❓ Hon Giz Watson raises concerns about shark species in WA waters, questioning the impact of shark fin prices, legality of fishing methods, and use of droplines. The Minister acknowledges the issue and outlines measures being taken to address it, including legislative reviews and regulations.
AnsweredQoN 1002Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to grave concerns about the status of various shark species in Western Australian waters. (1) Has the high price of shark fin increased the legal and illegal targeting of shark species in the waters off mid and south west Western Australia? (2) Can long-lines and/or gill nets be used legally outside managed fisheries to target sharks? (3) Are these methods now being employed outside the managed fisheries? (4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(1) Has the high price of shark fin increased the legal and illegal targeting of shark species in the waters off mid and south west Western Australia? (2) Can long-lines and/or gill nets be used legally outside managed fisheries to target sharks? (3) Are these methods now being employed outside the managed fisheries? (4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(2) Can long-lines and/or gill nets be used legally outside managed fisheries to target sharks? (3) Are these methods now being employed outside the managed fisheries? (4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(3) Are these methods now being employed outside the managed fisheries? (4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters.
(4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(1) Has the high price of shark fin increased the legal and illegal targeting of shark species in the waters off mid and south west Western Australia? (2) Can long-lines and/or gill nets be used legally outside managed fisheries to target sharks? (3) Are these methods now being employed outside the managed fisheries? (4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(2) Can long-lines and/or gill nets be used legally outside managed fisheries to target sharks? (3) Are these methods now being employed outside the managed fisheries? (4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(3) Are these methods now being employed outside the managed fisheries? (4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(4) What proportion of licensed fishing boats are now using unattended droplines? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
I thank Hon Giz Watson for some notice of the question. Although that was a compact question, the answer is somewhat lengthy. Therefore, I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard . Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
Leave granted. The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
The following answer was incorporated - (1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
(1) There has been a global increase in the targeting of large sharks for their fins, including by those fishermen operating in the Australian domestic fisheries and waters adjacent to Australia, and this has been attributed to the increasing prices given for shark fins. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the catch of sharks by those not licensed to operate in the southern and west coast target shark fisheries is increasing. It has also been suggested that both legal and illegal shark finning practices are increasing in the waters off mid and south-western WA, particularly by wetline fishers, Commonwealth tuna longliners and rock lobster fishers. In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters. (2) The Department of Fisheries has identified gaps in the current legislation whereby wetliners may legally operate pelagic longlines or pelagic gillnets off the WA coast between North West Cape and the South Australian border. However, the capacity for these gear methods to land tuna is generally a disincentive to their use, as WA fishing boat licence holders are restricted to a small bycatch of tuna and tuna-like species. While this gap exists, the department believes that only a very few licensed fishing boats are using pelagic gear in these waters. Demersal longlines and demersal gillnets may only be used by licensees in the west and south coast shark fisheries (Shark Bay to the South Australian border). There are gear prohibitions in place restricting the use of gillnets, shark longlines and shark droplines with metal traces in the waters between Steep Point (Shark Bay) and Koolan Island (East Kimberley). While a wetliner may legally use pelagic or demersal longlines and droplines without metal traces in these waters, the capacity for both methods to retain sharks when used without metal traces is minimal and generally not considered commercially viable. (3) For reasons of commercial viability, it is consider that very few, if any licensed fishing boats would be operating gillnets and longlines to target sharks outside the managed fisheries even though gaps in legislation exist. The Department is currently developing proposals for my consideration that will tighten legislation so that the majority of shark fishing will be confined to the recognised shark fisheries. (4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
In response to increased interest in targeting sharks, the Department of Fisheries is currently investigating measures to afford more protection to the breeding stock of more vulnerable species. Already, in November 2002, the department has introduced regulations that prevent the use of hooks on rock lobster pots, mooring lines and similar gear. This has reduced the capacity of rock lobster fishermen to target large sharks while fishing for rock lobsters.
(4) The exact number of licensed fishing boats using unattended droplines is not known. Wetliners are currently not prohibited from using unattended droplines or attaching metal traces to droplining gear.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.