Successes and failures of ecosystem indicators
(just a few slides to stimulate discussion)
Nate MantuaUniversity of Washington
Aquatic and Fishery SciencesPICES/ICES/GLOBEC ECOFOR Workshop
Friday Harbor, Sept 7-11 2012
• Retested published correlations with new (independent) data and found many correlations didn’t hold up
• Found only 2 cases where environment-recruitment correlations were being used in management• SST-sardine recruitment relationship• Rainfall-banana prawn recruitment relationship
Management use of biophysical relationships today?
See Jackie King’s list from the previous talk … plus: • SST used to predict New Zealand snapper recruitment in
assessments for some regional stocks• Wilderbauer et al’s transport mediated recruitment
estimates for Eastern Bering Sea flatfish
A few more examples, but not that many considering the number of relationships that have been published. why the slow uptake into management?
• Ecosystem Considerations report (~200 p)
• Produced annually by NOAA ecosystem scientists
• Goal: to provide an overview of marine ecosystems in Alaska for the North Pacific Fishery Management Council
• Stock assessment recommendations are evaluated within an ecosystem context (EBFM, qualitative)
Supplying ecosystem information to fishery managers in Alaska
919 pages!
Only 70 pages
Ecosystem assessments
• Canada’s regional status and trends reports (annually published)
• Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Ecosystems Considerations
• The California Current System– Northern California Current Ecosystem Indicators,
PaCOOS quarterly reports, CCEIA (919 pages!), Sydeman’s Central California EIA
• Puget Sound Marine Waters report (new)
Use of EIAs
• How are these being used? • How is the fishery oceanography community
increasing the utility of these efforts? • Are there opportunities to make them more
useful? • How can the EIA approach better compliment
the single stock assessments that continue to feed directly into fishery management? How or where might these parallel tracks intersect?
other