• Logged in as Unregistered User
  • Sign in

Social-Ecological Systems Meta-Analysis Database: Case

SummaryThe Heard and McDonald Islands (HIMI) are remote subantarctic volcanic islands located about 41,000 km southwest of Australia and 1,700 km north of Antarctica. The islands and the surrounding EEZ are governed by Australia as an Australian External Authority (through the Heard and McDonald Islands Act of 1953) though they also fall within the governance boundaries of the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). The Heard and McDonald Islands EEZ abuts the French EEZ around Kerguelen Island and the CCAMLR high seas. Being identified as one of the top five priority areas for protection in Australia's National Ocean Policy, Australia declared a 65,000 km-squared marine reserve within their EEZ around the islands in October of 2002. HIMI is one of the largest biologically pristine (i.e. least impacted by human activity) islands in the world and the most pristine island in the Southern Ocean (e.g., no alien species, least human activities, etc.). It is also the only subantarctic island with a continuously active volcano. HIMI also supports large breeding populations of marine birds and mammals. The marine region supports a range of slow growing and vulnerable benthic organisms (e.g., cold-water corals and sponges), several endemic fish and benthic species, nursery areas for a range of fish species, including Patagonian toothfish, prime foraging areas for a number of land-based marine predators, including threatened seals and albatross, an endemic cormorant and a variety of penguins. The main purpose of the MPA is to protect the conservation values of HIMI, including the World Heritage and cultural values, biodiversity, the unique features of the benthic and pelagic environments, representative portions of the different marine habitat types, and marine areas used by land-based marine predators for foraging activities. The MPA is managed as an IUCN Category 1a nature reserve and is fully no-take. Prior to the MPA, the Heard and McDonald Islands (with a 12nm buffer portion of the surrounding waters) were declared a Wilderness Reserve by Australia. In 1997, the Heard and McDonald Islands were added to the World Heritage List. During this time, the land and 12nm ocean portion of the Wilderness Reserve were also managed as an IUCN Category 1a nature reserve. This case includes three types of environmental commons: Patagonian toothfish (the main fishery in the region), King Penguin as an ecosystem indicator (best studied bird in the area, sensitive to climate and environmental changes), and Light Mantled Albatross as a migratory species indicator. Two Governance Systems and three Actor Groups are also included. The HIMI Marine Reserve Management Plan (governance system) governs the land and ocean within the Australian EEZ around the Heard and McDonald Islands and is implemented by the Australian Antarctic Division. The HIMI Fishery Management Plan regulates the harvest of toothfish and icefish resources within the EEZ and is implemented by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA). While AAD and AFMA are separate bodies with separate mandates and management plans, they work very closely in the management of the HIMI MPA. According to expert interviews, the fishing industry has an agreement to do the monitoring in the MPA (there is also government surveillance by both Australian and France via satellites). Ultimately, this means that the MPA is actively monitored, and thus fishing likely does not occur in the MPA (note also that the fishing industry was highly involved in MPA siting). However, because of lack of funding by AAD (and the high cost of going to HIMI), broader scale management and monitoring (as purportedly required in the MPA management plan) has not been possible (e.g., land-based surveys to count King Penguins and other birds, broad ecological monitoring). Nevertheless, the HIMI reserve likely remains protected by sheer isolation. Its remoteness and harsh weather keeps human impact to a minimum; even tourist vessels rarely set foot there. Despite being protected by isolation, the lack of visits and research there in the last decade means that managers know almost nothing about the status of marine life (with the exception of targeted fish species) around HIMI. For example, satellite monitoring by the AAD has revealed massive glacial retreat, but how this (and other climate change impacts) is affecting land-based birds and mammals remains speculation. Note that the case is only coded for toothfish management since the icefish fishery is much smaller and relatively unstable from year to year. This MPA was expanded on 29 March 2014 (to 71,2000 km-squared; with a new Management Plan), but this is outside of the snapshot for this case.
Statuspublic
TeamHIMI Team
Start Date2014-12-19 00:28:31 -0500
Coding Complete?Yes
Date Completed2015-09-03 17:49:22 -0400
SectorMarine protected areas
ProjectSESMAD
Data Source(s)Primary data, Secondary data
CountryAustralia
External BiophysicalThe major biophysical processes and disturbances are: 1. Volcanism, 2. Harvest (historic and current), and 3. Climate Change. 1. Volcanism: The Heard and McDonald Islands are volcanic islands with McDonald Island being the active volcano. During past eruptions, entire bird colonies have been destroyed on McDonald Island. 2. Harvest: Historically, King Penguins were harvested alongside Elephant Seals in the 1800s, both for their oil. Elephant seal populations were decimated and King Penguins were likely exterminated, but both populations have since recovered, with King Penguins now actually growing exponentially. Currently, Icefish and Toothfish are harvested in the waters around the Heard and McDonald Islands. Their harvest is deemed sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council (Icefish since 2006; toothfish since 2012) and the Australian Fisheries Management Authority. In the mid-1990s to early 2000s, this area was ravaged by Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) fishing, but none has been reported since 2006/07 season. 3. Because of the islands' location in the subantarctic (and in the path of major circumpolar fronts), both the land and sea systems are highly vulnerable to climate change.
External SocialAside from harvesting, the Heard and McDonald Islands are so remote (isolated) and with such a harsh climate, that they remain free from most social processes or disturbances. Even tourists seldom visit the islands. The intense levels of IUU fishing in the area led to the formal organization of a Coalition of Legal Toothfish Operators (COLTO). COLTO, along with dozens of other institutions (government, non-government, State, international, industry, etc.), have worked to dramatically reduce IUU fishing throughout the Southern Ocean, including around the Heard and McDonald Islands (with none reported since 2006/07 season).
Snapshots2002-2012
Timeline1853 - Discovery. 1910 - Claimed by UK. 1947 - Transferred to Australia. 1953 - Heard and McDonald Islands Act of 1953, formalizing governance of the islands and 12nm surrounding ocean as an Australian External Territory. 1979 - EEZ declared to 200 nm (abutting France's Kerguelen Island EEZ and CCAMLR high seas). 1980 - Australia signs the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). 1981 - Antarctic Marine Living Resources Act enacted, establishes the legal process by which CCAMLR measures would be applied to fishing vessels operating in the Heard and McDonald Islands EEZs. 1983 - HIMI added to the Register of the National Estate (to protect HIMI's heritage values). 1987 - the Heard and McDonald Islands Environment Protection and Management Ordinance, this was designed to further protected the islands from human interference, requiring a permit to enter HIMI, including the 12nm marine zone around it. The Ordinance explicitly stating a need "to preserve and manage the Territory so as to protect the environment and indigenous wildlife..." 1991 - Australian Fisheries Management Act came into force, regulating all fishing within the HIMI EEZ. 1992 - Australia signs CBD, part of obligation/objectives is to make a national representative system of MPAs. 1994 - Australia signs the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS), formalizing the 200nm waters around HIMI as Australia's EEZ (before then, it was technically referred to as the Australian Fishing Zone, rather than an EEZ). 1996 - Heard Island Wilderness Reserve Established. 1997 - World Heritage Listing (though Australia made the submission to include HIMI on the World Heritage List in 1990). 1997 - Toothfish and Icefish fishing commenced (and managed under the AFMA). 1998 - Bioregionalization of all Australian EEZs published; HIMI was one of five priority areas. 1999 - Strategic Plan for National system of MPAs. 2000 - HIMI MPA proposal. 2002 - HIMI marine reserve and conservation zone established (65,000 km-squared); at the time, it was the largest IUCN category 1a MPA in the world, second largest no-take MPA in AU EEZ (second to the Great Barrier Reef). Note that some areas were left out of the original proposal because of potential interference with the commercial fisheries. These were re-evaluated and some were added to the marine protected area in 2014. 2005 - The Heard Island and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Management Plan implemented (by the AAD). 2014 - The HIMI marine reserve expanded and a new management plan written (2014-2024).
Modeling Issues
Surveys
Theories

Visualization

Show Render

Hide Render


Attached Components

Actors

Name:
Australian Toothfish Fishers
details
Past collaboration:
High (3)
Although the companies may compete for access to fishing grounds, they have worked together to obtain sustainability certification (through the MSC) and must continue to work together to maintain this certification. Further, they are members of COLTO and accordingly have worked, and continue to work together, to lobby for legal toothfish operators and to take action against illegal fishing (E.g., Osterblom and Sumaila 2011).
Costs of exit:
Yes
Costs of exit is high since these two Australian fishing companies hold the entire quota at the Macquarie and the Heard and McDonald Islands. Further, these companies have worked (and invested) in becoming certified as sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council, which adds further value to the fishery. Also, while Toothfish fisheries exist in other areas throughout the circumpolar region, most of them are in other States' EEZ and would not be open to Australian fishing vessels. Some stocks on the high seas (e.g, in the Ross Sea) would be available to Australian fishing vessels, however, these fisheries occur in a highly competitive Olympic Style fashion and Australian vessels would not be guaranteed any portion of the quota.
Proportionality (of costs and benefits):
Yes
Interest heterogeneity:
Low (1)
Toothfish fishing rights are held by a small number of operators. At Macquarie Island and Heard and McDonald Islands, rights are held by 2 companies; Austral Fisheries Pty Ltd and Australian Longline Pty Ltd. At Macquarie a maximum of three boats are allowed to operate at any one time. At the Heard and McDonald Islands, up until the 2011/12 season, three vessels were in operation per season. Between 2012/13 and 2013/14 season, four vessels were in operation.
Leadership:
["Informal leader"]
There is some informal leadership through COLTO, particularly though the chairman who heavily lobbies on behalf of COLTO and all legal toothfish operations. The chairman invests his time heavily in traveling to meetings, engaging with industry, NGOs, scientists and others to promote the image of sustainable legal toothfish operators (See e.g., .
Leadership authority:
Missing
Actor group trust:
Missing
Personal communication:
More than once a year (5)
Industry representatives meet multiples times a year through a variety of forums including SARAG (the Subantarctic Resource Assessment Group, which meets multiple times a year), SouthMAC (the Subantarctic Fisheries Management Advisory Committee, which meets at least once a year), CCAMLR meetings, COLTO meetings.
Remote communication:
More than once a year (5)
In coordinating through various forums (e.g., see above, SARAG, SouthMAC, CCAMLR, COLTO) as well as MSC certification.
Leadership accountability:
Missing
Actor group coordination:
Both formal and informal
They coordinate through fishing operations. Also, these two companies also applied jointly for MSC certification. They are also members of the Coalition of Legal Toothfish Operators (COLTO) that lobbies on behalf of legal toothfish operators, pressing for regulations against IUU fishing.
Name:
Australian Fisheries Management Authority
details
Past collaboration:
High (3)
The AFMA was established in 1992 and members have had to work together since then in managing a wide variety of fisheries throughout Australia's EEZ (which is the third largest in the world).
Costs of exit:
Not Applicable
Proportionality (of costs and benefits):
Not Applicable
Interest heterogeneity:
Low (1)
The AFMA share interests in the management of fish resources within Australian Territorial Waters
Leadership:
["Formal leader"]
The Australian Fisheries Management Authority is a government agency with a formal bureaucratic structure.
Leadership authority:
High (3)
AFMA is the AU government's statutory agency responsible for fisheries management.
Actor group trust:
Missing
Personal communication:
More than once a year (5)
AFMA representatives meet multiples times a year through a variety of forums including SARAG (the Subantarctic Resource Assessment Group, which meets multiple times a year), SouthMAC (the Subantarctic Fisheries Management Advisory Committee, which meets at least once a year), and in and around CCAMLR meetings.
Remote communication:
More than once a year (5)
In coordinating through various forums (e.g., see above, SARAG, SouthMAC, CCAMLR, etc.).
Leadership accountability:
Medium (2)
AFMA, as a government agency, has a bureaucratic structure.
Actor group coordination:
Formal
Members of the AFMA meet regularly with each other to manage fish resources.
Name:
Australian Antarctic Division
details
Past collaboration:
Medium (2)
Members have to collaborate on a variety of management measures, research activities, gathering data (e.g., for the HIMI MPA proposal). Many members have worked for the AAD for years to decades.
Costs of exit:
Not Applicable
Proportionality (of costs and benefits):
Not Applicable
Interest heterogeneity:
Medium (2)
Depending on the department an individual works on, and depending on the individual, they may be working to further research, conservation, economic and/or political objectives. These interests may be in potential conflict (divergent) from each other.
Leadership:
["Formal leader"]
The AAD has a formal director that overseas the entire Division. They also have a head Manager for each of their Branches under the Division.
Leadership authority:
High (3)
The Director of the AAD is responsible for overseeing management of Australia's entire Antarctic region, including the subantarctic territory at Heard and McDonald Islands and Macquarie Island.
Actor group trust:
Missing
Personal communication:
More than once a year (5)
More than 300 individuals work for the AAD, but they all work in close proximity, with many in the same office.
Remote communication:
More than once a year (5)
Via email.
Leadership accountability:
Medium (2)
Actor group coordination:
Both formal and informal
Staff of the AAD include support, policy and science personnel as well as researchers that spend extensive time in the field (in the Antarctic and subantarctic) as well as scientists based at the University of Tasmania, providing opportunity for formal and informal interaction between individuals in this collective group.

Governance Systems

Name:
Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Management Plan
details
Type of formal governance:
Management plan
End Date:
2012
This management plan was designed to run through 2012. In 2014, a new management plan was implemented and designed to run through 2024. This second management plan aligned with the new larger boundaries of the MPA that was adopted in 2014.
Begin date:
2005
This Australian Commonwealth MPA was declared in 2002 under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The management plan also includes provisions applicable to the Heard and McDonald Islands World Heritage properties, important wetlands, and threatened and migratory species.
Governance trigger:
Not Applicable
Governance system description:
MPA Management Plan
The HIMI Marine Reserve Management Plan, implemented by the Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, lays out the objectives, rules and guidelines for managing the HIMI Marine Reserve.
Governance scale:
State-based policy
The management plan is state-based since the Heard and McDonald Islands are governed as an Australian territory (despite their distance from the Australian mainland ~4000km).
Centralization:
Highly centralized (4)
Governance is controlled almost entirely by major state bodies, especially the Department of the Environment.
Metric diversity:
High: Many metrics for success (3)
The MPA management plan includes a variety of inter-related goals for biodiversity conservation, sustainable management, protection of areas occupied by species during different life history stages (e.g., juveniles toothfish grounds, nesting areas for seabirds, foraging areas for birds and mammals), reduction of invasive species threats, and more.
MPA primary goal (in practice):
["Biodiversity conservation"]
The MPA proposal (2005) defines the main purposes of the MPA to: 1) protect conservation values of Heard Island and McDonald Islands, the territorial sea and the adjacent Exclusive Economic Zone (HIMI EEZ) including: the World Heritage and cultural values of the Territory of Heard Island and McDonald Islands; the unique features of the benthic and pelagic environments; representative portions of the different marine habitat types; and marine areas used by land-based marine predators for local foraging activities. 2) provide an effective conservation framework which will contribute to the integrated and ecologically sustainable management of the HIMI region as a whole; 3) provide a scientific reference area for the study of ecosystem function within the HIMI region; and 4) add representative examples of the HIMI EEZ to the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas.
MPA motivation:
["Ecological value", "Feasibility"]
Ecological value: HIMI was one of five priority areas that the Australian government identified for marine protection as part of their Australian Ocean Policy. Feasibility: Heard and McDonald Islands are incredibly remote. There is no native population and the region is incredibly inhospitable. They islands are only occasionally visited by tourists or scientists. Fishing does occur outside the MPA.
MPA protection:
["Protecting key life history stage(s)", "Reducing threats"]
The MPA plan actually also includes land-based protection, which encompasses nesting areas for a variety of seabirds as well as Antarctic fur seals and Southern elephant seals. The Ocean component protects foraging grounds and is off limits to fishing.
MPA internal natural boundaries:
Low (1)
The MPA is based on CAR principles (being comprehensive, adequate and representative), thus on having a certain percentage of habitats covered. In some areas, it has some coherence (e.g., protecting an entire bank), but in other areas, it has little to no coherence (e.g., MPA boundaries draw as hard lines and squares with on apparent ecologically significance).
Distance to markets:
More than 1000km (4)
HIMI is located ~4000km from Western Australia and major markets (the USA, Japan, China) are even further away.
MPA budget:
30000 $US
30,000 AU Dollars is budgeted annually for the Heard and McDonald Islands MPA (See Director of National Parks 2013/14 Annual Report).
PA IUCN strict zones:
100 %
The entire MPA is a IUCN category 1a (strict nature reserve)
MPA connectivity:
No (1)
No evidence that connectivity was explicitly considered. Also note that the Heard and McDonald Islands are an Australian overseas territory, so incredibly remote and far from all the other areas that are part of AU's national MPA network.
PA CAR principles:
Yes (3)
These were the foundational principles used in citing this MPA.
MPA migratory benefit:
Yes
The MPA protects breeding grounds and some foraging areas.
MPA migratory life history:
Yes- foraging area for many seabirds, including King Penguins and light-mantled albatross.
The MPA includes foraging areas for flying seabirds, including migratory albatross.
MPA threats to migratory sp:
["Resource competition", "Bycatch", "Habitat destruction"]
The major threats to migratory flying seabirds that are managed under this governance system are being caught incidentally in longline operations and also to habitat loss from human (e.g., scientists, tourists) and natural (e.g., volcanic) distances. Antarctic fur seals and Southern elephant seals are also threatened by competition for food (Mackerel Icefish, also targeted commercially, see Green 2006). King Penguins at HIMI have also been shown to forage on Mackerel Icefish, particularly in the winter (Moore et al. 1998).
MPA migratory threats and redux:
Some protection of foraging grounds and protection (on land) of nesting sites.
The MPA protects some seabird foraging grounds and most seabird nesting grounds on the islands (land-based protection is included in the MPA management plan). Note that most of the seabird protection measures are actually implemented by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority as seabird bycatch mitigation measures under the 2002 Heard and McDonald Islands Fishery Management Plan (measures are in agreement with CCAMLR seabird conservation measures).
Social-ecological fit:
Low (1)
Heard and McDonald Islands are part of the larger Kerguelen Plateau system. The MPA only encompasses the Australian territorial waters, but not the adjacent French national waters (around Kerguelen) or the high seas (governed by CCAMLR) beyond the AU and FR EEZs.
Governance knowledge use:
["Scientific knowledge"]
With no human habitants on HIMI, the GS exclusively uses scientific knowledge.
MPA IUCN somewhat strict zones:
0 %
The entire MPA is a IUCN category 1a (strict nature reserve)
MPA IUCN sustainable zones :
0 %
The entire MPA is a IUCN category 1a (strict nature reserve)
MPA threats:
Fishing
According to the HIMI Marine Reserve Proposal (2002), long-term commercial fishing is the main potential threat to the conservation values of the HIMI region. Other human activities, such as tourism, science or other logistical operations, could also threaten the area, but are a higher risk to the land rather than the ocean parts. Also, fishing is the only activity that takes place regularly (every year); all other human-based activities are intermittent. Environmental threats include volcanism (land) and climate change (land and ocean).
Governance system spatial extent:
 
Horizontal coordination:
Missing
Name:
Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery Management Plan
details
Type of formal governance:
Management plan
Management plan has been implemented in the context of enabling legislation
End Date:
current (2014)
This governance system is still in operation.
Begin date:
2002
The Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery Management Plan 2002 is implemented under the 1991 Fisheries Management Act amended in 2011. The Management Plan includes the trawl fishery for Mackerel Icefish (Champsocephalus gunnari) and the trawl, longline and pot fishery for Patagonian toothfish (Dissostichus eleginoides). An increasing amount of the toothfish catch has been taken via longline rather than trawl (which used to be the primary fishing means).
Governance trigger:
Not Applicable
Governance system description:
Fisheries Management Plan
The Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery is managed according to the HIMI Toothfish Management Plan by AFMA (the Australian Fisheries Management Authority) under the Fisheries Management Act 1991. In addition, the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Conservation Act 1981, administered by the AAD (Australian Antarctic Division) implements Australia’s international obligations under Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). The HIMI Toothfish Fishery Management Plan provides the rules for setting catch limits, granting fishery quotas, and implementing other fisheries and environmental measures (e.g., gear restrictions, bycatch rules, etc.). The plan is implemented primarily by the AFMA, but in cooperation with the AAD and in accordance with CCAMLR Conservation Measures. There is a Sub-Antarctic Resource Assessment Group (SARAG) that acts a scientific advisory body for implementing the fisheries management plan and a Sub-Antarctic Management Advisory Committee (SouthMAC) which provides for fishery management consultation between industry, managers, scientists and other interests groups. SouthMAC is AFMA's main source of advice on management of fisheries at Heard and McDonald Islands and Macquarie Island.
Governance scale:
State-based policy
Fisheries at Heard and McDonald Islands are managed by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA), in close cooperation with AAD (the Australian Antarctic Division) and in accordance with Conservation Measures set by CCAMLR (The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, which is an international regime).
Centralization:
Highly centralized (4)
Decisions are ultimately made by AFMA (the national government).
Metric diversity:
High: Many metrics for success (3)
AFMA aims to maintain stocks at sustainable levels, while also attempting ecosystem based management. This includes having bycatch limits and mitigation measures for avoiding seabirds.
MPA primary goal (in practice):
Not Applicable
MPA motivation:
Not Applicable
MPA protection:
Not Applicable
MPA internal natural boundaries:
Not Applicable
Distance to markets:
More than 1000km (4)
HIMI is more than 4000km away from mainland Australia. Toothfish are either landed in Australian ports or Mauritius (off of South Africa). But the main markets are even further away - in the United States, Japan and China (see AFMA 2014).
MPA budget:
Not Applicable
PA IUCN strict zones:
Not Applicable
MPA connectivity:
Not Applicable
PA CAR principles:
Not Applicable
MPA migratory benefit:
Not Applicable
MPA migratory life history:
Not Applicable
MPA threats to migratory sp:
Not Applicable
MPA migratory threats and redux:
Not Applicable
Social-ecological fit:
Low (1)
The HIMI toothfish stock is part of a larger Kerguelen Plateau population. This population is targeted by French fishers (in the Kerguelen Island French EEZ fishery), by Australian fishers (HIMI fishery), and by high seas fishers in the CCAMLR Area. The stock has also been heavily targeted by IUU fishers in national and high seas waters. There is some coordination between managers (especially CCAMLR and AFMA) but less so with French national fishers. Also, there remain critical gaps in the life history information about the Kerguelen Plateau toothfish.
Governance knowledge use:
["Scientific knowledge"]
Management is very science-based with input from the AFMA, AAD, SARAG, CCAMLR and others; all of these groups include fisheries scientists. Biological and ecological information is actively gathered by AFMA fisheries observers (required on all Heard and McDonald Island fishing vessels). AAD, in collaboration with the AFMA, also carries out annual fisheries-independent surveys (random stratified trawl survey).
MPA IUCN somewhat strict zones:
Not Applicable
MPA IUCN sustainable zones :
Not Applicable
MPA threats:
Not Applicable
Governance system spatial extent:
410722
Australia's exclusive economic zone around the Heard and McDonald Islands is 410,722 km-sq.
Horizontal coordination:
Formal
AFMA (Australian Fisheries Management Authority), which implements the fisheries management plan, also coordinates (horizontally) with members of the AAD (Australian Antarctic Division). They further (vertically) coordinate with CCAMLR and multiple science and advisory groups (e.g., SARAG, SouthMAC).

Environmental Commons

Name:
King Penguin
details
Productivity:
Moderately Productive (2)
All populations have been increasing since being overexploited in the 19th and early 20th centuries and most are considered fully recovered and were considered to have recovered fairly quickly once exploitation ceased. Populations at Heard and Kerguelen were slower to recover and are thus still increasing. They have the longest breeding cycle (18 months) of all seabirds (Bost et al. 2013 and references therein).
Commons aggregation:
Population
King penguin are a species of penguin related to Emperor penguins (same genus). Their population is found throughout the subantarctic, with breeding colonies on subantarctic islands, including at Heard and McDonald Islands.
Biotic:
Yes
Commons unit size:
Medium (3)
The king penguin is the second largest species of penguins, growing up to about three feet in height and 35 lbs in weight (Bost et al. 2013).
Commons mobility:
High (3)
King Penguins forage at great depths and have high mobility. They are among the world's deepest diving seabirds, second only to Emperor penguins. They usually forage between 100-200 meters, but have been recorded diving to 440 m. During the summer season, then tend to stay within 500 meters of their breeding colonies, while in the winter, they have been recorded traveling up to 1800 km from their colony (5000 km traveled round trip; Putz et al. 1999).
Commons spatial extent:
20000
Based on estimates from Bird Life International, King Penguins' extent of occurrence is <20,000km-2 (Bird Life 2015).
Environmental medium:
Oceanic
Breeds on land, but forages in the ocean.
Commons heterogeneity:
Moderate (2)
Populations are more concentrated at colonies during the breeding season, but can disperse widely during foraging and when not breeding.
Intra annual predictability:
High (3)
Colony location and breeding life cycle is well known for King Penguins. Their foraging ecology has been extensively studied and is strongly dependent on the frontal zone features, especially the Antarctic Polar Front. Because of their unusual breeding life cycle (the longest of all seabirds, lasting more than a year), there are always penguins at the colony, even though the laying period is asynchronous and has considerable variation between breeding sites and years (Bost et al. 2013 and references therein).
Inter annual predictability:
High (3)
King Penguins are well studied with the location of breeding colonies well known. Most local populations have stabilized since being overexploited in the past (see Bost et al. 2013 and references therein).
Technical substitute:
No
Commons boundaries:
Somewhat unclear boundaries (2)
King penguins were heavily harvested in the late 19th and early 20th century (in association with the sealing industry) and all colonies have since been recovering. Location of colonies and their recovery has been well studied. In many colonies their life history has also been well-studied, as well as their foraging range and behavior. However, their exact location at any given time is difficult to determine because they occupy different spaces during different times of their life history (see Woehler 2006; Bost et al. 2013 and references therein).
Commons renewability:
Renewable (1)
Commons accessibility:
Somewhat accessible (2)
The resource is accessible via ships, however, its vast distance from ports means that transportation costs might outweigh the benefits of harvesting and other activities. Tourist vessels do visit King Penguin colonies on subantarctic islands (but they are not allowed to harm the birds).
Commons indicator:
["Ecosystem health and/or biodiversity"]
King penguins feed on pelagic fish, especially myctophids (mesopelagic fish) and some squid, foraging largely out at the Polar Front (Bost et al. 2013). At Heard and McDonald Islands, King Penguins have also been known to feed on Mackerel Icefish (which are also commercially harvested) especially in the winter (Moore et al. 1998). They are very vulnerable to environmental and climate change and could be threatened by a potential fishery interaction (if prey species is targeted or if targeted species also feeds on prey species; Bost et al. 2013).
Name:
Light Mantled Albatross
details
Productivity:
Not Applicable
Commons aggregation:
Population
The light mantled albatross is a species of albatross found throughout the circumpolar region.
Biotic:
Yes
Commons unit size:
Small (2)
Wingspan can be over 2 meters; and they typically weigh between 2.5 and 4 kilograms.
Commons mobility:
High (3)
Light mantled albatross have been known to travel up to 1500 km from breeding sites to forage; and a total distance of over 6000km (Weimerskirch & Robertson 1994).
Commons spatial extent:
1700000
Estimates suggest that birds from Macquarie island forage on average 1516 km from the island in the direction of Antarctica. Assuming a radius of 750km this corresponds to a total spatial extent of 1.7 million sq km, but species occurs in areas up to 44.3 million sq km. This estimate should be taken as the minimum spatial extent and values likely exceed this number considerably.
Environmental medium:
Oceanic
Nests on land; but spends a considerable amount of lifecycle foraging in the open ocean and coastal areas.
Commons heterogeneity:
High (3)
High site fidelity to breeding site (low heterogeneity); but for much of life cycle are distributed widely.
Intra annual predictability:
Missing
Not enough information to assess intra annual predictability.
Inter annual predictability:
Moderate (2)
Availability across years is somewhat unpredictable because they are biennial breeders and do not return each year. Further, breeding sites are on remote and difficult to access subantarctic islands. At many of these islands, scientists are not able to collect data regularly and often the actual location of the nests can be difficult to access. Estimates suggest that the population at Macquarie might be more predictable than others and also that its more stable. Other sites exhibit considerable variability or uncertainty. For example, the population at Heard Island has been estimated at 200-500 nesting pairs, but its difficult for scientists to find all of the nests and the birds often nest in new and different areas. Note that the last survey of this species at Macquarie was conducted in 2005 (ACAP 2012) and at Heard Island in 2003/04 season (Green and Woehler 2006).
Technical substitute:
 
Does not serve an important or valued economic function
Commons boundaries:
Somewhat unclear boundaries (2)
The general boundaries are fairly well defined to include the circumpolar region; but they are somewhat fuzzy at the margins.
Commons renewability:
Renewable (1)
Commons accessibility:
Somewhat accessible (2)
Light-mantled albatross are not currently targeted by human harvesting efforts. However, they overlap with Antarctic species and may be taken as bycatch by tuna and toothfish fishers. They represented 6% of total seabird bycatch by tuna longliners between 1988-1997 in New Zealand (ACAP 2012), but less so in recent years. The Macquarie Island toothfish fisheries had zero seabird by catch (as of 2013), and the HIMI fisheries reported only 3 seabirds overall (none of which were light mantled albatross).
Commons indicator:
["Status of highly migratory species"]
The light mantled albatross is a migratory seabird found in the circumpolar region of Antarctica. Birds breed on sub-Antarctic islands such as Macquarie island and forage on average up to 1,500 km south from breeding sites with a total distance travelled of over 6,000km in 10-15 days (Weimerskirch & Robertson 1994). Total distribution size has been estimated at 12,600 km-2 (BirdLife Fact Sheet 2014). Used as a highly migratory species indicator for Macquarie and Heard and McDonald Islands due to its prevalence at both locations. Compared to the estimated population size of this species (19,000-24,000 breeding pairs), a significant proportion of the population breeds at Macquarie (~1250 pairs) and Heard (200-500 pairs).
Name:
Patagonian Toothfish
details
Productivity:
Poorly productive (1)
Toothfish are not a highly productive fish. Like many deep dwelling fish, their life history characteristics make them vulnerable to overexploitation. They grow relatively slowly, live up to 50 years and mature later in life (10-13 years of age for females; 6-10 years for males). There is also evidence that toothfish may not spawn every year, leading to lower overall fecundity (see Collins et al. 2010 and references therein). Many populations are able to support small commercial fisheries (e.g., 1000-3000 tonnes/year), while others were quickly overexploited in the mid 1990s and early 200s from IUU fishing and have yet to recovery (e.g., BANZARE Bank; McKinlay et al. 2008).
Commons aggregation:
Population
Patagonian toothfish (Dissostichus eleginoides) are a species of fish with a broad circum-Antarctic distribution, largely found off the tip of South America and around subantarctic islands, including Macquarie Island and the Heard and McDonald Islands. There appear to be distinct populations in the South Indian Ocean (including fish found around the Heard and McDonald Islands, Crozet, Kerguelen, Prince Edward and Marion Islands), the South Atlantic (including fish found around South Georgia, North Scotia Ridge), the Patagonian Shelf, and a distinct stock off Macquarie (see Collins et al. 2010, Appleyard 2002, Appleyard 2004).
Biotic:
Yes
Commons unit size:
Medium (3)
Toothfish can reach a weights greater than 200 kg and lengths over 2.3 meters (see e.g., Collins et al. 2010). The size of captured fish are, however, somewhat smaller and are generally gear-dependent. Trawl fishers tend to capture younger smaller fish (around 1 meter in length); while longline operators capture older larger fish (< one meter in length).
Commons mobility:
Medium (2)
Toothfish are capable of moving between large distances, but the vast majority tend to be resident in a small area, with some but limited movements to nearby areas (see Collins et al. 2010 and references therein). For example, 99% of the fish tagged and recaptured around the Heard and McDonald Islands were found (1-3 years later) within 30 km of where they were originally tagged. However, some fish were found more than 1800 km away (Williams et al. 2002).
Commons spatial extent:
 
Patagonian toothfish are distributed throughout the Southern Ocean and are concentrated around sea mounts, continental shelves and islands. There are several different stocks including those found around Macquarie Island and HIMI. Individual toothfish are for the most part residents of a relatively small geographical area although some undergo extensive migrations (MSC 2012)
Environmental medium:
Oceanic
Commons heterogeneity:
Moderate (2)
Patagonian toothfish have a broad circum-Antarctic distribution, but they appear to have a patchy rather than continuous distribution with distinct and potentially isolated populations. Populations seem to be concentrated around islands (e.g., South Georgia) and banks (e.g., Kerguelen Plateau) with the vast deep areas of the Southern Ocean acting to isolate and restrict these populations (see Collins et al. 2010 and references therein). Macquarie Island Patagonian Toothfish tend to be concentrated in two fishing grounds around Macquarie Island; the Aurora Trough and Macquarie Ridge. None of these fishing grounds are within the Macquarie Island Marine Park.
Intra annual predictability:
Low (1)
Note that most toothfish fisheries operate in a limited window of time (usually over the course of a few months), thus the scientific information on toothfish is largely based on an annual snapshot with very little information gathered about toothfish during the rest of the year. As a result, there are still major gaps in the life history knowledge of toothfish. For example, for many populations, their reproductive and spawning cycle (which usually happens in the winter between June and September, while some fisheries only operate in the summer) is not well understood. For some populations of toothfish, their reproductive cycle involves spawning migrations and there is increasing evidence that mature individuals may not spawn every year (i.e. exhibiting skip spawning). Despite these gaps in their intrannual cycle, tag-recapture studies suggest that most toothfish stay close by to where they were caught (e.g., in the HIMI fishery 99% of recaptured tagged fish were caught within 30km of where they were first caught and tagged 1-3 years prior), some individual fish travel great distances (e.g., in the HIMI fishery, some fish traveled up to 1850 km from where they were caught; see Collins et al. 2010 and references therein).
Inter annual predictability:
Moderate (2)
Most know Patagonian toothfish populations have been targeted in commercial fisheries on an annual basis since the mid to late 1990s and can predictably be caught from year to year. Genetic, otolith chemistry and parasite fauna studies all suggest that there are distinct populations of toothfish (one in the South Indian Ocean, one in the Atlantic sector, one off of Patagonia, and one around Macquarie; See Collins et al. 2010 and references therein). Further, tag-recapture studies indicate that most individual toothfish within a stock stays close by from year to year. For example, in the Heard and McDonald Islands (HIMI) fishery, 99% of recaptured toothfish were caught within 30 km of where they were tagged 1-3 years prior (Williams et al. 2002). However, in most stocks there are individuals that also exhibit vast travels. For example, in the HIMI fishery, some fish were recaptured up to 1850 km away (on the Crozet Plateau; Williams et al. 2002).
Technical substitute:
No
Commons boundaries:
Somewhat unclear boundaries (2)
Depending on the toothfish population, boundaries are more or less clear. For example, boundaries for the Macquarie Island stock appear fairly clear since the vast majority of toothfish spend their whole lifecycle in the water around Macquarie Island (based on genetics and tag-recapture studies in which mover than 99% of recaptures were from the Macquarie population; MSC 2012). Note that at Macquarie, there is some movement of toothfish between the Southern and Northern fishing grounds; as well as a smaller but limited movement into areas governed by CCAMLR. For other toothfish stocks, the boundaries are less clear. For example, the South Indian Ocean population appears to occupy a rather large range over the Kerguelen Plateau and out to the Prince Edward Islands, but the boundaries of this population's distribution are still unknown (see Collins et al. 2010 and references therein).
Commons renewability:
Renewable (1)
Toothfish are a renewable resource, but are still subject to overexploitation because of their life history characteristics (e.g., slow growth, long-lived, later to mature).
Commons accessibility:
Somewhat accessible (2)
The fish are accessible as a result of the availability of ocean-going vessels that can process and store Patagonian toothfish for eventual sale on international markets (especially the US and Japan).
Commons indicator:
["Status of species targeted by fisheries"]

Component Interactions

Governance Interaction

Heard and McDonald Islands Toothfish Fishery

2002-10-31 to 2012-12-31

Commons User:
Australian Toothfish Fishers (Actor)
Primary:
Patagonian Toothfish (Environmental Common)
Governing Organization:
Australian Fisheries Management Authority (Actor)
Governs:
Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery Management Plan (Governance System)
Governs:
Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Management Plan (Governance System)

Governance Interaction

Heard and McDonald Island Light Mantled Albatross Interaction (Migratory Species)

2002-10-31 to 2014-03-28

Primary:
Light Mantled Albatross (Environmental Common)
Commons User:
Australian Toothfish Fishers (Actor)
Governs:
Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery Management Plan (Governance System)
Governing Organization:
Australian Fisheries Management Authority (Actor)
Governing Organization:
Australian Antarctic Division (Actor)
Governs:
Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Management Plan (Governance System)

Governance Interaction

Heard and McDonald Island King Penguin Conservation (Ecosystem Health)

2002-10-31 to 2014-03-28

Governing Organization:
Australian Antarctic Division (Actor)
Primary:
King Penguin (Environmental Common)
Governs:
Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Management Plan (Governance System)

Studies

Appleyard, S. A., R. D. Ward, and R. Williams. 2002. Population structure of the Patagonian toothfish around Heard, McDonald and Macquarie Islands. Antarctic Science 14:364-373.


Appleyard, S. A., R. Williams, and R. D. Ward. 2004. Population genetic structure of Patagonian toothfish in the West Indian Ocean sector of the Southern Ocean. CCAMLR Science 11:21-32.


Charles-Andre Bost, Karine DeLord, Christophe Barbraud, Yves Cherel, Klemens Putz, Cedric Cotte, Clara Peron and H. Weimerskirch, "King Penguin," in Penguins: Natural History and Conservation, eds. Pablo Garcia and P. Dee Boersma (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2013), 7-22.


Williams, R., G. N. Tuck, A. Constable, and T. Lamb. 2002. Movement, growth and available abundance to the fishery of Dissostichus eleginoides Smitt, 1898 at Heard Island, derived from tagging experiments. CCAMLR Science 9:33-48.


Welsford, D., A. Constable, and G. B. Nowara. 2011. The Heard Island and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve and Conservation Zone - A model for Southern Ocean marine reserves? Pages 297-304 in G. Duhamel and D. Welsford, editors. The Kerguelen Plateau: marine ecosystems and fisheries. Société française d'ichtyologie.


G. Duhamel and D. Welsford, editors. 2011. The Kerguelen Plateau: marine ecosystems and fisheries. Société française d'ichtyologie.    


Brickle, P., K. MacKenzie, and A. Pike. 2005. Parasites of the Patagonian toothfish, Dissostichus eleginoides Smitt 1898, in different parts of the Subantarctic. Polar Biology 28:663-671.


Chambers, L. E., R. Altwegg, C. Barbraud, P. Barnard, L. J. Beaumont, R. J. Crawford, J. M. Durant, L. Hughes, M. R. Keatley, M. Low, P. C. Morellato, E. S. Poloczanska, V. Ruoppolo, R. E. Vanstreels, E. J. Woehler, and A. C. Wolfaardt. 2013. Phenological changes in the southern hemisphere. PLoS One 8:e75514.


Marine Stewardship Council. Heard Island and McDonald Islands (HIMI) toothfish. https://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/southern-ocean/heard_island_and_mcdonald_islands_himi_toothfish/fishery-name/. Updated on June 23, 2015; Accessed on September 3, 2015.


AFMA. Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery Management Plan 2002. Compilation from February 23, 2012. 31pp.


Commonwealth of Australia (2014). Heard Island and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Management Plan 2014-2024, Department of the Environment, Canberra, 92 pp. 


Chambers, L. E., P. Dann, B. Cannell, and E. J. Woehler. 2014. Climate as a driver of phenological change in southern seabirds. Int J Biometeorol 58:603-612.


Croxall, J. P. 2008. The role of science and advocacy in the conservation of Southern Ocean albatrosses at sea. Bird Conservation International 18: S13-S29.


Australian Department of the Environment. Heard Island and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Proposal. 2002, 9pp. 


BirdLife International. Light-mantled Albatross Phoebetria palpebrata, Species Fact Sheet. http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=3971. Accessed on September 3, 2015. 


Ussif Rashid Sumaila, Louise Teh, Reg Watson, Peter Tyedmers and Daniel Pauly. "Fuel price increase, subsidies, overcapity, and resource sustainability," ICES Journal of Marine Science 65 (2008): 832-840.


Henrik Österblom, Orjan Bodin, Rashid Sumaila, and Anthony J. Press. "Reducing Illegal Fishing in the Southern Ocean: A Global Effort," Solutions 4 (2015):72-79.


Martin A. Collins, Paul Brickle, Judith Brown, and Mark Belchier. "The Patagonian Toothfish: Biology, Ecology and Fishery," in Advances in Marine Biology, ed. M. Lesser (Burlington: Elsevier Inc., Academic Press, 2010), 227-300.


Lorne K. Kriwoken and Nick Holmes, "Emerging Issues of Australia's Sub-Antarctic Islands: Macquarie Island and Heard Island and McDonald Islands," in Looking South: Australia's Antarctic Agenda, eds. Lorne K. Kriwoken, Julia Jabour and Alan D. Hemmings (Federation Press, 2007), 149-164.


AFMA, "Status Report: Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery," Canberra, Australia (2014), 37pp. 


Henrik Österblom and Orjan Bodin. "Global cooperation among diverse organizations to reduce illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean," Conservation Biology 26 (2012):638-648.


Trathan, P. N., and D. Agnew. 2010. Climate change and the Antarctic marine ecosystem: an essay on management implications. Antarctic Science 22:387-398.


Australian Antarctic Division. Heard and McDonald Islands. http://heardisland.antarctica.gov.au/protection-and-management/marine-reserve. Accessed on September 3, 2015. 


Putz, K., Y. Ropert-Coudert, J.-B. Charrassin, and R. Wilson. 1999. Foraging Areas of King Penguins Aptenodytes patagonicus breeding at Possession Island, Southern Indian Ocean. Marine Orinthology 27:77-84.


COLTO. Coalition of Legal Toothfish Operators. http://www.colto.org. Accessed September 3, 2015. 


AFMA. Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery. http://www.afma.gov.au/fisheries/heard-island-mcdonald-island-fishery/. Accessed September 3, 2015.


Meyer, L., A. Constable and R. Williams. 2000. Conservation of marine habitats in the region of Heard Island and the McDonald Islands. Australian Antarctic Division, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Kingston, 78 pp. 


Woehler, E. 2006. "Status and conservation of the seabirds of Heard Island," In Heard Island: Southern Ocean Sentinel. Ken Green and Eric Woehler, eds. Chipping Norton, New South Wales: Surrey Beatty & Sons: 128-165. 


Green, K. 2006. "The Marine Mammals of Heard Island," In Heard Island: Southern Ocean Sentinel. Ken Green and Eric Woehler, eds. Chipping Norton, New South Wales: Surrey Beatty & Sons, 166-183. 


McKinlay, J. P., D. Welsford, A. Constable, and G. B. Nowara. 2008. An assessment of the exploratory fishery for Dissostichus spp. on BANZARE Bank (CCAMLR Division 58.4.3b) based on fine-scale catch and effort data. CCAMLR Science 15:55-78.


Lynch, H. J., W. F. Fagan, R. Naveen, S. G. Trivelpiece, and W. Z. Trivelpiece. 2012. Differential advancement of breeding phenology in response to climate may alter staggered breeding among sympatric pygoscelid penguins. Marine Ecology Progress Series 454:135-145.


Moore, G. J., B. Wienecke, and G. Robertson. 1999. Seasonal change in foraging areas and dive depths of breeding king penguins at Heard Island. Polar Biology 21:376-384.


Peron, C., H. Weimerskirch, and C. A. Bost. 2012. Projected poleward shift of king penguins' (Aptenodytes patagonicus) foraging range at the Crozet Islands, southern Indian Ocean. Proc Biol Sci 279:2515-2523.


Heritage Expeditions Ltd. Species List from Voyage 1262: South Indian Ocean to Heard and McDonald Islands (2012): 16 pp.


Raymond, B., M.-A. Lea, T. Patterson, V. Andrews-Goff, R. Sharples, J.-B. Charrassin, M. Cottin, L. Emmerson, N. Gales, R. Gales, S. D. Goldsworthy, R. Harcourt, A. Kato, R. Kirkwood, K. Lawton, Y. Ropert-Coudert, C. Southwell, J. van den Hoff, B. Wienecke, E. J. Woehler, S. Wotherspoon, and M. A. Hindell. 2015. Important marine habitat off east Antarctica revealed by two decades of multi-species predator tracking. Ecography 38:121-129.


CCAMLR. Schedule of Conservation Measures in Force 2014/15 Season. http://www.ccamlr.org/en/document/publications/schedule-conservation-measures-force-2014/15. Accessed on September 3, 2015.


CCAMLR. Fishery Report 2013: Dissostichus eleginoides Heard Island Australian EEZ (Division 58.5.2). Hobart, Tasmania (2013): 13 pp. 


IUCN. World Heritage Outlook: Heard and McDonald Islands. http://www.worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/. Updated November 12, 2014, accessed September 3, 2015.


Australian Antarctic Division and Director of National Parks (AU). 2005. Heard Island and McDonald Islands MArine Reserve Management Plan. Kingston, 151 pp. 


Ken Green and Eric Woehler. 2006. Heard Island: Southern Ocean Sentinel. Chipping Norton, New South Wales: Surrey Beatty & Sons, 270 pp.