*

Tiger Prawn stocks in the Commonwealth, NT, WA and QLD are sustainable. There is one negligible stock in NSW. 

The standard name ‘Tiger Prawn’ refers to the species Penaeus esculentus, Penaeus semisulcatus and Penaeus japonicus. Only P. esculentus (Brown Tiger Prawn) and P. semisulcatus (Grooved Tiger Prawn) are considered in this chapter; P. japonicus is not caught commercially in Australian waters.  

Brown Tiger Prawn appears to be endemic to tropical and subtropical Australian waters. Some genetic evidence indicates that there are separate stocks on the east and west coasts of Australia [Ward et al. 2006]. The biological stock structure in the Commonwealth Northern Prawn Fishery (NPF) across northern Australia is uncertain and is assumed to be a single stock for assessment and management purposes.  Brown Tiger Prawns are also considered to constitute a single separate stock in the Commonwealth Jointly Managed Torres Strait Prawn Fishery for assessment and management purposes.

Grooved Tiger Prawn ranges across northern Australian waters, the Indo-West Pacific Ocean, and the Mediterranean Sea. The biological stock structure is uncertain across northern Australia and in the Commonwealth NPF is assumed to be a single stock for assessment and management purposes.

Here, assessment of stock status is presented at the management unit level—East Coast Otter Trawl Fishery (Brown and Grooved Tiger Prawn) (Queensland), Exmouth Gulf Prawn Managed Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn) (Western Australia), North Coast Prawn Managed Fisheries (Brown Tiger Prawn) (Western Australia), Northern Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn) (Commonwealth), Northern Prawn Fishery (Grooved Tiger Prawn) (Commonwealth), Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn) (Western Australia), Torres Strait Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn) (Jointly managed); and at the jurisdictional level—New South Wales (Brown Tiger Prawn).

Northern Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)

The stock assessment for the tiger prawn fishery uses a multispecies approach, with a weekly, sex- and size-structured population model for Brown and Grooved Tiger Prawns [Punt et al. 2011]. This bio-economic stock assessment model provides annual estimates of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) and Maximum Economic Yield (MEY) [Punt et al. 2010]. The model looks seven years ahead towards the MEY and MSY targets, using updated spawning/recruitment survey results, catch/effort data and fishery economic information, but dampens year-to-year effort changes that may arise from high recruitment variability or fishing constraints. Species-level components of MSY and MEY, based on estimated effort for each species, are taken from this overall model.  

Full stock assessments are undertaken every two years, with logbook data collected continuously in intervening years. In addition, annual fishery-independent monitoring in the Gulf of Carpentaria provides prawn size data and indices of abundance by species that are put into the assessment [Kenyon et al. 2021]. The most recent tiger prawn fishery assessment covers catch and effort up to 2021 [Deng et al. 2022].  

The base-case estimate of the Brown Tiger Prawn spawning stock size at the end of 2021 as a proportion of spawning stock size (SB) at MSY (SB₂₀₂₁/SB_MSY) was 0.90, with a range across sensitivities of 0.66–0.90 [Deng et al. 2022]. Further, the 5-year average (2017 to 2021) of spawning stock size as a proportion of spawning stock size at MSY was 1.11 and well above the agreed limit reference point (LRP) of 0.5SB_MSY. The base-case estimate of the size of the Brown Tiger Prawn spawning stock as a proportion of stock size at MEY (SB₂₀₂₁/SB_MEY) was 0.66 (range across sensitivities 0.62–0.72 [Deng et al. 2022]), a decrease from 1.25 in the previous stock assessment [Deng et al. 2020].  

Estimated effort in 2021 as a proportion of effort that achieves MSY (E₂₀₂₁/E_MSY) from the base case was 0.45, while estimated effort in 2021 as a proportion of effort that achieves MEY (E₂₀₂₁/E_MEY) from the base case was 0.49. Estimated catch at MSY in 2021 along the modelled path to the seven-year MSY target for Brown Tiger Prawn was 1,053 t, while estimated catch at MEY along the path towards the MEY target was 1,087 t [Deng et al. 2022].  

The Integrated Monitoring Program’s 2022 preseason recruitment surveys indicate low relative post-recruitment abundance for Brown Tiger Prawns, the fourth lowest in the data series and part of a four-year decline in the index (2003 to 2022) [AFMA 2022].

Catch of Brown Tiger Prawn in 2021 was 341 t, down from 409 t in 2020 [Butler et al. 2022]. The corresponding fishing effort in 2021 of 1,345 days, was slightly higher than that in 2020 (1,309 days) [Deng et al. 2022].

The above evidence indicates that the biomass of this stock is unlikely to be depleted, that recruitment is unlikely to be impaired, and that the current level of fishing mortality is unlikely to cause the stock to become recruitment impaired.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the Brown Tiger Prawn management unit in the Northern Prawn Fishery (Commonwealth) is classified as a sustainable stock.

Northern Prawn Fishery (Grooved Tiger Prawn)

Refer to ‘Northern Prawn Fishery (Brown tiger prawn)’ above for a description of the multi-stock assessment used for this stock.  

For the most recent assessment, which covers catch and effort up to 2021 [Deng et al. 2022], the base-case estimate of the size of the Grooved Tiger Prawn spawning stock at the end of 2021 as a proportion of spawning stock size at MSY (SB₂₀₂₁/SB_MSY) was 0.75 (range across sensitivities 0.66–0.82) [Deng et al. 2022]. Further, the 5-year average of spawning stock size as a proportion of spawning stock size at MSY (0.95) was well above the agreed LRP of 0.5SB_MSY. The base-case estimate of the size of the Grooved Tiger Prawn spawning stock as a proportion of spawning stock size at MEY (SB₂₀₂₁/SB_MEY) was 0.61 (range across sensitivities 0.52–0.61), a decrease from 0.99 in the previous stock assessment [Deng et al. 2022].  

Estimated effort in 2021 as a proportion of effort that achieves MSY (E₂₀₂₁/E_MSY) was 0.48, while estimated effort in 2021 as a proportion of effort that achieves MEY (E₂₀₂₁/E_MEY) was 0.76. Estimated catch at MSY for 2021 along the modelled path to the seven-year MSY target for Grooved Tiger Prawn was 1,582 t, while estimated catch at MEY along the path to the MEY target was 1,402 t [Deng et al. 2022].  

The Integrated Monitoring Program’s 2022 preseason recruitment surveys indicate low relative post-recruitment abundance for Grooved Tiger Prawns, equivalent to the lowest seen in the data series (2003 to 2022) [AFMA 2022].

Catch in 2021 was 673 t, down from 957 t in 2020 [Butler et al. 2022] and the second lowest catch on record since the 1970s [AFMA 2022]. The corresponding fishing effort in 2021 was 3,320 days, down from 4,080 days in 2020.

The above evidence indicates that the biomass of this stock is unlikely to be depleted, that recruitment is unlikely to be impaired, and that the current level of fishing mortality is unlikely to cause the stock to become recruitment impaired.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the Grooved Tiger Prawn management unit in the Northern Prawn Fishery (Commonwealth) is classified as a sustainable stock.

Torres Strait Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)

The Torres Strait Prawn Fishery operates in the eastern part of the Torres Strait and south in nearby Queensland waters. This fishery is shared by Australia and Papua New Guinea under formal arrangements articulated in the Torres Strait Treaty. Brown Tiger Prawns are harvested at night using demersal otter trawl.  

The last full stock assessment of Brown Tiger Prawn in Torres Strait was completed in 2006 [O’Neill and Turnbull 2006]. This assessment used catch and standardised catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) (accounting for annual increases in fishing power) data up to 2003 and biological data from fishery-independent surveys. An update to that assessment in 2019 used updated information on fishing power and CPUE up to 2018 [Turnbull 2019].

The 2019 assessment found that Brown Tiger Prawn biomass has been steady over the recent decade at between 60% and 88% of the unfished (1980) biomass. The updated delay–difference model, using a Beverton–Holt spawner–recruitment curve, calculated MSY for Brown Tiger Prawns to be about 617 t (90% confidence interval [CI] 507–763 t), which is comparable with the 2006 assessment of MSY (676 t) [O’Neill and Turnbull 2006]. Results were similar using a Ricker stock–recruitment curve (MSY 606 t, [CI] 483–697 t). The 2019 assessment also indicates that fishing power has not changed markedly since the 2006 assessment [Turnbull 2019]. Effort in the fishery (1 273 days in 2021; 1,034 days in 2020) is consistently below the estimated effort to achieve MSY (EMSY = 3 846 days).

Except for 2017, recent nominal CPUE for Brown Tiger Prawn (100–200 kg/day) has remained generally well above levels reported in the 1990s and early 2000s (50–90 kg/day) [Turnbull and Cocking 2019].  

Catch of Brown Tiger Prawn has fluctuated over time, closely linked to effort, ranging from a high of 965 t in 1998 to a low of 111 t in 2017. Catch in 2021 (231 t) increased slightly from catch in 2020 (203 t) [D’Alberto et al. 2022].

The above evidence indicates that the biomass of this stock is unlikely to be depleted and that recruitment is unlikely to be impaired. The above evidence also indicates that the current level of fishing mortality is unlikely to cause the stock to become recruitment impaired.  

Although the absence of fishery-independent data (particularly an independent index of abundance) means there is some uncertainty about the stock status, total effort and total catch in 2021 were substantially below the updated E_MSY and MSY, and biomass appears to be substantially above the limit reference point.  

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the Torres Strait Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn) management unit is classified as a sustainable stock.

Brown and Grooved Tiger Prawn biology [Somers 1987; Yearsley et al. 1999; Kangas et al. 2015]

Distribution of reported commercial catch of Tiger Prawns

Commonwealth – Recreational. The Australian Government does not manage recreational fishing in Commonwealth waters. Recreational fishing in Commonwealth waters is managed by the state or territory immediately adjacent to those waters, under its management regulations.

Commonwealth – Indigenous. The Australian Government does not manage non-commercial Indigenous fishing in Commonwealth waters, with the exception of the Torres Strait. In general, non-commercial Indigenous fishing in Commonwealth waters is managed by the state or territory immediately adjacent to those waters. In the Torres Strait, both commercial and non-commercial Indigenous fishing is managed by the Torres Strait Protected Zone Joint Authority (PZJA) through the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (Commonwealth); the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Queensland); and the Torres Strait Regional Authority. The PZJA also manages non-Indigenous commercial fishing in the Torres Strait.

Queensland – Indigenous (Management Methods). For more information see Traditional fishing | Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Queensland (www.daf.qld.gov.au)

1. AFMA 2022, Northern Prawn Fishery Resource Assessment Group (NPRAG) meeting, minutes, 17 to 18 May 2022, Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.
2. Butler, I, D'Alberto, B and Dylewski, M 2022, Northern Prawn Fishery, in Patterson, H, Bromhead, D, Galeano, D, Larcombe, J, Timmiss, T, Woodhams, J and Curtotti, R (eds), Fishery status reports 2022, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra.
3. Caputi, N 1993, Aspects of spawner-recruit relationships, with particular reference to crustacean stocks: a review, Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 44: 589–607.
4. Caputi, N, de Lestang, S,Hart, A, Kangas, M, Johnston, D and Penn, J 2014b, Catch Predictions in Stock Assessment and Management of Invertebrate Fisheries Using Pre-Recruit Abundance—Case Studies from Western Australia, Reviews in Fisheries Science and Aquaculture, 22:1, 36-54.
5. Caputi, N, Feng, M, Pearce, A, Benthuysen, J, Denham, A, Hetzel, Y, Matear, R, Jackson, G, Molony, B, Joll, L and Chandrapavan, A 2014a, Management implications of climate change effect on fisheries in Western Australia: part 1, Fisheries Research and Development Corporation project 2010/535, Fisheries research report, Western Australian Department of Fisheries.
6. Caputi, N, Penn, JW, Joll, LM and Chubb, CF 1998, Stock–recruitment–environment relationships for invertebrate species of Western Australia, in GS Jamieson and A Campbell (eds), Proceedings of the North Pacific Symposium on Invertebrate Stock Assessment and Management, Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 125: 247–255.
7. D'Alberto, B, Butler, I and Tuynman, H 2022, Torres Strait Prawn Fishery, in Patterson, H, Bromhead, D, Galeano, D, Larcombe, J, Timmiss, T, Woodhams, J and Curtotti, R (eds), Fishery status reports 2022, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra.
8. Deng, RA, Hutton, T, Miller, M, Upston, J, Moeseneder, C, Kompas, T and Pascoe, S 2022, Agenda item 6a: Tiger prawn assessment – results (status of the Northern Prawn Fishery Tiger Prawn Fishery at the end of 2021 with TAE estimation for 2022 and 2023)’, report to the NPRAG meeting 17 to 18 May 2022, Brisbane.
9. Deng, RA, Hutton, T, Punt, A, Upston, J, Miller, M, Moeseneder, C and Pascoe, S 2020, Status of the Northern Prawn Fishery tiger prawn fishery at the end of 2019 with an estimated TAE for 2020 and 2021, report to AFMA, CSIRO, Brisbane.
10. Department of Fisheries 2021, Prawn Resource of Exmouth Gulf Harvest Strategy 2021 – 2026 Version 2.0. Fisheries Management Paper No. 265. Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Western Australia.
11. Department of Fisheries 2022, Prawn Resource of Shark Bay Harvest Strategy 2022 – 2027 Version 2.0. Fisheries Management Paper No. 267. Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Western Australia.
12. Helidoniotis, F, 2020, Stock assessment of Queensland east coast tiger prawns (Penaeus esculentus and Penaeus semisulcatus), Fisheries Queensland, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries.
13. Jacobsen, I, Zeller, B, Dunning, M, Garland, A, Courtney T, and Jebreen, E, 2018, An Ecological Risk Assessment of the Southern Queensland East Coast Otter Trawl Fishery and River and Inshore Beam Trawl Fishery, Fisheries Queensland, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Brisbane.
14. Kangas, MI, Sporer, EC, Hesp, SA, Travaille, KL, Brand-Gardner, SJ, Cavalli, P and Harry, AV 2015b, Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery, Western Australian Marine Stewardship Council Report Series 2: 294 pp.
15. Kenyon, RA, Deng, R, Donovan, AG, van der Velde, TD, Fry, G, Tonks, M and Salee, K 2021, An integrated monitoring program for the Northern Prawn Fishery 2018–2021, final report, AFMA 2017/0819, CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Brisbane.
16. Larcombe, J, Zeller, B, Taylor, M, and Kangas, M, 2016, Tiger Prawns, In Status of Australian fish stocks reports 2016, Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra.
17. Larcombe, J, Zeller, B, Taylor, M, and Kangas, M, 2018, Tiger Prawns, In Status of Australian fish stocks reports 2018, Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra.
18. Lovett et al. 2023, Lovett, RA, Fox, AR, Wickens, ME and Hillcoat, KB 2023, Stock assessment of Queensland east coast tiger prawns (Penaeus esculentus and Penaeus semisulcatus), Australia, with data to December 2021, Fisheries Queensland, Department Agriculture and Fisheries.
19. Newman, S, J, Wise, B, S, Santoro, K, G, and Gaughan, DJ (eds) 2023, Status Reports of the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources of Western Australia 2021/22: The State of the Fisheries, Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Western Australia.
20. O’Neill, MF and Turnbull, CT 2006, Stock assessment of the Torres Strait Tiger Prawn Fishery (Penaeus esculentus), Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, Brisbane.
21. Pears, RJ, Morison, AK, Jebreen, EJ, Dunning, MC, Pitcher, CR, Courtney, AJ, Houlden, B and Jacobsen, IP 2012, Ecological risk assessment of the East Coast Otter Trawl Fishery in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park: technical report, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville.
22. Penn, JW, Caputi, N and Hall, NG 1995, Stock–recruitment relationships for the tiger prawn (Penaeus esculentus) stocks in Western Australia, ICES Marine Science Symposium, 199: 320–333.
23. Punt, AE, Deng, R, Pascoe, S, Dichmont, CM, Zhou, S, Plagányi, É, Hutton, T, Venables, WN, Kenyon, R and van der Velde, T, 2011, Calculating optimal effort and catch trajectories for multiple species modelled using a mix of size-structured, delay-difference and biomass dynamics models, Fisheries Research, 109: 201–11.
24. Punt, AE, Deng, RA, Dichmont, CM, Kompas, T, Venables, WN, Zhou, S, Pascoe, S, Hutton, T, Kenyon, R, van der Velde, T and Kienzle, M 2010, Integrating size-structured assessment and bio-economic management advice in Australia’s Northern Prawn Fishery, ICES Journal of Marine Science, 67: 1785–801.
25. Roach, J, Kangas, M and Winning, M 2012, Tiger Prawns Penaeus esculentus and P. semisulcatus, in M Flood, I Stobutzki, J Andrews, G Begg, W Fletcher, C Gardiner, J Kemp, A Moore, A O’Brien, R Quinn, J Roach, K Rowling, K Sainsbury, T Saunders, T Ward & M Winning (eds), Status of key Australian fish stocks reports 2012, Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, 186-192.
26. Somers, IE 1987, Sediment type as a factor in the distribution of commercial prawn species in the Western Gulf of Carpentaria, Australia, Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 38: 133–149.
27. Turnbull, C 2019, Updated tiger prawn stock assessment for the Torres Strait prawn fishery: a final report to AFMA for the TSPMAC and TSSAC, project 180802, Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Canberra.
28. Turnbull, C and Cocking, L 2019, Torres Strait Prawn Fishery Data Summary 2019, Australian Fisheries Management Authority. Canberra, Australia.
29. Wang, N, 2015, Application of a weekly delay-difference model to commercial catch and effort data in multi-species fisheries, PhD Thesis, University of Queensland and Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Brisbane.
30. Ward, R, Ovenden, J, Meadows, J, Grewe, P and Lehnert, S 2006, Population genetic structure of the brown tiger prawn, Penaeus esculentus, in tropical northern Australia, Marine Biology, 148(3): 599–607.
31. Wise, BS, St. John, J and Lenanton, R 2007, Spatial scales of exploitation among populations of demersal scalefish: Implications for management. Part 1: Stock status of the key indicator species for the demersal scalefish fishery in the West Coast Bioregion. Report to the FRDC on Project No. 2003/052. Fisheries Research Report No 163. Department of Fisheries, Western Australia, 130 pp.
32. Yearsley, GK, Last, PR and Ward, RD 1999, Australian seafood handbook: domestic species, CSIRO Marine Research, Hobart.