The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of marine management of marine mining and industry". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT The potential for a wide variety of mineral resources exists within Australia’s maritime jurisdiction (see Table 1 in attached Expert Assessment). However marine mining and related industries remain an “emerging industry” and there is currently a low level of understanding of pressures and management strategies. Globally, the marine mining industry is more advanced and is supported by a growing body of research investigating the likely environmental impacts and mitigation strategies. Currently there are no offshore mining activities in Australia other than the well-established shell sand mining operation in Cockburn Sound (Fremantle, WA) and sand mining in Moreton Bay (Queensland). Both operations were granted extraction licences by state departments subject to strict environmental controls particularly relating to seagrass meadow replanting (Cockburn Sound) and sediment plumes (Moreton Bay). Other submissions to state and federal governments to explore and potentially exploit seafloor resources elsewhere in Australia, have been rejected or stalled due to the lack of existing base line knowledge, lack of community support, and poor understanding of the potential social and environmental impacts of such activities. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT Published papers and reports (assessment has been conducted by literature review). 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Understanding of pressure: Marine mining occurs on a local scale. Likely environmental impacts unclear with only ad hoc baseline information. • Planning associated with management of pressure: Resource assessment and planning is ad hoc and conducted on local scales, driven by commercial constraints and community pressures. • Input for informing management of pressure: Limited data available. International studies and established marine mining codes of conduct can inform understanding and planning. • Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Federal and state regulatory framework largely untested except where the marine mining is established. State-level decisions limited to temporary moratoria. • Outputs from management framework in place: Established operations have management programs; proposed operations have only desktop analysis. Limited research outputs exist (bathymetric mapping, benthic surveys etc.). • Outcomes of management framework in place: Established operations mitigate for local impacts, though not cumulative impacts. CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT Marine mining is limited in Australian waters with little change since 2011.

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of marine management of traditional use of marine resources". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT Quantifying the traditional use of marine resources by Indigenous communities is difficult due to the dispersed and sporadic nature of much traditional harvesting and the often complex and sensitive process of building community endorsement for long term monitoring programs to quantify harvest levels. Across Australia, there is a high diversity of community initiatives for monitoring and managing traditional harvest due to the specific local context for planning, managing and conservation. Since the 2011 assessment, the workforce of Indigenous rangers has grown around Australia and this has increased the on-ground capacity for monitoring the traditional take (e.g., GBRMPA, 2011; DIPF, 2013). In the Great Barrier Reef, as part of a Traditional use of marine resource agreement (TUMRA), Traditional owners are required to monitor, record and report traditional harvest activities (GBRMPA, 2008). In the Northern Territory, Indigenous rangers record information on the loss or return of aquatic species (e.g. fish, dugong, turtles) in their patrol areas (DIPF, 2013). Kimberley coastal communities are advancing with developing and implementing monitoring and evaluation frameworks (Jackson et al., 2015). Wide scale involvement of Indigenous rangers in monitoring programs also occurs in the Torres Strait (Johnson et al., 2015). Even with increased effort dedicated to Indigenous natural and cultural resource management, results have been mixed, with many projects falling well short of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous expectations (Barbour & Schlesinger, 2012). Natural and cultural resource management is considered a worthy and necessary goal (Ens et al., 2012), yet designing and implementing programs to achieve sustainability goals are not straightforward (Dressler et al., 2010). Determining whether traditional harvest is sustainable needs to be assessed on a case-by-case community basis given the wider ecological and pressure conditions within an area and as such, it is important to consider the state of the harvested population, state of supporting habitats, range of threats, and controls to limit human impacts. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT The information used in the assessment was based on extracting insightful statements from reports and articles across Australia on Traditional use of marine resources. No data sets were used to generate this assessment. 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Understanding of pressure: Gradual shift from the well-recognised need to understand sustainable traditional harvest levels towards building on-ground capacity and solutions for quantifying this level. • Planning associated with management of pressure: Indigenous-driven planning is growing yet it is not consistently linked to a framework that assesses the performance of stated objectives. • Input for informing management of pressure: Further progress on consistent recording and storing of data on traditional harvesting is needed before it informs management frameworks about the impact of this use. • Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: An extensive range of Indigenous-based initiatives are advancing to support the management of Traditional use of marine resources; assessing their performance is the next increment for effective management. • Outputs from management framework in

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of marine management of shipping". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT A total of 26936 ships arrived at Australian ports during 2014, 9.8% of those arrived at Port Hedland, 9.3% at Brisbane, 8.1% at Newcastle, 7.3% at Melbourne and 6.8% at Dampier. --Operational discharges-- Environmental regulation of shipping is regularly reviewed and amended to strengthen environment protection and reduce the environmental impact of shipping globally through the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). Some recent amendments to international law of significance include: • MARPOL Annex V amendments which tighten the controls on discharge of garbage at sea. • Amendments to Annex VI of MARPOL which introduces technical and operational controls on greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping. --Marine invasive species-- Due to a range of concerns about technical feasibility and efficacy of the available technology, the 2004 International Convention on the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments is yet to enter into force. The required entry into force criteria (ratification by 30 States, representing 35% of world tonnage) is likely to be met in 2016 which means that the convention will enter into force in 2017. The International Guidelines for the Control and Management of Ships' Biofouling to Minimize the Transfer of Invasive Aquatic Species, were adopted in 2011. While voluntary, the Guidelines provide a basis upon which to further promote a best practice approach to biofouling management for the prevention of marine pest incursions. A review of Commonwealth marine pest policy in Australian has recently been concluded which, along with the implementation of the new Biosecurity Act 2015, should lead to some advances in and a more nationally consistent approach to domestic marine pest policy and legislation relating to shipping. --Domestic shipping management-- A number of significant changes have taken place since 2011 in relation to the management of shipping around the Australian coast with a view to increasing environmental protection. • Designation of the Coral Sea Particularly Sensitive Sea Area • Extension of the Great Barrier Reef compulsory pilotage area • Review of the National Plan for Maritime Environmental Emergencies • Development of the North East Shipping Management Plan DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT Data contained in sectoral reports, information on national and international guidelines, protocols and the MARPOL convention. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided. 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Understanding of pressure: Good understanding of potential impacts. • Planning associated with management of pressure: Good level of national and international coordination to manage impacts. • Input for informing management of pressure: Strong management systems remain in place. • Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Shipping management systems continue to provide effective protection in most areas, with some gaps relating to marine pest management. • Outputs from management framework in place: Ongoing management is needed to ensure that best practice procedures remain in place. • Outcomes of management framework in place: Shipping management needs to be adaptable to changing shipping patterns. CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT New guidelines have been developed, a new biosecurity

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Pressures on the marine environment associated with marine debris". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE Marine debris is recognized as a globally important stressor in the marine environment, with increasing reports of impacts on marine biodiversity reported during the last four decades (Gall and Thompson 2015) and upwards of 6-12 million metric tons of plastic waste entering the oceans each year (Jambeck et al. 2015). Marine litter includes consumer items such as glass or plastic bottles, cans, bags, balloons, rubber, metal, fiberglass, cigarettes and other manufactured materials that end up in the ocean and along the coast, and other materials intentionally or unintentionally discarded at sea. In Australia, marine debris has been identified as a key threatening process for threatened and endangered vertebrate fauna. Marine litter also has socioeconomic impacts, it acts as a transporter of invasive species, can be a navigation hazard and there are increasing concerns over the human health risks due to food security issues from seafood (Rochman et al. 2015). With estimates of ¾ or more of marine debris coming from land-based sources and continued growth in plastics production and usage, marine debris is a ubiquitous problem, with high but variable concentrations of marine debris found both in coastal and marine environments (Hardesty et al. 2014). DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT Concentrations derived from a single survey around Australian coastline and at sea, carried out between 2011-2013 as well as data and analyses presented in peer review publications, a recent review of the TAP for marine debris. 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • 2016 • Assessment grade: Good Assessment trend: Stable Confidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus Confidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus Comparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment • 2011 • Assessment grade: Very good Assessment trend: Stable Confidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus Confidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT Marine debris was not included in 2011 assessment.

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of marine management of commercial fishing". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) is a common objective across all Australian jurisdictions resulting in a good level of understanding of the direct pressures commercial fishing has on the marine environment. All Australian jurisdictions have introduced one or more measures to address those pressures that are increasingly based on risk assessment and implementing a management response. These include harvest strategies for the main commercial species, adaptive management involving expert judgement, more quantitative management strategy evaluation, ecosystem modelling and broader ecological risk assessments. There is now a greater understanding of the effects of climate change and ocean acidification on the marine environment and the need to consider this when determining appropriate fisheries management responses. However, management agencies are yet to integrate all the available science into their management systems. Likewise, current habitat analysis work will identify the emerging priorities in managing the environmental effects on habitats of commercial fishing. Spatial management has been introduced to mitigate the impacts on both vulnerable species and habitats where identified i.e. gulper shark closures in the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery and the introduction of gillnet zoning closures to limit interactions with the Australian sea lion. Similarly, spatial closures that specifically prohibit trawling within seagrass and other sensitive nursery habitats are often used for many fisheries including, for example, the Shark Bay and Exmouth Gulf prawn trawl fisheries in Western Australia. Specific mitigation measures for protected species are also used to reduce the effects of commercial fishing. This includes such things as: seal and turtle excluder devices, square mesh panels in trawls, tori lines and other sea bird deterrent devices. Education programs for the fishing industry have also been improved to provide a greater understanding of how to avoid and/or handle protected species. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT The assessment is based on relevant literature and reports on current management measures associated with commercial fishing – a list is provided in the attached Expert Assessment. 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Understanding of pressure: Understanding of fisheries and effective management frameworks is reasonably high and improving. • Planning associated with management of pressure: Improved planning processes directed towards research and risk-based assessment processes are resulting in more robust outcomes. • Input for informing management of pressure: Greater use of technology for data collection informs management decisions and measures the trajectory of trends over time. • Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Improved processes have been developed to expand the range of fishery assessment tools with an increased use of risk-based approaches. • Outputs from management framework in place: Biennial State of key Australian Fish Stocks Report form the primary assessment output for national commercial fisheries. • Outcomes of management framework in place: Improvements in data gathering and reporting direct resources towards commercial fishing operations that pose the highest risk to the marine environment. CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of marine management of climate variability and climate change". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT Anthropogenic ocean warming, superimposed on natural climate variations – in particular El Niño–Southern Oscillation and decadal variability – and ocean acidification pose risks to Australia’s coral reef ecosystems, giant kelp and other habitats. In response, there have been significant shifts in the ranges of various invertebrates and fish. Recent reviews of climate change impacts and adaptation on Australia’s commercial marine fisheries and marine ecosystems discuss the implications for marine management. On the Great Barrier Reef, rising summer sea temperatures and steadily increasing ocean acidity increase the risk of mass coral bleaching. The cumulative impacts of economic activities – port dredging and runoff of sediment, nutrients and fertiliser from agriculture, for example – cause coral reefs to become stressed and more prone to the effects of climate change. More broadly around Australia, ocean warming and changes in currents are affecting fisheries and aquaculture. World-leading research on these risks is ongoing through Australian universities and research institutes and in consequence the understanding of physical processes is high. Understanding of the economic and cultural significance of the marine environment for Australia is lower, but considerable value is attributed to coastal regions in temperate and tropical Australia. Understanding of the management strategies required to combat the risks is lower still due at least in part to its complexity. Research is ongoing, but a greater investment in developing, implementing and monitoring strategies, monitoring and understanding change, and systematic acquisition and storage of data, is required. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT The assessment is based on published literature – a list is provided in the attached Expert Assessment. 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Understanding of pressure: Understanding of climate variability and its management is reasonably high and improving with government funding for well-established and internationally-respected institutions. • Planning associated with management of pressure: In-depth planning for icons such as the Great Barrier Reef continues, and commercial fisheries are aware of the need to plan around climate variability. Elsewhere efforts are more patchy. • Input for informing management of pressure: Short-term funding cycles are a continuing threat to effective management for long-term goals and sustainability. • Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Management tools and approaches exist and in some cases are applied; stronger regulation is required for long-term environmental health. • Outputs from management framework in place: Conflicting interests between economic development and the environment are leading to a gradual long-term environmental declines, which current management is not addressing. • Outcomes of management framework in place: Further policy and management controls are required to address declining environmental health and emerging risks of climate change. CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT Not specified. Review of additional literature has been conducted since 2011 SoE Assessment.

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of marine management of recreational fishing". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT Recreational fishing continues to have considerable value as a popular Australian lifestyle activity contributing both economic benefits to the economy and playing an important social role in the Australian way of life. The most recent Australia wide survey of recreational and indigenous fishing was conducted in 2000-01. The results of this survey indicated that 3.4 million people participated in recreational fishing during this 12 month period generating an estimated $1.8 billion in expenditure on services and items related to recreational fishing. For example, in Western Australia a recent survey of recreational fishing found that approximately 711,000 people (29.6% of the population) fished recreationally in the 2014/15 period compared to 691,000 in 2011/12 (32% of the population). Over 160,000 recreational fishing licences were issued during 2014/15 for specific recreational fishing activities. All revenue raised from licence fees goes back into recreational fisheries management. During the 2014/15 period, the Department of Fisheries Western Australia spent a total of $19 million on managing recreational fishing around the State, which includes the development of harvest strategies that include sectoral allocation and target catch ranges for both the recreational and commercial fish resources. Through this process, 19 fish resources have been identified as having a significant recreational fishing component and of these, 85% currently have catch ranges within acceptable limits. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT The assessment is based on expert knowledge of recreational fisheries management, peer-reviewed publications, state/territory and national assessments of fish stocks and recreational fishing activities and expert input from the Australian Fisheries Management Forum. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided. 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Understanding of pressure: National and state/territory surveys have been conducted although understanding of overall impacts on stock status is not always known. In some jurisdictions ecosystem based approaches also include understanding of risks to species habitats and ecosystem structure. • Planning associated with management of pressure: Most jurisdictions have formal recreational fisheries management capacity and most incorporate ecosystems based approach to assessing risk, with increasing focus on habitat and fishery enhancement. • Input for informing management of pressure: Survey data include catch and effort data, and some social/behavioural and economic information. • Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: All jurisdictions use a range of controls including access restrictions, closed areas, closed seasons, restrictions on gear types, daily bag limits, minimum and or maximum size limits, possession limits, and licencing. • Outputs from management framework in place: National and jurisdictional survey data and reports can be used to provide information across species and stock ranges. • Outcomes of management framework in place: Recovery of some previously overfished species is occurring. CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT Commercial and recreational fisheries and traditional use of resources were all included in the one assessment in the 2011 report.

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of marine management of anthropogenic noise". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT There is a good understanding of the potential sources of anthropogenic marine noise arising from construction related activities, oil and gas activities, shipping and military operations in Commonwealth waters. These include geophysical and geotechnical surveys, seismic exploration, seabed piling, explosives, construction, dredging, ongoing operations, sonar and noise from vessels (particularly dynamically positioned vessels). It is clearly understood that the level of impact from these noise sources will vary depending on the size of the noise source, spatial distribution of simultaneous sources, duration and level of the noise and proximity to sensitive receptors as well as the sensitivity of the particular species to noise. Less is known of the impacts of ongoing low level noise associated with shipping and that generated by other emerging sectors such as marine mining and renewable energy operations, although work on understanding noise impacts associated with these sectors is being actively researched overseas where these activities are more widespread (e.g. Europe). The level of understanding of the cause-effect pathways for marine noise impacts is also underdeveloped. In some cases predictions of impacts are made using limited scientific evidence, with available studies focused on short-term exposures of individuals rather than long-term population consequences and limited in-field verification of sound modelling and environmental impact. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT Environment data from petroleum activities in commonwealth waters that generate underwater noise spanning 2012 – 2015, data from collaborative research activities carried out by DSTG and the Australian Navy, data and analyses published in peer reviewed publications and agency reports. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided. 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Understanding of pressure: Sources of underwater noise across most sectors are well known, however knowledge of impacts requires a greater level of understanding. • Planning associated with management of pressure: Acute impacts across sectors are largely managed through EPBC Act approval processes, regulatory frameworks and environmental planning, reducing risks to sensitive receptors. • Input for informing management of pressure: Substantial information is available to inform management with varying degrees of uptake across sectors. • Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Environmental authorisation processes associated with or endorsed by the EPBC Act are in place across sectors for acute impacts; there is little management of chronic impacts. • Outputs from management framework in place: Assessment and inspection of noise producing activities associated with the oil and gas industry and environmental assessments and collaborative research programs conducted by the Navy are used to inform required areas of improvement in these sectors. Outputs and improvement processes across other sectors are less clear. • Outcomes of management framework in place: An increased level of regulatory oversight for oil and gas activities and ongoing research and inputs into military environmental plans aim to ensure effective management of underwater noise in these sectors. Management outcomes for other sectors are less

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Effectiveness of marine management of oil and gas extraction and production". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT There is a very good understanding of the pressures and emerging threats from planned oil and gas activities. There is less available information about pressures arising from new technologies such as floating LNG and pressures arising from unplanned activities such as oil spills, however, there is a growing body of information around management of these pressures. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT All petroleum activities in commonwealth waters. Environment data only spans 2012 – 2015 since NOPSEMA was formed. Combination of qualitative and quantitative data used. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided, but all information is available from the NOPSEMA website: https://www.nopsema.gov.au/ 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • Understanding of pressure: Understanding of the impacts of exploration, production and decommissioning activities of the oil and gas industry are well understood. • Planning associated with management of pressure: Single national regulator for oil and gas operations in Commonwealth waters. • Input for informing management of pressure: Data collected is analysed for trends across industry and used to inform future environmental management improvements and regulatory activity. • Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Regulatory framework is subject to regular independent review to ensure ongoing effectiveness. • Outputs from management framework in place: The assessment and inspection of oil and gas activities is used to inform required areas of industry improvement. • Outcomes of management framework in place: Increased level of regulatory oversight ensures effective management of offshore oil and gas activities. CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT Since the 2011 assessment, a national regulator of oil and gas activities has been established as the independent regulator for safety, well integrity and environmental management with its environmental management and approvals endorsed under the EPBC Act. This has introduced an increased level of scrutiny through assessment processes and compliance inspections across the offshore oil and gas industry resulting in high levels of compliance being recorded within the oil and gas regulated community.

The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Pressures on the marine environment associated with traditional use of marine resources". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE Quantifying the traditional use of marine resources by Indigenous communities is difficult due to the dispersed and sporadic nature of much traditional harvesting and the often complex and sensitive process of building community endorsement for long term monitoring programs to quantify harvest levels. Across Australia, there is a high diversity of community initiatives for monitoring and managing traditional harvest due to the specific local context for planning, managing and conservation. Since the 2011 assessment, the workforce of Indigenous rangers has grown around Australia and this has increased the on-ground capacity for monitoring the traditional take (e.g., GBRMPA, 2011; DIPF, 2013). In the Great Barrier Reef, as part of a Traditional use of marine resource agreement (TUMRA), Traditional owners are required to monitor, record and report traditional harvest activities (GBRMPA, 2008). In the Northern Territory, Indigenous rangers record information on the loss or return of aquatic species (e.g. fish, dugong, turtles) in their patrol areas (DIPF, 2013). Kimberley coastal communities are advancing with developing and implementing monitoring and evaluation frameworks (Jackson et al., 2015). Wide scale involvement of Indigenous rangers in monitoring programs also occurs in the Torres Strait (Johnson et al., 2015). Even with increased effort dedicated to Indigenous natural and cultural resource management, results have been mixed, with many projects falling well short of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous expectations (Barbour & Schlesinger, 2012). Natural and cultural resource management is considered a worthy and necessary goal (Ens et al., 2012), yet designing and implementing programs to achieve sustainability goals are not straightforward (Dressler et al., 2010). Determining whether traditional harvest is sustainable needs to be assessed on a case-by-case community basis given the wider ecological and pressure conditions within an area and as such, it is important to consider the state of the harvested population, state of supporting habitats, range of threats, and controls to limit human impacts. DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT The information used in the assessment was based on extracting insightful statements from reports and articles across Australia on Traditional use of marine resources. No data sets were used to generate this assessment. 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • 2016 • Assessment grade: Low impact Assessment trend: Unclear Confidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus Confidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus Comparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment • 2011 • Assessment grade: Very good Assessment trend: Stable Confidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus Confidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT Since 2011, focus had been placed on monitoring and recording harvest levels to help quantify trends in Traditional use of marine resources.