25.10.2013 Views

Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Annual Review 2012

Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Annual Review 2012

Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Annual Review 2012

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

AEBAR <strong>2012</strong>: Non-protected bycatch<br />

Figure 5.11 (from Hobday et al.): Diagrammatic representation of the hierarchical risk assessment<br />

process where activities that present low risk are progressively screened out by assessments of<br />

increasingly high data content, sophistication, <strong>and</strong> cost.<br />

5.4.3.2. Qualitative (Level 1) risk assessment<br />

Rowe (2010) summarised an expert-based, qualitative (Level 1) risk assessment, commissioned by<br />

DOC, for the incidental mortality of seabirds caused by New Zeal<strong>and</strong> fisheries. The main focus was<br />

on fisheries operating within the NZ EEZ <strong>and</strong> on all seabirds absolutely or partially protected under<br />

the Wildlife Act 1953. New Zeal<strong>and</strong> flagged vessels fishing outside the EEZ were included, but risk<br />

from non-NZ fisheries <strong>and</strong> other human causes were not included.<br />

The panel of experts who conducted the Level 1 risk assessment assessed the threat to each of 101<br />

taxa posed by 26 fishery groups, scoring exposure <strong>and</strong> consequence independently according to the<br />

schemas in Tables 5.9 <strong>and</strong> 5.10 (details in Rowe 2010b). The risk for a given taxon posed by a given<br />

fishery was calculated as the product of exposure <strong>and</strong> consequence scores. Potential risk was<br />

estimated as the risk posed by a fishery assuming no mitigation was in place, <strong>and</strong> residual risk (called<br />

“optimum risk” by Rowe 2010b) was estimated assuming that mitigation was in place throughout a<br />

given fishery <strong>and</strong> deployed correctly. The panel also agreed a confidence score for each taxon-fishery<br />

interaction using the schema in Table 5.11.<br />

Table 5.9: Exposure scores used by Rowe (2010) (modified from Fletcher 2005, Hobday et al 2007)<br />

Score Descriptor Description<br />

0 Remote The species will not interact directly with the fishery<br />

1 Rare Interactions may occur in exceptional circumstances<br />

2 Unlikely Evidence to suggest interactions possible<br />

3 Possible Evidence to suggest interactions occur, but are uncommon<br />

4 Occasional Interactions likely to occur on occasion<br />

5 Likely Interactions are expected to occur<br />

92

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!