*

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

Jurisdiction	Stock	Stock status	Indicators
Commonwealth	Northern Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)	Sustainable	Spawning stock size, effort, MSY, MEY
Commonwealth	Northern Prawn Fishery (Grooved Tiger Prawn)	Sustainable	Spawning stock size, effort, MSY, MEY
Commonwealth	Torres Strait Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)	Sustainable	Biomass estimate, catch, effort
New South Wales	New South Wales (Brown Tiger Prawn)	Negligible
Queensland	East Coast Otter Trawl Fishery (Brown and Grooved Tiger Prawn)	Sustainable	Biomass estimate, MSY and Emsy estimates, catch rate, effort
Western Australia	Exmouth Gulf Prawn Managed Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)	Sustainable	Biomass and recruitment surveys, catch, CPUE
Western Australia	North Coast Prawn Managed Fisheries (Brown Tiger Prawn)	Sustainable	Catch, effort
Western Australia	Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)	Sustainable	Biomass and recruitment surveys, catch, CPUE, Biomass dynamics model

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

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

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

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

East Coast Otter Trawl Fishery (Brown and Grooved Tiger Prawn)

Brown (Penaeus esculentus) and Grooved Tiger Prawns (P. semisulcatus) are primarily retained in the Queensland East Coast Otter Trawl Fishery (ECOTF) where they are recorded as ‘Tiger Prawns’ [Roach et al. 2012]. Since 2021, the ECOTF has been managed through five regional management areas, all with corresponding harvest strategies. The Northern and Central Harvest Strategy Regions (north of 18°S and 22°S respectively) lay within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMP) and contributed approximately 80% of the average total (2000–22) catch. Between 2000 and 2019, standardised annual catch rates in the Northern and Central regions generally trended upward [Helidoniotis 2020] except for 2007–08 when they declined following the advent of management changes, GBRMP re-zoning closures and rising operational costs [Larcombe et al. 2016]. Since 2019, the annual standardised catch rate derived from high abundance grids in both regions combined has remained relatively stable [Lovett et al. 2023].  

The earlier of the two most recent stock assessments (both applied a monthly delay-difference model to catch and effort data) estimated that in 2019 biomass was at 49% and 50% of unfished biomass, and MSY at 1,216 t and 311 t for the Northern and Central ECOTF regions, respectively [Helidoniotis 2020]. The 2019 catch of 602 t for the Northern region was well below MSY, while a catch of 333 t for the Central region was slightly above MSY. At 997 t, the 2021 combined Northern and Central regional catch was slightly (6%) higher than in 2019, with the most recent stock assessment [Lovett et al. 2023] estimating the northern and central regions combined biomass at 79% of the unfished level. In 2021–22 the combined catch for the entire East Coast stock was 1,150 t. The above evidence indicates that the biomass of this stock is unlikely to be depleted and recruitment is unlikely to be impaired.  

Prior to 2000, Tiger Prawn fishing effort levels in Queensland were at an historic high, averaging above 40,000 days per year [Larcombe et al. 2018]. From 2000–07, a 35% decline in Tiger Prawn fishing effort occurred due to structural adjustment of the Queensland East Coast Trawl fleet, following expansion of GBRMP no-fishing zones; as well as due to adverse weather and economic conditions [Larcombe et al. 2016]. Since 2007, total Tiger Prawn effort in the ECOTF has been consistently below the 2000–06 annual average of 29,826 days. The GBRMP ECOTF ecological risk assessment found that overfishing risk was low for Brown Tiger Prawn, and intermediate for Grooved Tiger Prawn at 2009 Tiger Prawn effort levels [Pears et al. 2012]. The Southern East Coast Trawl Fishery ecological risk assessment found that the overfishing risk for Brown Tiger Prawn south of the GBRMP was also low, based on 2009 effort levels [Jacobsen et al. 2018]. Between 2010–21, average annual fishing effort applied to the stock (in terms of total days fished) was less than effort in 2009. Fleet fishing power also declined during this period (Lovett et al. 2023).  

The average annual catch contribution to the 2000–22 East Coast stock catch from Northern and Central regions and Moreton Bay was 49%, 33% and 13% respectively. Current (2021–22) effort levels are well below that required to achieve MSY (E_MSY) in the Northern Region, slightly above E_MSY for the Central Region (Helidoniotis 2020), and below E_MSY for Moreton Bay (Wang 2015). This level of fishing pressure is unlikely to cause the stocks within the management unit to become recruitment impaired.  

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the East Coast Otter Trawl Fishery (Queensland) Brown and Grooved Tiger Prawn management unit is classified as a sustainable stock. 

Exmouth Gulf Prawn Managed Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)

A key management objective for Brown Tiger Prawns in Exmouth Gulf (WA) is to maintain the spawning biomass (using catch rate as a proxy for biomass) above the historically determined biological reference points [Penn et al. 1995], with a target of ≥ 25 kg per hour and a limit of ≤ 10 kg per hour in fishery independent spawning stock surveys [DPIRD 2021]. Daily monitoring of catch rates ensures cessation of fishing when catch rates drop below the target level within the key spawning area, or in early August, whichever comes first. Three fishery independent Brown Tiger Prawn spawning stock surveys were carried out from August–October 2022, achieving an average catch rate of 45.5 kg per hour, well above the target level. The fishery has recovered from the effects of the 2010–11 marine heatwave [Caputi et al. 2014a, 2016] that may have affected survival of recruits in the inshore nursery habitat in recent years. The above evidence indicates that the biomass of this stock is unlikely to be depleted and that recruitment is unlikely to be impaired. 

With respect to fishing mortality, temporal and spatial closures (based on fishery-independent and industry surveys) ensure that brown tiger prawns are not harvested at sub-optimal sizes. Commercial catch per unit effort (CPUE) data are used as an additional indicator of abundance to monitor changes in stock levels from year-to-year. The commercial catches are compared with a target catch range (250–550 t) based on the average catch from 1989–98, a period when the fishery was considered sustainable following a stock recovery [Newman et al. 2023].

The predicted catch for Brown Tiger Prawns in 2022 (based on the relationship between annual catches and measures of prawn abundance during pre-season recruitment surveys) was 390–585 t. The total catch of Brown Tiger prawns in 2022 was 411 t and was thus within both the target catch range and 2022 catch prediction range [Newman et al. 2023; Caputi et al. 2014b]. The level of annual fishing effort has reduced from historical levels of 35,000–50,000 hours (standardised to twin gear) to 22,715 trawl hours in 2022. The total number of fishing vessels has also been reduced substantially over time, from 23 vessels to six larger vessels operating with quad trawl gear. The above evidence indicates that the current level of fishing pressure is unlikely to cause the stock within the management unit to become depleted.  

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the stock within the Exmouth Gulf Prawn Managed Fishery (Western Australia) Brown Tiger Prawn management unit is classified as a sustainable stock.

New South Wales (Brown Tiger Prawn)

Stock status for New South Wales stock is reported as Negligible due to historically low catches in this jurisdiction, and the stock has generally not been subject to targeted fishing. The New South Wales commercial catch during the period 2017–18 to 2021–22 averaged less than 0.5% of landings from neighbouring jurisdictions, and Tiger Prawn is not a major component of recreational landings. Fishing is unlikely to be having a negative impact on the stock.

North Coast Prawn Managed Fisheries (Brown Tiger Prawn)

In recent years, small quantities of Brown Tiger Prawns have been landed from the North Coast Prawn Managed Fisheries (WA), which is comprised of the Onslow, Nickol Bay, Broome and Kimberley Prawn Managed Fisheries. This species is only a key target species in one of these fisheries, the Onslow Prawn Managed Fishery, which is directly adjacent to the Exmouth Gulf Prawn Managed Fishery. Assessment for Brown Tiger Prawns in the North Coast Prawn Managed Fisheries is primarily based on comparing annual catches to a target catch range, as an indicator of fishery performance and for evaluating if the stock is likely to be subjected to overfishing. When an annual catch falls outside this target catch range, a review is undertaken. In 2022, all the North Coast Prawn Managed Fisheries combined landed 16.6 t of Brown Tiger Prawns [Newman et al. 2023]. The fishing effort in the Kimberley and Nickol Bay Prawn Managed Fisheries is primarily directed towards Banana Prawns. The overall annual mean fleet effort for both these fisheries was lower in 2022 compared with recent years, which in turn is expected to have resulted in a decreased level of effort on Brown Tiger Prawns. The overall annual mean fleet effort in the Nickol Bay Prawn Managed Fishery has reduced since 2007, with 700 boat days fished annually between 1990 and 2005, compared to only 62 boat days in 2022. In the Kimberley, the number of operators actively fishing each year has declined from around 20–50 boats (resulting in over 1,000 boat days fished annually) in the 1990s and early 2000s to less than 15 boats since 2009 (less than 600 annual boat days), with only 290 boat days fished in 2022. Only one vessel fished in the Onslow Prawn Managed Fishery in 2022. The above evidence indicates the biomass of this management unit is unlikely to be depleted and recruitment is unlikely to be impaired. Furthermore, the current level of fishing mortality is unlikely to cause the management unit to become depleted.  

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the North Coast Prawn Managed Fisheries (Western Australia) Brown Tiger Prawn management unit is classified as a sustainable stock. 

Northern Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Northern Prawn Fishery (Grooved Tiger Prawn)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)

The status of Brown Tiger Prawn stocks in WA is assessed annually using fishery-independent biomass and recruitment surveys and a weight-of-evidence approach that considers a range of relevant information [Wise et al. 2007]. The assessment approach is primarily based on monitoring of fishery-independent indices (survey catch rates) of recruitment and spawning stock levels relative to specified reference points [DPIRD 2022]. Fishery independent pre-season surveys provide an index of annual recruitment that is used for predicting annual Brown Tiger Prawn catches in the fishing season for that year. Other information collected throughout the season (e.g., commercial catches, effort, and environmental data) are also evaluated to provide insights into operational factors that might affect fishery performance, or spawning stock and environmental factors affecting prawn recruitment [Kangas et al. 2015].

Commercial CPUE data are used as an additional indicator of abundance, to monitor changes in stock levels from year-to-year. The annual commercial catches and catch rates are compared with associated reference points, based on the average catch and catch rate from 1989–98, a period when the fishery was considered sustainable following a stock recovery [Newman et al. 2023].

Key management objectives for Brown Tiger Prawns are to maintain adequate spawning stock and recruitment levels. Brown Tiger Prawns are managed to remain above a target catch rate level [DPIRD 2022]. Management responses in the form of either a review of season/management arrangements if catch rates are at, or below, a threshold reference level, or changes to management arrangements if catch rates are at, or below, the limit reference level. These reference levels are informed by a spawning stock–recruitment relationship for this species and biomass dynamics modelling [Caputi 1993; Caputi et al. 1998; Penn et al. 1995; Newman et al. 2023]. A mandatory closure of the Brown Tiger Prawn northern spawning area (NCPL) is also enforced from June onwards to protect the spawning stock. Once fishing ceases, fishery-independent surveys are conducted to verify catch rates in the closed northern and southern (open) spawning areas.

In June 2022, the spawning survey catch rate for Brown Tiger Prawns in the NCPL, when it had closed to fishing for the remainder of the season, was 21.7 kg/hr. In July, the survey catch rate decreased to 19.5 kg/hr, and in August it remained at a similar level (18.0 kg/hr).  The Brown Tiger Prawn spawning stock levels in the NCPL were therefore below the target reference level of ≥ 25 kg/hr between June and August (mean 20.6 kg/hr). The above survey results thus indicate that the biomass of this species within this management unit in 2022 had been depleted. However, as 2022 is the first year since 2016 that survey results have been below the target reference level, it is considered unlikely that recruitment has been impaired due to effects of fishing on spawning stock levels, but rather the lower biomass likely reflects annual recruitment variation.

Annual Brown Tiger Prawn catches are compared against a target catch range (400–700 t) based on catches from 1989–1998 (a period when the fishery was considered sustainable) and a catch prediction range (390–585 t), based on the relationship between annual catches and recruitment surveys. For 2022, the Brown Tiger Prawn catch was 326 t, which was below the lower end of the catch prediction range and also below the annual target catch range [Newman et al. 2023; Caputi et al. 2014b].

The level of annual fishing effort since 2007, when all boats adopted four standardised nets (quad gear), has been between 33 to 41 thousand trawl hours (standardized to twin nets). In 2022, fishing effort was 28 thousand trawl hours, the lowest effort recorded for the fishery in several decades. This was in part due to a 35% reduction in allocated fishing days and additional spatial trawl closures to manage stock issues. The initial fishing season was set for 125 fishing nights, however, after both the April and June reviews, additional moon closure days were added, reducing the total effort available to 114 nights. Furthermore, a number of management measures, including a reduction in allowable effort, have been introduced for the 2023 season to reduce fishing pressure on the Western King Prawn stock. These measures will also provide additional protection for Brown Tiger Prawns.

The combined evidence above indicates that the current level of fishing pressure is unlikely to cause the stock in Shark Bay to become depleted, and that due to the implementation of additional management measures, future levels of fishing pressure will be lower, further protecting Brown Tiger Prawns (and Western King Prawns) against impaired recruitment.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the stock within the Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery (Western Australia) Brown Tiger Prawn management unit is classified as a sustainable stock.

Torres Strait Prawn Fishery (Brown Tiger Prawn)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Species	Longevity / Maximum Size	Maturity (50 per cent)
TIGER PRAWNS	1–2 years, 55 mm CL	East Coast: 6 month, 32–39 mm CL West coast: 6 months, 27–35 mm CL Northern Australia: 6 months, 32–39 mm CL

Distribution of reported commercial catch of Tiger Prawns

	Commonwealth	Western Australia	Queensland	New South Wales
Commercial
Otter Trawl
Stow Net
Various
Indigenous
Unspecified
Recreational
Unspecified
Cast Net

Method	Commonwealth	Western Australia	Queensland	New South Wales
Commercial
By-catch reduction devices
Effort limits
Effort limits (individual transferable effort)
Gear restrictions
Harvest Strategy
Limited entry
Processing restrictions
Seasonal or spatial closures
Spatial closures
Temporal closures
Vessel restrictions
Recreational
Bag/possession limits
Gear restrictions
Seasonal or spatial closures

	Commonwealth	Western Australia	Queensland	New South Wales
Commercial		787.04t	807.16t	8.65t
Indigenous		No Catch	Unknown
Recreational		No Catch	Unknown

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

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

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

Commercial catch of Tiger Prawns - note confidential catch not shown

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