Implementing EBFM in the (NE) U.S. Atlantic

1. Implementing EBFM in the (NE) U.S. Atlantic Jason Link NEFSC Woods Hole, MA

2. EBFM • Moving beyond when, why and what • Now we’re to HOW?

3. One Main Theme of EBFM: CONFRONTING TRADEOFFS

5. “The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress." - Joseph Joubert

6. Heurism • Understanding Ecosystem Functioning • Relative Importance of Different Processes • Advancing Scientific Theory

7. Tactical Management • Revised Stock Assessments • Yield Adjustments • Altered Biological Reference Points, etc. • Direct Impacts on Target, Non-Target Species, PETS, Habitat, Agg Groups • Specific “What If” Scenarios and Gaming • BINDING IN SCOPE

8. Strategic Management • Assessing Biomass Tradeoffs • System Level Emergent Properties • Evaluating Alternate Stable States • Evaluating Long Term Recruitment Bottlenecks • General “What If” Scenarios and Gaming, Long Term Trends • BOUNDING IN SCOPE

9. Gradient of Possibilities Stock/Single Species Multi-species Aggregate Biomass Ecosystem Messy Picture Here Gadids Pelagics Flatfish SS models, forget ecosystem issues Whole System Models, forget pop dy Multi-species assessments Aggregate Biomass Models SS assessments with explicit M2 or habitat or climate considerations Multiple SS assessments in “harmony”

10. "I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it." -Pablo Picasso

11. SS Add-ons • Increasing #s of extant cases incorporated into assessments • Still slow “uptake kinetics” in overall Mgt process • Yields generally lower if predation is considered as a component of total mortality • Remains critical for most “forage” species • Starting to include environmental cues

12. e.g., Atlantic Herring M2 and F during 1959-2002

13. e.g., Pandalid Shrimp Assessment

14. e.g., Menhaden: EstimatedAbundance With and W/out Predation 9000 Age 1 8000 7000 6000 5000 Numbers (millions) 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 3500 Age 2 3000 2500 2000 Numbers (millions) 1500 1000 500 0 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Predators No Predators

15. e.g., Loligo Production+M2 Model B/BMSY No Predation With Predation Year

16. e.g., Linked Climate-Population Models Climate (IPCC Air Temperature to Estuarine Temperature) Fisheries (Environmentally-explicit population model: R as a function of T) F=0.8 550 ppm Management (Link Forecasted SSB to Management Benchmarks) Based on mechanistic hypothesis developed in Hare and Able (2007) Fish Oceanogr 16: 31-45.

17. Multispecies Models • MSVPA, MSProd, AggProd etc. • Effects of predation the main emphasis

18. e.g., MSVPA • >15 spp • Age/size structured • Focuses on M2 of main “forage” stocks • Formal review process for 1 region, 2nd planned

19. Temporal variability in predation mortality on young age classes of Atlantic mackerel

20. e.g., MS Production & Aggregate Production Models • Used as part of recent GARM • Basically same as SS, just for groups of stocks • Simulators • Fitting • Context • Scenarios

21. 250 Guild Biomass- Base Scenario 200 150 100 50 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 Time Benthivores Planktivores Shrimp-Amphipods Shrimp-Fish Piscivores Base Scenario

22. 250 Guild Biomass- Scenario 3 200 150 100 50 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 Time Benthivores Planktivores Shrimp-Amphipods Shrimp-Fish Piscivores Scenario 3: Over-Fish Pelagics

23. Aggregate Production Model

24. EMAX • Energy Budgets/ Network Analyses • Emerging as a tool for: • Heurism • Strategic Mgt • Tradeoff Evaluation • MSE • Considered as part of formal trade-off analysis • Dynamic models next • Used as part of recent GARM

26. ECOGOMAGG GOM Aggregated System Flow X11 X1 Phytoplankton X2 Bacteria X6 X3 Zooplankton X4 Gelatineous zoop X5 Microneckton X2 X6 Macro-benthos X12 X7 Mega-benthos X8 Shrimp X9 Pelagic fish X7 X10 Demerdal fish X4 X11 Sharks X12 HMS X1 X13 X13 Pinnipeds X14 Baleen whales X15 Toothed whales X16 Seabirds X8 X5 X14 X3 X9 X15 X10 X16 • A home grown dynamic model • Builds off of EMAX (energy budget) outputs

27. ATLANTIS NEUS • Full blown ecosystem simulations • Still in validation & verification stage • An important Mgt tool • Systemic Perspective • Virtual “perturbations” • MSE catch all model

28. Northeast United States – (22, 8) 0 50 120+ 300+ Pelagic Epibenthic Sediment

29. Squids, No Fishing, yr 0 (1964)

30. Squids, No Fishing, yr 46

31. 2 1995 1999 1.5 1973 1977 1 0.5 1968 1985 PC 2 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 -0.5 1980 1989 -1 -1.5 -2 PC 1 Ecological Indicators • Outputs both from empirical and modeling studies • Evaluate a broad suite of ecosystem properties • Vetting ongoing, MV Approaches • Translation to Decision Criteria is key, ongoing (EO-F) • Remains to be incorporated into Mgt Process

32. Summary of NEUS Model e.g.s • Several modeling efforts at various stages along the modeling gradient • Working at both ends of the gradient to make ecosystem-based mgt advice operational • Several research/development activities • A few instances of review in SAW/SARC/TRAC/GARM and like processes • Most instances as ESAMs/MRMs; • Systemic outputs still being developed • Not as data limited as elsewhere, but have identified clear data gaps • Tool and software development continually ongoing

33. “Not only was an ecosystem management approach legal, it was mandatory if all applicable laws were to be simultaneously obeyed.” • - Jack Ward Thomas

34. Monitoring or Surveys Observations Ecosystem Models IEA Decision Rule Implementation MSE/MPs, IEAs

35. MSE, virtual world for mgt institutions

36. Education and Outreach

38. Stakeholder Interactions leading to Implementation • Numerous presentations at MAFMC, NEFMC • SSC, Ecosystem Cmtes beginning to uptake • FEPs • MREP • Numerous mtgs with NGOs, Industry Groups • Surveys, Workshops, Discussion Groups, Cooperative Research, Collaboration, etc. • NERO Collaborations and Working Groups • Academic Partners • Buy in & Collaboration

39. Ecosystem Assessment Program • Started < 1 year ago • Established to integrate all of NEFSCs efforts • Goals are to develop LMR management products from an EBFM perspective, and to facilitate interdisciplinary endeavors within our Center and region • The one part of the organization dedicated primarily with the task of taking a systemic, holistic, integrated view of our ecosystems

40. The Key for Any Renewable Resource Management Rate of Removal of a resource <= Rate of Replenishment of that resource

41. "When there is a hill to climb, don't think that waiting will make it smaller." -George Bernard Shaw

42. Plans/Suggestions for Implementation:Technical • Predation mortality (M2) should be included in stock assessments of forage (common & commerical prey) species (e.g., fish & invertebrates) • Explore environmental drivers on r, g, dist, etc. for major stocks • Tradeoffs among species, fleets, and sectors needs to be modeled explicitly • Continue with multiple modeling efforts • Venues & fora for model review and output dissemination need to be revisited

43. Plans/Suggestions for Implementation:Institutional/Organizational • Adoption of an MSE framework to evaluate scenarios and tradeoffs • Develop integrated products (EAR, ESR, IEAs, etc.) • Continue outreach and stakeholder engagement/involvement • Work within existing institutional processes (e.g., SARC/TRAC/etc., SSC, Ecosystem Cmtes, ROs) to provide both modified SS and Systemic Mgt Advice • “Keep it simple, keep it safe” – sensu Gandalf

44. If you think you can or think you can’t, you’re right. - Henry Ford

45. EBFM is as easy as pie

46. Extra Slides in my hip pocket

47. e.g.- Atlantic Herring • Highly migratory, locally dominant, spatially overlapping with many species • Predation by protected species, commercially valuable species- odontocetes, seals, birds, fish, invertebrates • Competition with protected or commercial species- planktivores, ichthyoplanktivores • Predation on larvae of commercial species • Large fishery potential • Lower trophic levels • Very high trophic efficiency • Horizontal flux, high biomass • High linkage density • Temperature mediated changes in distribution, migration or production?!