An Assessment of Fisheries Management Strategies in Alaska Relative to the Goals of Ecosystem Approaches to Management
Anne B. Hollowed, Kerim Aydin, Jennifer Boldt, Angie Greig, Patricia Livingston, and Chang Ik Zhang
2
Outline
1. Overview of EBM objectives in US fisheries off Alaska
2. Examples of current EBM management measures
3. Reporting and tracking EBM a. Status reports and indicatorsb. Modeling efforts to predict future impactsc. Tracking progress using an integrated framework tool
4. Evaluation of effectiveness of EBM mgt off Alaska
5. Future research and management direction
3
North Pacific Fishery Management Council Ecosystem Approach to Management
Prevent Overfishing
Promote Sustainable Fisheries and Communities
Preserve Food Web
Manage Incidental Catch and Reduce Bycatch and Waste
Avoid Impacts to Seabirds and Marine Mammals:
Reduce and Avoid Impacts to Habitat
Promote Equitable and Efficient Use of Fishery Resources
Increase Alaska Native Consultation
Improve Data Quality, Monitoring and Enforcement
www.fakr.noaa.gov/tasking/management_FMP.pdf
4
Multi-species, Multi-fishery, Multi-Sector, Multi-Objective Management
Rationalized
Fishery
Provisions
Habitat
Protection
Provisions
Single
Species Harvest
Caps
Total Catch
Steller sea lion
Provisions
Prohibited
Species
Bycatch
Caps
Community
Development
Quotas
Seabird
bycatch
provisions
Ecosystem
Considerations
5
Current Groundfish Stock StatusCurrent Groundfish Stock StatusRelative to MSY and B(MSY)Relative to MSY and B(MSY)
Multispecies managementMultispecies management
Individual TAC’s should Individual TAC’s should not be exceedednot be exceeded
Basis is to use “Basis is to use “lowest lowest common denominatorcommon denominator” ” speciesspecies
Fishery “Fishery “openingsopenings” ” allowed based on allowed based on anticipated bycatch ratesanticipated bycatch rates
Fishery “Fishery “closuresclosures” occur ” occur based on real-time based on real-time observer catch estimates observer catch estimates and fish-ticket data.and fish-ticket data.
OY caps – 2 Million t OY caps – 2 Million t BSAIBSAI
ABCTAC Catch OFL
B 0 0.001 B100% B100%
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.50
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
F40%
F35%
FOFL3 B( )
FABC3 B( )
1
B
B40%
Control Rule
6
7
Bering Sea Research Area 2008 Bering Sea Habitat Conservation Area
Aleutian Islands Habitat
Conservation Area 2007
8
Prohibited speciesManagement
• Prohibited species caps:P. halibut, BSAI crab, P. salmon (especially Chinook and Chum), P. herring
• Gear/Area closures– Bristol Bay Red King
Crab Conservation Area
• Chinook salmon:– Hard cap +
incentive programs• Chum salmon: TBD
this summerPacific herring. Photo: JJ Vollenweider, NOAA Fisheries
9
Non-target Management
• Vulnerability assessment– Susceptibility:
bycatch rate. – Productivity: vital
rates• Divide groups into
complexes with similar life history characteristics: sculpin, shark, skates, octopus, squid
• Species identification of catch
• Accelerated life history studies
10
Forage Fish• Catch deterrents
– Maximum Retention Allowance 2% of landed catch
• No directed fishery
Reduce Discard• Full retention provisions
on catcher vessels targeting cod and pollock
• Groundfish Retention Standards
• Bycatch avoidance research
11
Alaska Fisheries Science Center & North Pacific Fishery Management Council’s version of Integrated Ecosystem Assessments
•Annual Stock assessment Fishery Evaluations •Catch reporting: non-targets, prohibited species, seabirds, other non-specified, forage fishEssential Fish Habitat – 5 year assessment and review•Reports from protected resources•Peer review by Center of Independent Experts and Marine Stewardship Council
www.NPFMC.NOAA.gov
12
“Proto” = shows recent level and trend in relation to historical variation (“green zone” is +/- 1 S.D.) Direction and color not indicative of “good” or “bad”.
Five-year running mean
Five-year linear trend
Ecosystem Considerations Chapter
Fisheries and The Environment (FATE) /Resource Ecology
and Ecosystem Modeling (REEM)
13
BS Diversity index
BS Species richness
BS size spectrum slope
BS HAPC survey CPUE
AI HAPC survey CPUE
GOA Diversity index
GOA species richness
GOA HAPC survey CPUE
All regions – indices of diversity
14
Total catch
Bottom trawl effort
Longline effort
Pot effort
Trophic level of catch
FIB index
Discards
Discard rate
HAPC nontarget catch
Bering Sea Fishing effects on ecosystem
15
Forecasting Models
• Multispecies Bycatch Model
• MSVPA/MSFOR
• End – To – End Models
• Multispecies Management Strategy Evaluations
• ECOSIM
Multispecies & multiMultispecies & multi--fi sheries managementfisheries management
Fisheries
Multiple species/ stocks
Multispecies & multiMultispecies & multi--fi sheries managementfisheries management
Fisheries
Multiple species/ stocks
walleye pollock
Pacific cod
Greenland turbot
yellowfin sole
rock sole
arrowtooth flounder
Pacific herring
northern fur seal
PreyPredator - prey
Other predators
16
Zhang, C. I., S. Kim, D. Gunderson, R. Marasco, J. B. Lee, H. W. Park, and J. H. Lee. An Ecosystem-based Fisheries Assessment
Approach for Korean Fisheries. Fisheries Research. 2009. Application of Integrated Fisheries Risk Assessment Method for
Ecosystems (IFRAME) to EBS trawl fisheries
• Integrated Risk Scores
• Performance tracking
• Evaluation of alternative management strategies
Preliminary results and discussion
Integrated Fisheries Risk Assessment Method or Ecosystems IFRAME
17
Since 1997, numerous fishery management actions for
groundfish have been implemented.
Amendment of Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act (MSFCMA)
American Fisheries Act, and
A suite of Steller sea lion protection measures
These changes warrant evaluation of their impacts on the
EBS trawl fisheries and fisheries impacts on the EBS
ecosystem.
Changes in management for the EBS trawl fisheries
18
Management objectives and attributes (New)
SSustainabiliSustainabilitytySustainabiliSustainabilityty HHabitaHabita
ttHabitaHabitatt
BBiodiversiBiodiversitytyBiodiversiBiodiversitytyESocio-Socio-
EconomicsEconomicsSocio-Socio-EconomicsEconomics
Macro-economicsMicro-economicsSocial considerations
BiomassFishing intensitySize/age at first captureHabitat sizeCommunity structure
Habitat damageDiscarded wastesHabitat protection
Incidental catchDiscardsTrophic levelDiversityIntegrity of functional group
19
*Number of asterisks denotes relative weights
Indicators developed so far
Sustainability•Biomass***•Catch***•Age at first capture**
Biodiversity•Discard rate**•Mean trophic level**•Diversity index***
Habitat•Critical habitat damage rate**•Prohibited area from fishing***
Socio-economy•Catch per vessel**•Price per pound*•Average wage***
20
EcosystemFishery A
Species 1Objective S …
ORIObjective B …
ORIObjective H …
ORIObjective E …
ORI Species 2
Objective S … ORI
Objective B … ORI
Objective H … ORI
Objective E … ORI
Fishery B Species 1
Objective S … ORI
Objective B … ORI
Objective H … ORI
Objective E … ORI
Species 2Objective S …
ORIObjective B …
ORIObjective H …
ORIObjective E …
ORI
SRI
SRI
SRI
SRI
FRI
FRI
ERI
Nested risk indices of IFRAME
Ii : Score of indicator i Wi : Weighting factor of indicator in : Number of indicators
n
i
i
n
iii
W
WI
ORI
1
1
: Weighting value for objectives
: Sustainability risk index
: Biodiversity risk index
: Habitat risk index
: Socio-economic risk index
EEHHBBSS ORIORIORIORISRI
SORIBORIHORI
EBHS ,,,
EORI
0.1
i
ii
C
FRICERI
Ci : Catch of fishery
Bi : Biomass or biomass index of species i
i
ii
B
SRIBFRI
21
Walleye pollock :
1997 2007 .
BMSY 1.84 mmt 2.06 mmt
0.5BMSY 0.94 mmt 2.03 mmt
Biomass 3.67 mmt 1.95 mmt
Risk score 0 0.22
Assessing indicators using reference points
Objectives Attribute Indicator
Reference points
WeightTarget (0) Between (0-2) Limit (2)
Sustainability BiomassBiomass
(B)B≥BMSY
BMSY ＞ B≥ 0.5BMSY
B ＜0.5BMSY
***
Example _ Sustainability_Biomass (Tier 1)
22
07 07
0707
97 97
97 97
Preliminary risk assessment diagram for the EBS trawl fishery
FRI97 =0.665, FRI07=0.291
23
Evaluation of NPFMC harvest strategy relative to principles of EAM
• Management policy aligns well with principles of EAM.
• Complex system of management results in multi-sector management.
• Precautionary harvest policies appear to be sustainable.
• Predictive tools are needed to account for the interactions to assess how proposed changes ripple through the system.
24
IFRAME synthesizes indicators into a risk assessment framework for use in evaluating the efficacy of management practices.
Identifies key gaps in knowledge. Risk scores currently scaled to common scoring system but
ecosystem impacts may not be equal. Ecosystem status could be influenced by factors other than
management strategy. Weights currently subjective and may differ between user
groups. Preliminary results indicate there was an improvement in
the ecosystem resulting from new management practices.
IFRAME as an Element of Integrated Ecosystem Assessments
25
Integrated Ecosystem Assessments feasible because of comprehensive monitoring and assessment program within AFSC.
Further research needed on key relationships: Catch quotas and trawl distribution and intensity. Catch quotas and incidental catch rate. Improved understanding of life history of non-target
species. Forecasting: IFRAME +Technical Interactions
Future Issues and Modeling
26
Results of risk assessment for walleye pollock
ObjectivesORI
Significance1997 2007
Sustainability 0.001 0.074 NS
Biodiversity 0.571 0.313 NS
Habitat 0.923 0.222 NS
Socio-Economics
1.252 0.333 NS
SRI 0.687 0.232 NS
A total of 7 species (Pacific cod, POP, yellowfin sole, rock sole, flathead sole, and arrowtooth flounder) were assessed.
NS : denotes non-significant
27
• Preserving nodal species within a complex network – 300+ species
• Measuring direct and indirect effects of fishing and climate within a food web – 100+ groups including multiple
fisheries
• Tracking status and shifts in production between major functional groups.– 14 major groups
The Ecosystem Assessment: Tracking and modeling the effects of fishing and climate on ecosystem structure and function on multiple scales
28
Acres Disturbed: Km2 disturbed expanded from observer data
1997 2007
