Fisheries Management (Multiple Fishery Closures) Direction 2024

The primary legal concept is a statutory direction prohibiting fishing in defined maritime areas for participants in specific Commonwealth-managed fisheries. The direction is exercised under subsection 41A(2) of the Fisheries Management Act 1991 (s 3). The instrument uses spatial lawmaking: closed areas are defined by geodetic coordinates listed in two annexures and by phrases that describe the closed portion of the Australian Fishing Zone relative to a sequential line connecting those coordinates (Annexure A and Annexure B; s 7). The coordinates are expressed in recognised geodetic datums and the instrument treats GDA94 and WGS84 as equivalent (s 8(1)-(3)), which is a technical choice about positional reference rather than substantive legal content.

Key definitional cross‑references matter. The instrument relies on the Act's definitions for terms such as Australian Fishing Zone and Fishing (s 4, Note). It identifies the two fisheries by reference to existing statutory instruments and management instruments: Western Tuna and Billfish Fishery is defined by reference to the Western Tuna and Billfish Management Plan 2005; Western Skipjack Fishery is defined as in the Fisheries Management Regulations 2019 (s 4). That means the universe of affected persons is shaped by who is "permitted to engage in fishing" within those statutory definitions, which in turn will be governed by the permit, licence, authorisation and management scheme under the Act and subordinate instruments.

The instrument operates by exclusion from activity: s 7 as drafted is categorical , "Fishing is not to be engaged in" in the listed areas. The closed areas are described spatially as "the part of the Australian Fishing Zone that is generally north of the line commencing at Point 1 ... then along the geodesics connecting the following points sequentially" (Annexure A) and similarly for Annexure B. Use of the phrase "generally north of the line" and "north of the line" are drafting choices that shape the legal geometry to which the prohibition attaches. The instrument also expressly repeals a prior multiple-closure direction from 2014 in Schedule 1, showing it displaces the prior comparable instrument and replaces its spatial regime.

There are several technical legal mechanisms embedded. The instrument (s 5) provides that each instrument specified in a Schedule is amended or repealed as set out in the Schedule, and that any other item in a Schedule has effect according to its terms. The Schedule in this instrument effects a full repeal of the 2014 direction. The instrument therefore functions both as a spatial closure and as an updating instrument for the statutory closure regime.

The absence of certain text is also a conceptually important feature. The direction does not specify temporal limits beyond commencement; it does not include express exemptions, conditions, notification procedures, or reference to monitoring systems and it does not itself create or refer to compensatory measures. Those aspects, if relevant, must be found in the Act, subordinate rules or administrative practice.

The instrument states explicitly who falls within its direct scope. It "applies to a person who is permitted to engage in in fishing (however described) in the following fisheries: (a) Western Tuna and Billfish Fishery; and (b) Western Skipjack Fishery" (s 6(1)). Those two fisheries are defined by external instruments: the Western Tuna and Billfish Management Plan 2005 and the Fisheries Management Regulations 2019 respectively (s 4). Practically, that means the immediate legal targets are licence- or permit-holders, their masters and crews, and anyone who holds statutory authorisation to fish in those fisheries within the Commonwealth Australian Fishing Zone as defined by the Act. The instrument’s scope is not expressed to cover persons or vessels not "permitted to engage in fishing" in those fisheries; the mechanism is therefore regulatoryly targeted at those participants rather than all vessels present in the closed area.

Who decides compliance in practice is signalled by the instrument’s provenance. It is made and signed by the CEO of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Wez Norris, under the authority of the Fisheries Management Act 1991 (s 3 and signature block). That indicates decision‑making lies with AFMA acting under statutory power. The instrument does not on its face delegate decision-making to other agencies or disclose administrative processes for waiver, revocation, or amendment. The Schedule 1 repeal shows AFMA is replacing a prior closure instrument, which implies AFMA monitors and updates closure lines as a matter of administrative practice.

There are indirectly affected groups. Although the instrument applies directly to permit-holders in the named fisheries, there will be secondary effects on fishers who operate in other fisheries and who might use the same areas, service providers (for example, processors, ports and logistics who rely on catch from those fisheries), and owners or mortgagees of vessels that operate under authorisations in the named fisheries. The instrument does not make express provision for shore-based actors, but spatial closures in key fishing grounds can change fishing patterns and economic flows; such consequences are not set out in the instrument and would be realised in operational practice.

The geographic scope is important for the identity of affected persons and businesses. Annexure A defines an extensive polygon described as "generally north of the line" connecting 574 (or more) listed coordinate points across the North-West Shelf; Annexure B defines a second closure in the region of Christmas Island using three points. The instrument also specifies that coordinate systems are GDA94 or WGS84 and treats them as equivalent (s 8), which affects how captains and operators must configure navigation and reporting systems to determine if they are within the area. The instrument’s commencement date of 30 April 2024 gives a defined lead time from signature to legal effect, which is relevant to scheduling vessel activity and contractual commitments.

The primary legal duty created by the instrument is absolute and spatial: "Fishing is not to be engaged in in the areas specified in Annexure A and Annexure B" (s 7). That places an affirmative legal prohibition on permitted fishers in the named fisheries, forbidding them from engaging in fishing activities within the closed areas described by the annexures. The instrument does not define "fishing" itself but notes that the Act's definitions apply (s 4, Note). Accordingly, the content of the duty , what specific acts count as "fishing" , is determined by the Act and other definitions in force for the relevant fisheries.

Rights or exemptions are not articulated in the text. The instrument contains no express exception, conditional permission, authorisation or route for a permit-holder to seek or rely on a temporary exemption within the instrument itself. The instrument does not set out any administrative process for permit holders to obtain relief, nor does it provide for compensatory arrangements. Any rights to challenge, seek variation, or obtain exemptions will therefore depend on rights and processes available under the Fisheries Management Act 1991, or other administrative law pathways, none of which are detailed here.

Operational duties follow from the spatial definition. The instrument requires those to whom it applies to ensure their activities are outside the closed polygons once the instrument commences. Section 8 sets technical duties about coordinate use: coordinates are in GDA94 unless otherwise indicated, WGS84 is referenced, and GDA94 and WGS84 are taken to be equivalent (s 8(1)-(3)). That creates a practical duty to interpret and apply the coordinates correctly, and to treat the Annexure B coordinates as in WGS84 as noted.

Schedule 1 creates a duty for operators to be aware that the 2014 direction has been wholly repealed and replaced (Schedule 1). That means compliance risk includes ensuring actions taken under the old instrument are reconsidered in light of the new spatial regime; operators cannot rely on the 2014 instrument after the 2024 direction commences.

The instrument imposes no express new record-keeping, reporting or notification obligations; nor does it list procedural rights such as notice periods for enforcement action. Enforcement and rights of review or appeal are therefore likely to be those embedded in the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and related subordinate instruments; the instrument itself does not reproduce them. Practitioners should therefore consult the Act for the substantive content of enforcement powers, administrative review mechanisms and statutory defences applicable to contraventions of a direction made under s 41A(2).

The instrument does not specify penalties or enforcement mechanisms. It is a direction made under s 41A(2) of the Fisheries Management Act 1991 (s 3); the text of this direction simply prohibits fishing in specified areas (s 7) but contains no clause setting out penalties for breach, no compliance regime, no monitoring mandate and no administrative penalty schedule. As a result, any penal or enforcement consequences for contravention must be located in the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and other relevant subordinate instruments and regulations, not in the direction itself.

This drafting choice means enforcement is municipal to the statutory and regulatory framework under the Fisheries Management Act 1991. The instrument’s authority clause (s 3) points users to that Act for the legal basis of the instrument. Typical practice for directions of this kind is that contraventions of directions made under the Act attract the Act’s general offences, civil penalty regimes, or administrative measures; however, the instrument does not state which parts of the Act will be engaged and practitioners must therefore consult the Act to identify the applicable criminal, civil or administrative sanctions and the agencies or officers authorised to enforce the direction.

Because the instrument does not set out enforcement procedures, the operational enforcement environment is likely to be defined by existing AFMA enforcement practice, which may include vessel monitoring, observer programmes, boarding and inspection powers, infringement notices, seizure of gear or catch, suspension of permits or prosecution under the Act. None of those measures are specified in this direction and they should not be assumed from the text alone; they must be verified against the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and AFMA guidance or policies.

The instrument’s silence on the inclusion of the boundary line itself is material. Annexure A and Annexure B define closed areas as "north of the line" connecting sequential points. The instrument does not expressly state whether the line itself is part of the closed area or whether there is a de minimis buffer. That can be relevant for enforcement when a vessel is located on or extremely near the line. For enforcement, positional accuracy, datum equivalence (s 8) and the method for connecting listed points "along the geodesics" (Annexures) will be legally significant in establishing whether a vessel was in breach at a given moment.

Finally, the instrument’s repeal of the 2014 direction (Schedule 1) may affect enforcement continuity. If AFMA’s prior enforcement architecture relied on the earlier instrument’s terms, the repeal and replacement with a new spatial configuration could shift compliance focus, but the instrument itself does not articulate transitional enforcement arrangements.

The direction is an instrument made under the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and therefore sits within the Commonwealth fisheries regulatory framework. The instrument explicitly invokes the Act as its authority (s 3) and cross-references the Act’s definitions for terms such as Australian Fishing Zone and Fishing (s 4, Note). It also references other subordinate or management instruments for the definition of the named fisheries: Western Tuna and Billfish Fishery is defined "as in the Western Tuna and Billfish Management Plan 2005" and Western Skipjack Fishery "has the same meaning as in the Fisheries Management Regulations 2019" (s 4). Therefore the direction operates in direct relation to existing management plans and Regulations by targeting the licensed participants identified under those instruments.

The instrument effects a repeal of a prior direction, Multiple Fishery (Closures) Direction No. 1 2014, in its entirety (Schedule 1). That means the 2024 direction supersedes the earlier closure instrument where there is overlap. Users must therefore read the current direction together with the Act, management plans and Regulations to understand the complete legal regime operating after commencement.

The instrument also interacts technically with geodetic and charting systems by specifying coordinate datums. Section 8 states that coordinates are in GDA94 except where otherwise indicated, that a reference to WGS84 is to World Geodetic System 1984, and that GDA94 and WGS84 are taken to be equivalent (s 8(1)-(3)). Annexure B explicitly notes WGS84. This technical cross-reference is intended to align the instrument with navigational and surveying standards and reduces the risk of conflicts with maritime laws, charts or other statutory instruments that rely on a specific datum.

Because the direction applies to the Australian Fishing Zone, it interacts with the international law of the sea in the sense that the Australian Fishing Zone is a maritime jurisdictional construct defined in the Act. The direction therefore overlays fishing rights within that zone. The instrument does not address or modify concurrent coastal State or State/Territory laws, and does not mention other Commonwealth laws such as environmental protection statutes or customs/biosecurity controls, so any overlap with those regimes will depend on those regimes’ respective coverage. For example, the instrument does not purport to displace other Commonwealth obligations or to constrain enforcement by other agencies; it is a Fisheries Act direction targeted at fishing activity by permitted fishers.

Finally, the instrument does not create an express conflict clause, nor does it purport to amend the underlying Management Plan or Regulations. Its legal effect is as a direction under the Act, enforceable within that statutory architecture, and users must consult the Act and relevant management documents to reconcile duties and rights across instruments.

This instrument serves both as a new closure direction and as an update to the statutory closure landscape by repealing the prior analogous instrument. Schedule 1 records a full repeal of "Multiple Fishery (Closures) Direction No. 1 2014", with the Schedule entry: "The whole of the instrument , Repeal the instrument." That is the only amendment or repeal specified in Schedule 1. No other amendments to subordinate legislation, regulations or management plans are set out in the text.

The instrument itself is dated 9 January 2024 and defines a commencement date of 30 April 2024 (s 2). The gap between signature and commencement indicates an intended implementation period; the direction will begin to have legal effect from the commencement date and not before. There is no provision in the instrument for staged implementation, phased areas, or expiry; the instrument is silent as to whether it is permanent, time-limited or open to periodic review. The absence of an explicit sunset clause or review mechanism in the text means that, unless governed elsewhere by the Act or AFMA policy, the direction will remain in force until it is varied or revoked by a later instrument.

The instrument replaces the 2014 multiple closures direction: that replacement is effected by Schedule 1 and the Annexures. The instrument does not list any earlier amendments to this instrument or any modifications other than the repeal in Schedule 1. There is no reference in the text to any prior versions of the 2024 direction itself or to a sequence of amendments; the 2024 text should therefore be treated as the operative instrument upon commencement.

Because the instrument relies on other statutory instruments for defining fisheries (the 2005 Management Plan and the 2019 Regulations), any prior or subsequent amendments to those instruments will affect who is captured by the direction. The instrument does not freeze those external definitions; it references them as they stand for definition purposes. Practitioners should therefore track amendment activity in the Management Plan and the Regulations to understand changes to scope and application over time.

The text of the Fisheries Management (Multiple Fishery Closures) Direction 2024 contains no mention of litigation, judicial decisions, or legal challenges. It does not reference any case law, nor does it purport to summarise or follow any judicial findings. Because the instrument is new and its text does not disclose any litigation history, there are no reported cases or judicial interpretations contained within the instrument itself.

For practitioners seeking to understand how such directions have been interpreted historically, that must be researched in the case law and administrative law records relevant to directions made under s 41A(2) of the Fisheries Management Act 1991. The present instrument contains no internal cross-reference to judicial review avenues, though standard administrative law remedies,such as merits review or judicial review,may be available under the Act or general administrative law jurisprudence. The instrument itself does not identify applicable review mechanisms, stays or injunctive processes.

Because the instrument repeals the 2014 instrument in full, any litigation that related to or challenged the 2014 instrument will not be summarised in this new text. Practitioners should not infer from the silence that litigation has not occurred; they should instead conduct independent searches of administrative, Federal Court and other judicial records for prior challenges relating to Commonwealth fishery closures or to the operation of s 41A of the Act.

Readers should also note that absence of litigation history in the instrument does not affect parties’ legal rights to seek review or injunctive relief after commencement if they consider the direction unlawful, disproportionate, procedurally unfair or otherwise subject to legal challenge. The instrument does not restrict or expand access to courts; it simply sets out the direction to be obeyed from the commencement date.

There are a number of technical and practical details in the instrument that may catch practitioners, operators or compliance officers if they are not read closely.

1. Datum and coordinates. Section 8 treats GDA94 and WGS84 as equivalent (s 8(1)-(3)). Annexure A does not state an explicit datum for its long list of coordinates; s 8 indicates those coordinates are in GDA94 unless otherwise indicated. Annexure B, by contrast, explicitly states coordinates are in WGS84. Although the instrument equates the two datums, small numeric or rounding differences can be operationally material at the boundary line; the instrument does not set out a tolerance or margin. Operators should therefore ensure that vessel navigation and compliance systems are configured consistently, and should not assume that datum equivalence eliminates all practical positional uncertainty.

2. The phrase "north of the line" and "generally north of the line" is not precisely defined. Annexure A closes "the part of the Australian Fishing Zone that is generally north of the line" that commences at a specified Point 1 and then continues along geodesics connecting the sequential points listed. Annexure B closes "the part of the Australian Fishing Zone that is north of the line" defined by three points. The instrument does not state whether the line itself is included in the closure, or whether the closure includes the exact geodesic or only the seaward or landward side. That absence can create ambiguity in enforcement for vessels located on or extremely close to the line, and in legal proceedings determining the precise boundary of the closed area.

3. Extensive point sequencing in Annexure A. Annexure A contains a very long sequential list of points (in excess of 570 points by enumeration). The instrument tells readers the line is formed "along the geodesics connecting the following points sequentially" but does not provide a visual map or polygon file. This raises practical risks: transcription errors when loading coordinates into navigational or GIS systems; ambiguous parsing of minute/second notation where formatting varies; and the possibility that a single typo could materially change the polygon. Operators and counsel should verify coordinates against AFMA-published GIS files or official charts rather than relying on manual transcription from the printed schedule.

4. Repeal of 2014 direction. The instrument repeals Multiple Fishery (Closures) Direction No. 1 2014 in its entirety (Schedule 1). Parties relying on transitional understandings or prior exemptions under the 2014 instrument must not assume continuity; obligations and closed-area geometry may have changed. There is no transitional provision in the instrument itself.

5. Narrow scope of application. The instrument applies only to persons "permitted to engage in fishing" in the two named fisheries (s 6). That wording implies that persons who are not permitted to fish in those fisheries are not directly subject to the prohibition as it is framed. However, the instrument does not address whether the ban applies to, for example, support vessels, transiting vessels engaged in non-fishing activity, or vessels authorised under other regimes. Practitioners should check the Act and AFMA practice to see how those categories are treated in enforcement.

6. No penalties or enforcement detail. The instrument provides no enforcement or penalty regimes. If you need to advise clients about practical enforcement risk, you must go beyond the instrument to the Fisheries Management Act 1991 to determine the specific sanctions, powers and procedures available to AFMA and other enforcement bodies.

7. Commencement lag. The instrument is dated 9 January 2024 but commences on 30 April 2024 (s 2). That lead time may lead to operational or commercial planning issues, and to potential disputes over bookings, supply contracts and schedules. The instrument does not elaborate on transitional arrangements.

8. Geodesics as connector. The instrument specifies geodesics as the method of connecting sequential points. Geodesic connections are the shortest path between coordinates on the reference ellipsoid and differ from straight-line planar connections; incorrect interpretation of the connector method may cause mapping errors.

9. Lack of specified duration or review. No sunset or review clause appears. The instrument will remain effective until amended or revoked, but the basis for review or criteria for revocation are not set out.

10. Formatting anomalies. Annexure A contains minor notational irregularities (for example, inconsistent use of double prime characters, or slight deviations in decimal formatting and degree/minute presentation in places). These are likely typographical but can result in mis-entry if coordinates are transcribed manually.

In short, the instrument requires careful, technical handling: verify coordinates against AFMA-provided GIS files, confirm datum settings in vessel systems, clarify the legal status of the boundary line, and examine enforcement provisions in the Act.

Compliance requires mapping legal duties in the direction to operational practice and to statutory enforcement mechanisms outside the instrument. The direction’s core obligation is clear: once it commences (30 April 2024), people "permitted to engage in fishing" in the Western Tuna and Billfish Fishery and the Western Skipjack Fishery must not "engage in fishing" in areas described in Annexure A and Annexure B (s 6(1); s 7). The instrument relies on the Act’s definition of "Fishing" (s 4 Note), so the first compliance step is to verify whether particular activities fall within that Act definition.

Practical compliance steps:

1. Confirm statutory status. Determine whether the vessel, operator or crew are "permitted to engage in fishing" in one of the named fisheries under the Fisheries Management Act 1991, the Western Tuna and Billfish Management Plan 2005, or the Fisheries Management Regulations 2019. If the operator is not authorised under those instruments, then this direction does not, on its face, apply to them; however, other legal obligations may apply.

2. Obtain official spatial data. Do not rely on manual transcription from the printed Annexures. Request from AFMA any official electronic GIS shapefiles, KML/GeoJSON files or charts that correspond to Annexure A and Annexure B. Electronic files will reduce transcription error and ensure the geodesic connections are rendered correctly.

3. Configure vessel navigation and compliance systems. Ensure vessel GPS and chart plotters are set to treat GDA94 and WGS84 equivalently, consistent with s 8 of the direction. Load the official closure polygon files into vessel navigation systems so that alarms, waypoint checks and exclusion zones are active. Confirm that the electronics vendor or charting service correctly interprets geodesic connectors between points.

4. Review operational plans. For trips scheduled to operate near the closure, revise routing, fishing grounds and landing plans well before commencement. Consider contractual obligations for catch supply and inform downstream processors, buyers and freight providers of route changes. Given the 30 April 2024 commencement, ensure all voyages after that date are planned to avoid the closed polygons.

5. Educate masters and crew. Issue written operational guidance to masters and crews explaining the closure boundaries, datum conventions, whether the line itself is regarded as part of the closed area (seek AFMA clarification), and the procedures to avoid inadvertent encroachment. Stress the need for conservative buffers where positional uncertainty exists.

6. Seek clarifications in writing. If the inclusion of boundary lines, the status of specific coordinates, permitted transits, or exceptions for particular activities are unclear, request written guidance from AFMA. Do not assume silence. Written clarifications can be important evidence if an enforcement issue later arises.

7. Check for exemptions or permits. The instrument contains no express exemptions. If there are operational circumstances requiring entry into the closed areas,emergency repairs, crew safety, search and rescue, or other contingencies,seek pre-authorisation or at least contemporaneous notification procedures from AFMA and check the Act for implied or express exemptions.

8. Audit compliance controls. Establish monitoring and record-keeping showing voyage plans and vessel tracks that demonstrate compliance with the closure. Store navigation logs and GNSS tracks for periods at issue. Again, the direction does not create new record-keeping duties, but having contemporaneous records will be practical if enforcement or dispute arises.

9. Legal advice and administrative remedies. Where compliance would cause material commercial loss or is operationally impossible, obtain legal advice on the availability of administrative relief, merits review, or other statutory options under the Fisheries Management Act 1991. Identify and act on applicable timelines for applications and review.

10. Monitor for changes. The direction repeals the 2014 instrument and may be amended or superseded in future. Maintain a process for checking AFMA notices, Commonwealth legislation updates and the Register of Legislative Instruments for variations, revocations or new closures.

In sum, compliance is largely operational and technical. It requires confirming legal status under the Act, loading and relying on official spatial files, configuring navigation equipment to the correct datum and connector method, planning trips to avoid the closed polygons, and documenting steps taken. Where ambiguity exists, seek written clarification or pre-authorisation from AFMA and obtain legal advice about statutory remedies or processes.