Southern Squid Jig Fishery Management Plan 2005

The Plan builds around several compact legal and fisheries-management concepts. They are defined in the Plan and trigger concrete administrative paths.

• Statutory fishing right (gear SFR): a property‑style administrative right granted under the Plan that entitles the holder to engage in squid jigging, subject to conditions. The Plan defines gear SFR as an SFR "that entitles the holder to engage in squid jigging in the fishery" and specifies certificate contents and registration (s 3 def; s 22). A gear SFR must be registered in AFMA’s Register (s 22(3) note) and may be issued in respect of nominated boats (s 3 def).
• Total allowable effort (TAE): the annual cap on the number of standard squid jigging machines permitted in the fishery for a fishing year (s 3 def; s 11(1)). AFMA must set the TAE before each fishing year (s 11(1)), after consulting SEMAC and SquidRAG and optionally other interested persons (s 11(2)). TAE is expressed in "standard squid jigging machines" (s 3 def).
• Standard and non‑standard machines: a standard squid jigging machine is defined as a machine with two elliptical spools with one jig line on each spool (s 3 def). Holders may use non‑standard machines only if AFMA takes them to be equivalent to a certain number of standard machines, by applying a conversion factor for the machine type (s 14(1)-(4)).
• Allocation arithmetic: the Plan converts TAE into per‑SFR entitlements by dividing TAE by the total number of gear SFRs in force at the start of the fishing year, including SFRs suspended under specified sections of the Act (s 12(1)-(2)). The Plan rounds down allowed numbers when necessary (s 15(2); s 16(2)). The available number of SFRs for an eligible person is calculated by a formula tied to the number of fishing permits the person held on the relevant date (s 20).
• By‑catch action plan: AFMA must prepare and implement such a plan and review it at least biennially. The plan must require gathering by‑catch information, minimising incidental interactions with seabirds, reptiles, marine mammals and certain fish, minimising habitat impacts and keeping by‑catch stocks at ecologically sustainable levels; AFMA must consider EPBC Act protections when preparing it (s 9(1)-(5)).
• Conditions and compliance: SFRs carry conditions including an express condition that holders must comply with the Plan, any directions issued and supply information or samples on request (s 30(a)-(c)). AFMA can suspend an SFR under powers in the Act where it has reasonable grounds to believe a condition has been contravened (s 30 note re s 38 of the Act).
• Governance and advisory structure: AFMA is the decision‑maker. The Plan requires consultation with SEMAC and SquidRAG for TAE determinations (s 11(2)). SEMAC and SquidRAG are named advisory entities (s 3 defs).
• Legal form and process: certain determinations (notably the TAE) are legislative instruments (s 11 note). The Plan cross‑references administrative review rights under s 165 of the Act for certain decisions (for example, registration and conversion factor decisions) (s 3 notes; s 14(5) note).

Each of these concepts creates operational mechanisms: numeric ceilings (TAE), per‑SFR arithmetic, a stove‑pipe for allocating non‑standard gear via CFs, notification and deemed notice rules (s 36), and data and observer expectations (s 3 defs and s 30). Key numerical mechanics to watch are the inclusion of suspended SFRs when calculating per‑SFR allocation (s 12(2)), the rounding‑down rule for allowed machine numbers (s 15(2), s 16(2)), and the CF mechanism for non‑standard machines (s 14(2)-(4)).

The Plan names affected parties precisely, then operationally extends effects through conditions and administrative procedures.

• Primary affected persons: anyone engaged in or intending to engage in commercial squid jigging using a squid jigging machine in the area of the fishery, and persons conducting scientific research with a squid jigging machine in the same area (s 8(a)-(b)). The Plan is restricted to squid jigging methods; commercial trawl‑based squid fishing remains managed under a different plan (s 1 note).
• Eligible persons for SFR grants: a person is eligible for grant of one or more gear SFRs if, on the relevant date specified in a public notice under s 24 of the Act, the person held a fishing permit for the fishery (s 19(1)-(2)). That makes present permit holders the initial concentric beneficiary group when grants are offered.
• Registered SFR holders: persons who obtain gear SFRs under the Plan. Once an SFR is granted, the holder is the legal actor with entitlement to fish under the Plan’s terms and subject to its conditions (s 22). Holders must comply with Plan conditions, directions and information requests (s 30).
• Boat operators and owners: the Plan requires the use of nominated boats tied to SFRs (s 15(1)(c); s 16). A nominated boat’s allowed number depends on the SFRs for which it is nominated (s 16(2)). Consequently, boat owners, skippers and commercial crews must operate within the nominated‑boat constraint.
• Equipment suppliers and technology providers: because non‑standard machines must be assigned a conversion factor based on efficiency relative to standard machines (s 14(3)), manufacturers and suppliers of alternative jigging technologies are affected by AFMA’s CF methodology and the potential for machines to be treated as more, or less, efficient relative to the standard.
• AFMA and advisory groups: AFMA carries primary administrative responsibility (s 6, s 11, s 22, s 34). SEMAC and SquidRAG have statutory advisory or consultative roles for TAE settings and assessments (s 11(2); s 3 defs). Observers authorised by AFMA to carry out Plan observer functions (s 3 def) also feature.
• The broader Australian community and government stakeholders: the Plan states objectives referencing public accountability, ecological sustainability, international obligations and cost recovery targets (s 5(a)-(i); s 6(m)). These objectives tie the Plan to public policy goals and budgetary processes; the fishing industry is the obvious fiscal stakeholder because the Plan contemplates levies and cost recovery (s 6(m); s 5(e)).
• Intersecting regulatory actors: regulators under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 are relevant because AFMA must take EPBC Act protections into account when framing the by‑catch action plan (s 9(4)). Also, administrative review bodies and registers referenced in the Act govern rights of review for some decisions (s 3 notes).

Who pays: the Plan contemplates industry contributions through levies consistent with government cost‑recovery policy (s 6(m)). The Plan also signals that AFMA seeks to be cost‑effective and to meet government cost recovery targets (s 5(a), s 5(e), s 7(1)(b), s 7(1)(i)). Who decides: AFMA is the decision‑maker for TAE, conversion factors for non‑standard machines, notices, SFR grants once requested, and conditions, with prescribed consultation obligations (s 11(2); s 14(3); s 13; s 22). What behaviour changes: holders must constrain machine numbers, use nominated boats only, supply data and samples on request, and comply with a by‑catch action plan and any directions (s 15, s 16, s 30, s 9).

The Plan creates a network of statutory rights and parallel duties. These are the operative rules practitioners must observe.

Rights

• Right to fish through gear SFRs: a holder of a gear SFR that has been allocated at least one standard machine has the right to engage in squid jigging in the fishery, subject to the Plan and SFR conditions (s 15(1)(a)-(d); s 22). Certificates document the grant and must include name, description, fishery and conditions (s 22(1)(a)-(d)).
• Transferability and registration: the Plan contemplates the grant of transferable SFRs (s 6(j); s 7(1)(g)), and requires AFMA to register SFRs and enter nominated boat details into the Register as prescribed (s 22(3) note; s 3 note re Register).
• Availability of grants for eligible persons: persons who were fishing permit holders on the relevant date are eligible to be registered and to be offered gear SFRs in specified numbers determined by the Plan formula (s 19-20). AFMA must notify people when SFRs are made available and provide reasons, consistent with the Act (s 20 note 2).

Duties and constraints

• Use and capacity constraints: holders must not use more than their allowed number of squid jigging machines and must fish only from the boat nominated for the SFR (s 15(1)(b)-(c); s 16(1)).
• Rounding down: the allowed number for both persons and nominated boats is rounded down if the allocation is not a whole number (s 15(2); s 16(2)). That results in a loss of fractional entitlement in practice (example in s 15(2) and s 16(2)).
• Non‑standard equipment approvals: holders wishing to use non‑standard machines must apply for a decision about how many such machines are taken to be allocated; AFMA sets conversion factors based on relative efficiency (s 14(1)-(4)). These CF decisions are reviewable as relevant decisions (s 14(5) note).
• Information and sample provision: it is a condition of a gear SFR that the holder must give AFMA biological, economic or technical information, or biological samples available to the holder, if AFMA asks for them (s 30(c)). This is an ongoing statutory obligation attached to the right.
• Compliance with directions and by‑catch measures: SFR holders must comply with the Plan, any AFMA directions, and the by‑catch action plan prepared under s 9 (s 30(a)-(b); s 9(1)-(5)). The by‑catch action plan must require steps reducing incidental interactions with specified protected categories and minimising habitat impacts (s 9(3)-(5)).
• Notices, agents and procedural duties: holders who appoint agents must notify AFMA in writing and provide the instrument of appointment; appointments are ineffective unless AFMA is notified (s 35(1)-(3)). Holders must maintain contact details in the Register so notices under s 36 may be validly given.
• Transitional duties: until the transitional section ceases to have effect, persons holding a fishing permit may continue to fish in the fishery subject to the permit (s 37(4)-(6)). The Plan does not extinguish existing permits until the transitional timing specified by AFMA.

Administrative powers and rights of review

• AFMA powers: AFMA decides the TAE (s 11), conversion factors for non‑standard machines (s 14(3)), and notices allocations to SFR holders (s 13). The Plan expressly permits AFMA to delegate many powers to officers under its common seal except its powers over TAE and the delegation power itself (s 34).
• Reviewable decisions: the Plan references the Act’s review mechanism for "relevant decisions" under s 165 of the Act; registration decisions and conversion factor decisions are identified as reviewable (s 3 notes; s 14(5) note). The Plan also requires that AFMA notify applicants of grants and give statements of reasons in certain circumstances (s 20 note 2).

These duties and rights map directly to behaviour: rights are property‑like but conditional and operationally limited (nominated boat, allowed number of machines); duties are legal instruments for data, compliance and limitations designed to produce both conservation and administrative accountability.

The Plan itself contains limited direct penalty provisions; it establishes administrative conditions and references enforcement powers in the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and related regulations.

Enforcement mechanisms in the Plan

• Conditions and suspension: the Plan makes compliance with the Plan and AFMA’s directions a condition of a gear SFR and expressly cites AFMA’s power to suspend an SFR under the Act if it has reasonable grounds to believe a condition has been contravened (s 30 and note referencing s 38 of the Act). This provides an administrative enforcement path: suspension of the SFR effectively removes the holder’s entitlement to fish while the suspension stands.
• Directions limiting fishing: the Plan empowers AFMA, as a measure to achieve the objectives, to direct that fishing not be engaged in in the fishery or in a particular part for a specified period (s 6(i)). Directions of this kind operate as regulatory closures and are enforceable under the Act.
• By‑catch action plan and monitoring: the Plan requires a by‑catch action plan and a program of effort monitoring and surveillance to ensure compliance (s 6(f), s 6(h), s 9(1)-(5)). Monitoring and surveillance are enforcement tools: the Plan contemplates observers (s 3 def) and information collection obligations (s 30(c)) which support detection and proof of non‑compliance.
• Notice, agent and deemed receipt rules: the Plan’s notice rules (s 36) include deemed receipt times for different transmission methods and provide AFMA with procedural authority to rely on notices that, for AFMA, it may assume to be properly given (s 35(4) and s 36(2)-(4)). These provisions reduce procedural uncertainty for AFMA when issuing enforcement communications.

Penalties under the Act and regulations

• The Plan does not itself set criminal fines or civil penalties. Instead, it anchors compliance obligations in SFR conditions and cross‑refers to the Act and regulations (s 30 note 2). The Fisheries Management Act 1991 and the Fisheries Management Regulations 2019, and the Fisheries Management (Southern Squid Jig Fishery) Regulations 2005, set out offences and penalty regimes applicable to contraventions of the Act, Plan conditions and regulations (s 30 note 2). Practitioners must consult the Act and these regulations for specific penalty amounts and offence elements.
• Administrative review and rights of appeal: the Plan references the Act’s review regime for "relevant decisions" under s 165 (s 3 notes; s 14(5) note). A person has a right of review in relation to relevant decisions, including registration as eligible and grant or refusal of SFRs; administrative review may be available via the Tribunal named in the Act (s 3 note).
• Suspension and revocation: besides suspension under s 38 of the Act, the Plan notes that a gear SFR ceases to have effect if AFMA revokes the Plan (s 22 note 1). That is a high‑order consequence linked to repeal but is not a penalty for an individual offence.

Operational enforcement risks and burdens

• Proof and information costs: the Plan’s enforcement depends heavily on monitoring, surveillance and the supply of information and samples by SFR holders (s 6(h), s 30(c)). Those duties transfer evidentiary and compliance costs to holders; enforcement is easier when AFMA has timely data and authorised observers.
• Discretion and review: AFMA has broad administrative discretion in TAE setting (s 11), conversion factor decisions (s 14(3)), and directions (s 6(i)). Those decisions can have immediate operational effect; the Plan provides review avenues for certain decisions, but review timelines and processes are governed by the Act and not restated in the Plan (see s 3 notes).
• Impact of deemed notice rules: the deemed receipt settings for electronic or fax notices (s 36(4)) can create short operational windows for holders to respond to enforcement‑related notices and reduce the chance of procedural challenge based on non‑receipt.

In short, the Plan creates an administrative enforcement architecture that relies on AFMA’s statutory powers in the Act, surveillance and data obligations, suspension powers and the regulatory offence framework of the Act and subordinate regulations. The Plan itself sets the conditions and operationalised mechanisms rather than specific fines or criminal offences.

The Plan is made under s 17 of the Fisheries Management Act 1991 (the Act) and cross‑links to several other statutes and instruments. It is tightly integrated into the broader regulatory architecture.

Primary interaction with the Fisheries Management Act 1991

• The Plan is an instrument under the Act and implements powers in s 17 of the Act (see Plan heading; s 5 references Act s 17(5)). Many operative features depend on provisions of the Act: registration, grant, suspension, review rights and the Register are all governed by the Act and referenced throughout the Plan (s 22 notes; s 30 note referencing s 38; s 3 notes re Register and statutory definitions).
• Determinations under s 11 are legislative instruments under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (s 11 note referencing subsection 17(6B) of the Act and paragraph 6(d) of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003). This means TAE determinations are subject to the form and parliamentary scrutiny applicable to legislative instruments.

Interaction with the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)

• The Plan requires AFMA to take into account EPBC Act protections when preparing the by‑catch action plan (s 9(4)). Specifically, AFMA must consider protections for whales and cetaceans under Division 3 of Part 13 of the EPBC Act and the requirement for protection of listed marine species, migratory species, threatened ecological communities and threatened species (s 9(4)(a)-(b)(i)-(iv)). That binds AFMA to consider Commonwealth biodiversity obligations when setting by‑catch measures.

Regulations and other subordinate instruments

• The Regulations applicable to the fishery include the Fisheries Management Regulations 2019 and the Fisheries Management (Southern Squid Jig Fishery) Regulations 2005; the Plan notes these as additional compliance instruments and cross‑references them (s 30 note 2). The Fisheries Management (Southern Squid Jig Fishery) Regulations 2005 prescribe Register particulars for nominated boats (s 22 note 3).
• The Statutory Fishing Rights Charge Act 1991 is referenced in relation to the SFR charge payable within 30 days of SFRs becoming available (s 20 note 3). The Plan states there is no charge for this Management Plan, but it flags the statutory mechanism and timeframe for charge payment in the Act.

Administrative law and evidence

• Decisions under the Plan that are "relevant decisions" fall within the Act’s review scheme (s 165), meaning affected persons have administrative review rights for qualifying decisions (s 3 notes; s 14(5) note). The form of review and forum are governed by the Act.
• The Plan references the Evidence Act 1995 in a note to s 36 concerning presumptions about postal receipt (s 36 note regarding subsection 160(1) of the Evidence Act 1995). Thus, procedural notice and evidence presumptions are anchored to Commonwealth evidence law.

Other statutory and policy interactions

• The Plan explicitly implements government cost recovery policy by requiring AFMA to prepare budgets and recommend levies to recover management costs attributable to the industry (s 6(m)). This situates the Plan within the government’s fiscal and public‑administration policies.
• The Plan requires AFMA to take account of international obligations for fish stocks when adopting conservation and management measures (s 5(h)). That binds domestic administration to Australia’s international fisheries commitments.
• Delegation and instrument formality: the Plan limits delegation for TAE decisions (s 34) and requires AFMA’s delegations under its common seal. This parameter affects internal AFMA administrative structures and interacts with the Legislation Act 2003 and the Legislative Instruments Act for the making and tabling of legislative instruments.

In practice, compliance and enforcement under the Plan will require cross‑reference to the Act and the relevant subordinate regulations for offences, penalties and the mechanics of registration and suspension. EPBC Act obligations will constrain by‑catch policy design. AFMA is the coordinating centre: it must exercise powers under the Plan in a way consistent with these statutes and with government cost‑recovery and administrative law requirements.

The compilation includes amendments and records their dates and registration details in the endnotes. The Plan has been modified since its original registration.

Key historical steps (from the compilation endnotes)

• Original Plan: registered 27 April 2005 and commenced 28 April 2005 (Endnote 3).
• Southern Squid Jig Fishery Management Plan Amendment 2010 (No. 1): registered 8 December 2010; commenced 9 December 2010 (Endnote 3). The 2010 instrument amended several sections: s 3, s 6, s 7, s 11, and s 18 (Endnote 4).
• Fisheries Legislation (Management Plans) Amendment 2011 (No. 1): registered 19 December 2011; commenced 20 December 2011 (Endnote 3). The 2011 instrument made a range of changes, including amendments to Part 2 (s 9), Part 3 (s 11), and Part 4 (s 15), and repealed several sections and divisions that previously existed (Endnote 4).
• Fisheries Management Legislation Amendment (Minor Updates to Management Plans) Instrument 2024: registered 16 September 2024; Schedule 1 items 33, 34 commenced 14 October 2024 (Endnote 3). The 2024 changes affected s 19 and s 30 (Endnote 4).

Provision‑level amendment notes (Endnote 4 summary)

• Part 1: s 3 was amended by F2010L03194 and F2011L02746; s 6 and s 7 were amended by F2010L03194.
• Part 2: s 9 amended by F2011L02746.
• Part 3: s 11 amended by both F2010L03194 and F2011L02746.
• Part 4: s 15 amended by F2011L02746; s 18 was amended and then repealed.
• Part 5: s 19 amended by F2024L01167. Several divisions and sections were repealed in F2011L02746 (Divisions 5.3 and 5.4 and sections 23-29 and 31-33).
• Part 6: s 30 was amended by F2011L02746 and F2024L01167; sections 31-33 were repealed in F2011L02746.
• Part 7: s 34 and s 36 were amended by F2011L02746.

Editorial and compilation notes

• The compilation includes an editorial note explaining that uncommenced amendments are not shown in the compiled text and that endnotes contain amendment details (compilation preamble).
• The Legislation Act 2003 permits editorial changes when preparing compilations; endnotes flag where editorial changes exist (endnote preface).

Practical implications

• Several consequential structural changes were made in 2011 when parts of earlier allocation and application machinery were repealed and replaced by new provisions. Practitioners should rely on the compiled text and the endnotes for the currently in‑force framework and consult the Register for any uncommenced amendments (compilation notes).
• The most recent amendment affecting registration eligibility (s 19) was made in 2024 (F2024L01167), so eligibility mechanics may have been updated; consult the Gazette notice referenced for the relevant date for registration (s 19(2) cross‑reference).

Taken together, the amendment history shows iterative refinement of allocation, operational and administrative provisions, with the Plan’s current structure reflecting successive policy changes in 2010, 2011 and 2024. Practitioners should verify whether any uncommenced amending instruments are on the Register and review the Gazette notices AFMA publishes under the Act in relation to grants and relevant dates.

The compiled text and endnotes do not record any judicial decisions or litigation concerning the Plan itself. The Plan’s endnotes and schedule record legislative history, amendments and editorial changes, but no cases are named in the compilation.

What the Plan records about review rights and possible disputes

• Administrative review rights: the Plan repeatedly references the Act’s "relevant decision" review mechanism under s 165 of the Fisheries Management Act 1991. The compilation notes explain that a person has a right of review in relation to a relevant decision and that an application for review may be made to the tribunal specified in the Act (s 3 notes; s 14(5) note). That indicates that administrative challenges to registration decisions, grant refusals, and some conversion factor decisions are available under the Act.
• Review panel process references: the Plan refers to procedural safeguards when grants are available , for example, that AFMA must not grant an SFR before the end of the period in which applications may be made to the Statutory Fishing Rights Allocation Review Panel, or where an application has been made to the Panel, before the application is dealt with (s 21 note). These references point to built‑in mechanisms for allocation disputes which can involve statutory review processes.
• Legislative instrument challenge pathways: certain determinations under the Plan (for example, TAE determinations) are legislative instruments (s 11 note). Parliamentary and administrative‑law avenues for challenge or disallowance of legislative instruments exist under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 and general judicial review principles, though the Plan does not catalogue case law on such challenges.

Practical note for practitioners

• The absence of recorded litigation in the compiled Plan means there is no case law in the compilation to guide the interpretation of specific Plan provisions. Practitioners advising clients on likely contest theory must therefore rely on the Act’s review mechanisms, the general administrative law framework and any relevant decisions under the Fisheries Management Act or related instruments found elsewhere.
• For dispute risk assessment, note which decisions are flagged as reviewable in the Plan (registration, conversion factor decisions), which are legislative instruments (TAE), and the statutory suspension/remedial powers AFMA can deploy (s 38 of the Act referenced in s 30 note). Those features determine the procedural pathways and remedies likely available to affected persons.

If litigation has occurred, it is not recorded in this compilation. Users requiring case law should search judicial databases and the Register for decisions arising after the compilation date.

The Plan contains technical mechanics and procedural traps that affect entitlements and operational realities. These are points where practice‑level attention is required.

Rounding down and fractional loss

• Allowed numbers are the integer part only. The Plan requires rounding down any non‑whole allocation when calculating the allowed number of machines for a person and for a nominated boat (s 15(2); s 16(2)). This mechanically destroys fractional entitlement: for example, 5.5 allocated standard machines becomes an allowed number of 5 (s 15 example). Practitioners should note that fractional allocations are neither banked nor transferable under the Plan text; they effectively vanish in operational use.

Inclusion of suspended SFRs in denominator for allocations

• When AFMA determines the per‑SFR allocation it divides the TAE by the total number of gear SFRs in force at the start of the fishing year and expressly includes SFRs suspended under prescribed sections of the Act in that total (s 12(1)-(2)). This increases the denominator and reduces per‑SFR entitlement whenever suspensions exist, thereby diluting remaining active entitlements. That mechanism can have material economic effects when suspensions are common or prolonged.

Non‑standard machines and discretionary conversion factors

• AFMA decides conversion factors (CFs) for non‑standard machines based on relative efficiency (s 14(3)). The Plan gives AFMA broad discretion in setting CFs; although decisions are reviewable as "relevant decisions" (s 14(5) note), holders face operational uncertainty until CFs are set. Practically, introducing a new machine type without an established CF risks being treated conservatively or being allowed only after protracted assessment.

TAE variability and annual resetting

• TAE is determined annually, and AFMA must consult SEMAC and SquidRAG, but the Plan leaves substantial room for annual variation (s 11(1)-(2)). That means per‑SFR allocated standard machine numbers (per s 12) can change each year: allocations are recomputed relative to TAE each fishing year and then notified to owners (s 13). This creates year‑to‑year revenue and planning uncertainty for industry.

By‑catch obligations tied to EPBC Act protections

• The by‑catch action plan must consider multiple EPBC Act protections and must require minimisation of interactions with specified protected categories (s 9(3)-(5)). That means by‑catch measures may impose substantive operational constraints or even closures to meet EPBC obligations. AFMA must review the by‑catch action plan at least every two years (s 9(2)), so holders face evolving by‑catch requirements.

Agent appointments are ineffective unless AFMA is notified

• A holder’s appointment of an agent has no effect unless AFMA has been notified under s 35(1) and accompanied by the instrument or certified copy (s 35(2)-(3)). In practice, this means operators using agents for licensing transactions must ensure AFMA has the paperwork on file before relying on agent‑acted decisions; AFMA may accept notices as properly given without independent verification (s 35(4)), but that is AFMA’s administrative assumption, not a substitute for a holder’s duty to notify.

Deemed notice timings and electronic communications

• The Plan sets precise deemed receipt timings for notices sent by fax or email: on a working day between 9 am and 4 pm, one hour after sending; otherwise 9 am on the next working day (s 36(4)(b)). That can compress response windows and make procedural deadlines short, particularly for enforcement or allocation notices.

Transitional preservation of permits

• During the transitional period AFMA specifies by Gazette, persons holding fishing permits may continue to fish under those permits despite s 15 constraints (s 37(4)-(6)). Practitioners must watch the Gazette notice to know exactly when permit‑based rights lapse and SFR reliance becomes mandatory; failing to monitor the Gazette could lead to operating without required SFRs.

TAE is a legislative instrument

• The TAE determination is a legislative instrument (s 11 note). That subjects TAE to particular forms and parliamentary processes; it also means parties seeking to challenge TAE may have discrete grounds such as disallowance and judicial review of instrument‑making process issues.

No explicit charges in the Plan but statutory charge mechanism exists

• The Plan references the Statutory Fishing Rights Charge Act 1991 timing for payment (s 20 note 3) but states there is no charge for this Management Plan. Future practice or other instruments could reintroduce charges; practitioners should confirm current charge status before advising on costs.

These "gotchas" are mechanical consequences of the Plan text. They change the effective entitlement and operational burden for holders and prospective applicants and create discrete administrative and commercial risks that should be addressed in contracts, compliance plans and licence transfer negotiations.

Compliance under the Plan entails meeting registration, operational, reporting and procedural duties. Below is a practical checklist with legal foundations and recommended operational steps.

1. Verify whether the Plan applies and check transitional timings

• Confirm that the intended activity is squid jigging (not trawl) as the Plan manages only squid jigging (s 1 note; s 3 defs).
• Check whether the transitional provision remains in force and monitor the Gazette for AFMA’s notice setting the date the transitional section ceases (s 37(2)-(3)). Until that date, continuing permit holders may fish under permits (s 37(4)-(6)).

2. Registration and SFR grant preparedness

• If you held a fishing permit on the relevant date in AFMA’s notice, ensure registration as an eligible person is timely under s 19 and the Act (s 19(1)-(2); note s 24 of the Act).
• If gear SFRs are made available, respond to AFMA’s notice requesting a grant within 30 days; if you do not, you will receive reminder and final notices and the grant may cease to be available if you fail to request and provide a reasonable excuse (s 21(1)-(3)).

3. Understand your SFR certificate and nominated boat constraints

• Review the SFR certificate and the extract of the Register that AFMA provides; the certificate must state the holder, SFR description, fishery and conditions (s 22(1)-(3)). Ensure the nominated boat details entered in the Register are correct because the right to fish is tied to the nominated boat (s 15(1)(c); s 16).

4. Operational capacity management

• Before each fishing year, review AFMA’s TAE notice and the allocation notice AFMA must send to each SFR owner (s 11(1); s 13). Check the number of standard machines allocated to each of your SFRs: allocation is TAE divided by total gear SFRs in force at the start of the fishing year (s 12(1)-(2)).
• Apply rounding logic: allowed numbers are rounded down to the nearest whole machine (s 15(2); s 16(2)). Use this to plan vessel rigging and crew deployment.

5. Non‑standard machine planning

• If you plan to use non‑standard machines, apply to AFMA for a decision on how many such machines are taken to be allocated to your SFR(s) for the fishing year (s 14(1)). AFMA will set a conversion factor (CF) for that machine type based on relative efficiency (s 14(3)).
• Keep records and be prepared to seek review of CF decisions as a relevant decision under s 165 if you disagree (s 14(5) note).

6. Data, observer cooperation and by‑catch compliance

• Be prepared to supply biological, economic or technical information and biological samples when AFMA asks (s 30(c)). Ensure data collection, storage and sample access arrangements are in place.
• Implement by‑catch mitigation measures consistent with AFMA’s by‑catch action plan and EPBC obligations; be ready for observer programmes and monitoring/surveillance (s 9(1)-(5); s 6(f), s 6(h)).

7. Agent appointments and notices

• If you appoint an agent, submit a written notice to AFMA specifying the agent’s name and the powers authorised, accompanied by the instrument or certified copy (s 35(1)-(2)). Note that appointments are ineffective unless AFMA has been notified (s 35(3)).
• Keep your residential, office, postal and electronic contact details current in the Register so notices are validly given (s 36(1), (2)). Understand deemed receipt rules for email and fax that shorten response windows (s 36(4)).

8. Compliance with directions and potential suspensions

• Comply with any directions from AFMA under the Plan, including temporary closures or instructions to cease fishing in parts of the fishery for specified periods (s 6(i)). SFRs can be suspended if AFMA has reasonable grounds under the Act (s 30 note referencing s 38 of the Act). Ensure suspension response protocols and legal counsel contact details are in place.

9. Administrative review readiness

• Document grounds and timelines for reviewable decisions (registration, grant, conversion factors) and be prepared to lodge a review under s 165 of the Act within applicable timeframes (s 3 notes; s 14(5) note). Maintain contemporaneous records of consultations with AFMA, SEMAC and SquidRAG where relevant to challenge procedural failings.

10. Budget and levies

• Anticipate AFMA budgetary processes and possible levies consistent with government cost‑recovery policy (s 6(m); s 5(e)). Maintain financial provisioning for potential levies and the administrative costs of compliance.

Operational checklists and controls

• Daily operational log capturing: machine counts on board, nominated boat use, observer interactions, by‑catch incidents and gear changes.
• Equipment inventory tied to standard vs non‑standard classification and CF correspondence from AFMA.
• Data management protocols for biological, economic and technical data to ensure timely supply to AFMA.
• Legal and administrative calendar keyed to: AFMA TAE publication dates, SFR notification dates, review windows, Gazette notices and any applicable Tribunal timetables.

By following the Plan’s statutory structure (registration, SFR grant timetables, machine counts, nominated vessel restrictions, CF application and data supply) and keeping records to support any administrative review, holders and applicants can materially reduce compliance risk. Regular engagement with AFMA, SEMAC and SquidRAG and monitoring of Gazette and Register notices are practical necessities.