1 / 21

Scaup Adaptive Harvest Management 2008 - 2011

Scaup Adaptive Harvest Management 2008 - 2011. G. Scott Boomer USFWS Harvest Management Working Group Meeting Buda, TX 29 November 2012. Acknowledgements. DMBM

dung
Download Presentation

Scaup Adaptive Harvest Management 2008 - 2011

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Scaup Adaptive Harvest Management 2008 - 2011 G. Scott Boomer USFWS Harvest Management Working Group Meeting Buda, TX 29 November 2012

  2. Acknowledgements • DMBM • Mark Koneff, Bob Blohm, Paul Padding, Jim Kelley, Dave Sharp, Jim Dubovsky, Bob Trost, Bob Raftovich, Khristi Wilkins, Todd Sanders, and Ken Richkus • USGS • Fred Johnson • Mike Runge • Andy Royle • Flyway Technical Sections • Joe Fuller • Steve Cordts • Spencer Vaa • Don Kraege

  3. Outline • Brief History • Annual Performance • Status and Parameter Estimates • Policy • Harvest Results • Revisiting Regulatory Alternatives? • Process • Methods

  4. Past Harvest Regulations (e.g., Mississippi Flyway) 1969 thru 1987 Bonus Season: not to exceed 16 consecutive days (Oct 1 - Jan 31), bag limit of 5; OR, Bonus Bag: 2 bonus scaup in regular season SL: 50 - 60 95-96 Bag: 5 97-98 Bag: 6 99-04 Bag: 3 05-07 Bag: 2 2008 R (Hybrid) 2009 M 60 & 2 2010 M 60 & 2 2011 M 60 & 2 2012 L: 60 & 4 Points System Bonus Bags Special Seasons SL: 40 - 50 Bag: 4 - 10 SL : 30 Bag: 3 - 4 Bonus Bags Special Seasons SL: 20 - 40 Bag: 2 - 4

  5. Scaup Assessment Results

  6. Scaup Assessment Results: r

  7. Scaup Assessment Results: K

  8. Scaup Assessment Results: q

  9. Scaup Assessment Results: MSY

  10. Scaup Assessment Results:

  11. Scaup Harvest Policies: 2008 - 2012

  12. Observed Scaup Harvest

  13. Observed Scaup Harvest vs. Predictions Target (R) Target (M) Predicted (M)

  14. Preliminary Conclusions • Annual updates of population parameter estimates track changes in scaup status, suggesting modest increases in harvest potential • Model predictions are consistent with observed population increases • Scaup harvest policies have become more liberal as scaup status has improved • Observed harvest levels were similar to Flyway specific harvest predictions (at least under the moderate alternatives), and on average, have remained under allowable harvest thresholds

  15. Process for revisiting scaup regulations? • Given that the Flyways have not voiced concern over current packages (although the Pacific Flyway may be an exception…), how do we begin this conversation? • Are there triggers that we should consider for pursuing changes to scaup regulatory packages? • Important to recognize that regulatory alternatives ultimately have to be specified (i.e., they represent policy decisions - that may be informed with technical information).

  16. Potential Methods: • 1) Update technical information in 2007 scoping document • Update all Flyway harvest models with recent information • M: 3 years; R: 1 year; L: pending • Reset thresholds for regulatory change based on updated simulation • Re-calculate allowable harvest • Define appropriate allocation? • Work with individual Flyways to specify alternatives (e.g. 2008-2009 criteria…)

  17. Potential Methods: • 2) Reconsider how we account for partial controllability of harvest: • Specify the regulatory package (R, M, L) as the decision variable in the optimization (rather than harvest) • We then have to specify a distribution of harvest expected under each regulatory alternative (R, M, L) based on past experience • Consider closure rules? • From a technical perspective, this may be a more efficient and practical method to updating packages. • 3) Others?

  18. Scaup AHM: Technical Issues • Change in decision variable? • Change in model set? • Monitoring Needs? • BPOP • Banding needs recommendations • What are the implications of SEIS preferred alternative? • What is the relationships of scaup AHM to future changes in mallard AHM decision frameworks? • When should we consider “double-looping” for scaup AHM?

  19. Thanks for your attention!

  20. Harvest Policy

  21. Scaup Assessment Results:

More Related