, age and length stock analysis model. The assessment in 200914 indicated that exploitable biomass was approximately 35 per cent of unfished biomass and would continue to decline if fishing pressures remained unchanged. Updated mortality estimates in 2010, combined with decreasing commercial catch and no increase in catch rate, indicated that biological stock status had not improved. Based on this information, Queensland considered Snapper in Queensland waters to be recruitment overfished.

The assessment undertaken in New South Wales was largely based on attempting to maximise the yield per recruit in a fishery that was known to have been heavily exploited for a very long time (>50 years), and had been shown to be in a state best described as 'growth overfished'15. Management to address this problem was instigated in 2001, when the minimum legal length for Snapper was increased from 28 to 30 cm total length. Since then, increases in commercial catch and catch rate of Snapper in New South Wales, together with increases in the proportion of fish aged more than 5 years in landings, indicate that the biomass is unlikely to be recruitment overfished. However, the size composition data from detailed monitoring of the fishery show that the New South Wales portion of the biological stock continues to be heavily fished, and the status has remained at 'growth overfished' in all recent assessments.

An assessment of the status of the eastern biological stock of Snapper in waters adjacent to Victoria was undertaken in 201116. The assessment found that insufficient data were available to adequately assess the status of Snapper in these waters. The catch of Snapper for this part of the state is much less than for the western biological stocks; for commercial fishers, the eastern biological stock of Snapper has historically been considered a byproduct species.

Because of conflicting signals and the fact that no stock assessment has been conducted on the biological stock as a whole, the east coast biological stock is classified as an undefined stock.

A formal cross-jurisdictional stock assessment of this biological stock is needed as a matter of priority. New South Wales and Queensland have data sets that can be used in a future joint stock assessment. The undefined classification will not be resolved until this combined biological stock assessment has been completed.

Western Victorian biological stock

The most recent stock assessment for Snapper in Victoria was undertaken in 201116. It assessed commercial and recreational catch rates, fishery-independent pre-recruitment catch rates and age– length frequency distributions for the western biological stock. Commercial catch rates have shown an increasing trend since the late 1990s. Effort for all gear types in Victoria has decreased since 1999, as a result of a reduction in the number of licensed fishers in Victorian waters, and is at historically low levels.

Catch rate indicators for the western Victorian biological stock are in 'good condition' for 7 of the 10 indicators used to assess the status of the biological stock16, indicating that the biomass of the biological stock is unlikely to be recruitment overfished. Despite low recruitments in 2005–06 and 2010–11, the recent series of moderate recruitment years (2007–08, 2008–09, 2009–10) is expected to generate average abundance over the coming few years. These fluctuations are probably the result of environmental conditions affecting spawning success and/or recruitment to the fishery.

Based on the analyses outlined above, the current level of fishing mortality is unlikely to cause the biological stock to become recruitment overfished. The recent shift in the targeting of Snapper by Commonwealth- or state-licensed trawlers may pose a significant risk of overfishing the biological stock. Before 2005, Snapper taken as bycatch by Commonwealth-licensed trawlers was usually less than 20 tonnes (t) per year; landings by Victorian-licensed trawl fishers have generally been between zero and about 1.7 t per year, but increased to about 34 t in 2011. Fisheries managers are currently working with the commercial fishing industry to ensure that this risk is managed.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a sustainable stock.

South East Fishery (South Australia) biological stock

The South Australian South East Fishery biological stock has traditionally provided much lower catches than the three gulf-based biological stocks described below. Catches rose considerably through the mid–late 2000s, as a result of substantial increases in longline fishing effort, reflecting the uptake of the new longline fishing technology. Since 2003–04, commercial longline catch per unit effort (CPUE) has increased, indicating an increase in fishable biomass. No estimates of size and age structures are available for this biological stock, indicating a lack of indicators of year-class strength and recruitment history.

Historically, this biological stock has provided only incidental catches and low catch rates. However, from 2007–08, the catch and catch rates increased exponentially to record levels. There is recent evidence for at least one very strong recruitment event, which suggests that the population is not recruitment overfished8.

Given the fact that the biological stock has not previously been heavily exploited, combined with a lack of information on biomass and fish movement, the biological stock is classified as an undefined stock.

Gulf St Vincent Fishery (South Australia) biological stock

Commercial catches and catch rates for this biological stock have historically been consistently low. However, since 2008–09, there have been exponential increases in catch, effort and CPUE, to unprecedented levels. This is consistent with a substantial recent increase in biomass. Population age structures indicate that this relates to the recent recruitment of several strong year-classes to the population. As a consequence, the recent stock assessment suggests that, between 2000 and 2009, the stock biomass nearly doubled, to more than 2900 t8. Therefore, the biomass of this biological stock is unlikely to be recruitment overfished.

As a result of the estimated increasing biomass, catch and effort have increased substantially. The current CPUE is at historically high levels and has been increasing since 2007. The catch in 2010 was 454 t, which is approximately 16 per cent of the estimated biomass. This level of catch is unlikely to cause the biological stock to become recruitment overfished.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a sustainable stock.

Southern Spencer Gulf Fishery (South Australia) biological stock

From 2004–05, there was a substantial increase in commercial longline fishing effort for this biological stock, which related to the uptake of new longline fishing technology8. This resulted in a substantial increase in the effectiveness of fishers, culminating in dramatic increases in catches and CPUE. However, from 2008–09, CPUE declined dramatically, suggesting that the fishable biomass had become depleted8. This evidence indicates that the current level of fishing mortality is likely to cause the biological stock to become recruitment overfished.

Age-structure data indicate that no strong year-class has recruited to this biological stock since 1999. The stock assessment integrated these data and suggested that, between 2004 and 2009, biomass fell from 4200 to 3600 t8. Since recruitment for Snapper in South Australia is known to be highly variable and environmentally driven8, it is unclear if the poor recent recruitment is related to overfishing.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a transitional–depleting stock.

Northern Spencer Gulf Fishery (South Australia) biological stock

The Northern Spencer Gulf Fishery (South Australia) biological stock was traditionally the most important of the South Australian biological stocks, generally providing more than 50 per cent of the state's total catch. However, during the mid–late 2000s, its contribution declined to approximately 20 per cent. These lower catches reflect declines in fishing effort, which are consistent with a decline in biomass. The high levels of CPUE associated with these lower levels of catch and effort are thought to relate to hyperstability, reflecting the aggregative behaviour of Snapper and the experience of the fishers in this region17.

The suggestion of a decline in biomass relative to the 1990s is supported by the lack of recruitment of any strong year-classes to the population since 1999. It is not clear whether this lack of recruitment reflects the biological stock being recruitment overfished or an absence of environmental conditions conducive to spawning. In the absence of further recruitment, fishing mortality is likely to deplete the biological stock even further.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a transitional–depleting stock.

West Coast Fishery (South Australia) biological stock

The South Australian West Coast Fishery biological stock has traditionally provided much lower catches than the three gulf-based biological stocks described above. Catches rose considerably through the mid–late 2000s, as a result of substantial increases in longline fishing effort, reflecting the uptake of the new longline fishing technology. However, since 2003–04, commercial longline CPUE has declined, indicating a possible decline in fishable biomass. No estimates of size and age structures are available for this biological stock, indicating a lack of indicators of year-class strength and recruitment history.

Insufficient information is available to confidently classify the status of this biological stock; as a result, the biological stock is classified as an undefined stock.

South coast biological stock

This biological stock has not been formally assessed; hence, insufficient information is available to confidently classify its status. The biological stock is classified as an undefined stock.

Shark Bay oceanic biological stock

The most recent model-based stock assessment (Department of Fisheriesa 2011, unpublished) indicated that spawning biomass in 2010 was approximately 30 per cent of the unfished level, which is also the minimum threshold level for this biological stock. The biomass is estimated to have been increasing since a historical low of around 20 per cent in 2003 and is expected to reach the management target level (40 per cent of the unfished level) by 2014, suggesting a recovering biological stock.

The total allowable commercial catch (TACC) was reduced in 2007 (it had initially been reduced by 40 per cent in 2004) to 277 t to further assist biological stock recovery, with the aim of achieving the target level of 40 per cent of the unfished level by 2014. Since 263 t was caught in 2010, this level of fishing mortality should allow continued recovery of the biological stock.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a transitional–recovering stock.

Shark Bay inshore—eastern gulf biological stock

The most recent model-based stock assessment (Department of Fisheries 2011, unpublished) indicated that spawning biomass was approximately 60 per cent of the unfished level, which is well above the management target (40 per cent of unfished biomass) and the minimum threshold level (30 per cent of unfished biomass). The biological stock is not considered to be recruitment overfished.

There was no commercial catch of Snapper in the eastern gulf biological stock in 2010. As well, recreational catch was minor (4 t) and within the target catch range (0–12 t). This level of fishing mortality is unlikely to cause this biological stock to become recruitment overfished.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a sustainable stock.

Shark Bay inshore—Denham Sound biological stock

The most recent model-based stock assessment (Department of Fisheries 2011, unpublished) indicated that spawning biomass was approximately 42 per cent of the unfished level, which is above the management target (40 per cent of unfished biomass) and the minimum threshold level (30 per cent of unfished biomass). The biological stock is not considered to be recruitment overfished.

The total commercial catch of Snapper in the Denham Sound biological stock was less than 0.5 t in 2010. As well, recreational catch was minor (7 t) and within the target catch range (0–12 t). This level of fishing mortality is unlikely to cause this biological stock to become recruitment overfished.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a sustainable stock.

Shark Bay inshore—Freycinet Estuary biological stock

The most recent model-based stock assessment (Department of Fisheries 2011, unpublished) indicated that spawning biomass was approximately 22 per cent of the unfished level. This level of biomass is below both the management target level (40 per cent of unfished biomass) and the minimum threshold level (30 per cent of unfished biomass). Modelled estimates indicate that the biological stock will continue to rebuild very slowly to around 25 per cent of unfished biomass by 2015. The biological stock is considered recruitment overfished (according to the 30 per cent threshold level in Western Australia). However, biomass has been increasing in recent years, suggesting a recovering biological stock.

There was no commercial catch of Snapper from the Freycinet Estuary biological stock in 2010. As well, recreational catch was minor (1 t) and within the target catch range (0–3.8 t). This level of fishing mortality should allow the biological stock to recover from its recruitment overfished state.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a transitional–recovering stock.

West coast biological stock

Assessments completed in 2007 and 2009 showed that the fishing mortality on this biological stock exceeded the limit reference point of 1.5 times natural mortality18–19. Based on agreed decision rules, to decrease fishing mortality to a level that would allow the biological stock to recover, the total catch had to be reduced by 50 per cent, from levels near to or above 400 t. New management arrangements to achieve the required catch reductions have been successfully implemented for all commercial and recreational sectors, and the current catch in this region has been at acceptable levels (<200 t) since 2009–10.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the biological stock is classified as a transititional–recovering stock.


Table 2: Snapper biology10,12,15,20–22

Longevity and maximum size

30–40 years; 130 cm TL

Maturity (50%)

2–7 years; 22–56 cm FL

FL = fork length; TL = total length


Figure 1: Distribution of reported commercial catch of Snapper in Australian waters, 2010
Figure 1: Distribution of reported commercial catch of Snapper in Australian waters, 2010

Main features and statistics for Snapper stocks/fisheries in Australia in 2010
  • Snapper are taken commercially using baited traps, vertical lines (drop lines and handlines), bottom set longlines and semidemersal fish trawls. Charter and recreational catch is typically taken by rod and reel using bait, lures or jigs.
  • A range of input and output controls have been applied to Snapper across the four jurisdictions:
    • Input controls include limited entry, gear restrictions, spatial zonation and effort limits.
    • Output controls include TACCs, total allowable recreational catches, and recreational size and bag limits.
  • In 2010, commercial Snapper catch was taken by 134 vessels in Queensland (Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery), 280 vessels in New South Wales, 19 vessels fishing the east coast biological stock in Victoria, 79 vessels fishing the Victorian western biological stock and 309 vessels in South Australia. In Western Australia, 13 commercial vessels caught Snapper in the Gascoyne Demersal Scalefish Managed Fishery, 50 vessels in the West Coast Demersal Scalefish Fishery, 4 vessels in the West Coast Demersal Gillnet and Demersal Longline Fishery and 22 vessels in the Southern Demersal Gillnet and Longline Fishery.
  • The total amount of Snapper caught commercially in Australia in 2010 was more than 1800 t, comprising 78 t from the Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery (Queensland), 283 t from New South Wales, 83 t from Victoria's Port Phillip Bay (2009–10), 5 t from Victorian coastal waters beyond bays and inlets, 202 t from the northern Spencer Gulf, 82 t from the southern Spencer Gulf, 454 t from Gulf St Vincent, 263 t from the Gascoyne Demersal Scalefish Managed Fishery (Western Australia) (Shark Bay oceanic biological stock), 140 t from the West Coast Demersal Scalefish Fishery (Western Australia), 15 t from the West Coast Demersal Gillnet and Demersal Longline Fishery (Joint Authority) (west coast biological stock) and approximately 40 t off the Western Australian south coast by the wetline fleet and the Southern Demersal Gillnet and Long Line Fishery (Western Australia) (south coast biological stock).
  • The total amount of Snapper caught by charter fishers in Australia in 2010 was 164 t, comprising 44 t from the Queensland charter sector; approximately 17 t from the New South Wales charter sector; 40 t in the northern Spencer Gulf, 15 t in the southern Spencer Gulf and 25 t in Gulf St Vincent; and, in Western Australia, 13 t from the Shark Bay oceanic biological stock and 10 t from the west coast biological stock.
  • The most recent recreational catch estimates indicate catches of around 550 t from Queensland in 2005, around 224 t from New South Wales in 2001, 400 t from Victoria in 2006–0723, 17 t from the northern Spencer Gulf in 2010, 41 t from the southern Spencer Gulf in 2010, 37 t from Gulf St Vincent in 2010, 30 t from the Shark Bay oceanic biological stock in 2007–08, approximately 11 t from the three inner Shark Bay biological stocks in 2010 and 24 t from the west coast biological stock in 2010.

Figure 2: Commercial catch of Snapper in Australian waters, 2000–10 (calendar year)
Figure 2: Commercial catch of Snapper in Australian waters, 2000–10 (calendar year)
Note: Western Australian data are by financial year (e.g. 2010 represents 2009–10). The inner Shark Bay biological stocks are not included in catch figures, since they are predominantely recreational fisheries, and commercial catch is low or zero.

Catch Explanation

The commercial catch in Queensland increased from 100 t in 2000 to more than 200 t in 2005, but has subsequently declined to less than 100 t. In New South Wales, commercial catch declined from about 300 t in 2000 to less than 200 t in 2002, following an increase in the legal minimum length from 28 to 30 cm total length. There has been a steady increase in the commercial harvest since 2004, with 283 t landed in 2010.

There has been a long-term decline in catches of Snapper from Victorian waters over the past 30 years, mainly as a result of the number of licensed commercial fishers being reduced to one-third between 1986–87 and 2010–11. The majority of the licence removals occurred as a result of voluntary licence buy-back schemes in 1999–2000 and 2005–06. Commercial catches for the western Victorian biological stock have increased over the past decade, but catches have remained stable for the eastern biological stock.

Commercial catch in the northern Spencer Gulf has declined considerably since the early 2000s. Recent catches, however, have shown small increases since 2007. Catches in the southern Spencer Gulf increased between 2005 and 2007, but have subsequently decreased, reflecting declining biomass through the late 2000s. Catch in Gulf St Vincent was very low through the early and mid- 2000s, but has increased considerably in recent years as biomass has increased.

The commercial catch of the Shark Bay oceanic biological stock declined significantly in 2003–04, following a 40 per cent reduction in TACC, and again in 2006–07, following a further reduction (12 per cent) in TACC. Recreational catch is not well estimated, but taken to be approximately 15–20 per cent of overall total catch; the charter catch is stable at around 6 per cent of total catch. The inner Shark Bay biological stocks are predominantly recreational fisheries, with around 11 t taken in 2009–10. Commercial catches are approximately 0–2 t annually. Significant management measures were applied to the west coast fishery in recent years to reduce overall catches of all sectors by 50 per cent, in order to reduce fishing mortality to acceptable levels.


Effects of fishing on the marine environment
  • Snapper are generalist feeders and normally just one of a number of such species inhabiting continental shelf waters; as a result, effects on the food chain from fishing for Snapper are considered to be low risk. This is supported by a recent study, completed in the three Western Australian bioregions24 where Snapper are captured, that found no evidence of material changes in finfish community structure over the past 30 years25.
  • Most of the fisheries that target adult Snapper use hooks and lines. This means that the commercial fisheries have very little direct impact on benthic habitats.

Environmental effects on Snapper
  • Climate change consequences for Snapper biological stocks around Australia are currently being considered as part of projects funded by the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Program and the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. Warming conditions at northern margins of Snapper distribution may see existing spawning grounds no longer viable.
  • Recruitment variability in this species is typically driven by environmental factors10, although the mechanisms are not fully understood.


a Department of Fisheries, Western Australia
b South Australian Research and Development Institute
c Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Queensland
d Department of Primary Industries, Victoria
e Department of Primary Industries, New South Wales