+ - 0:00:00
Notes for current slide
Notes for next slide

State of the Ecosystem 2023 Overview
Mid-Atlantic and New England

NOAA Seminar
23 May 2023

Sarah Gaichas, Kimberly Bastille, Sean Lucey, Geret DePiper, Kimberly Hyde, Scott Large, Laurel Smith
Northeast Fisheries Science Center
and all SOE contributors

1 / 40

Goal: include climate and ecosystem information in management decision processes

Overview

  • What types of decisions are made?

    • Single species catch limits
    • Allocations to fleets or areas
    • Coordination across boundaries and sectors
    • Multispecies and ecosystem level tradeoffs

  • How can ecosystem information support these decisions?

    • Key tools: ecosystem reporting, risk assessment, scenario planning, managment strategy evaluation
    • Developing decision processes along with products

Word cloud based on Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council EAFM Guidance Document

EAFM Policy Guidance Doc Word Cloud

2 / 40

Background: Federal fishery management in the US

Eight regional Fishery Management Councils establish plans for sustainable management of stocks within their jurisdictions. All are governed by the same law, but tailor management to their regional stakeholder needs.

US map highlighting regions for each fishery management council

More information: http://www.fisherycouncils.org/
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/laws-policies#magnuson-stevens-act

3 / 40

State of the Ecosystem (SOE) reporting

Improving ecosystem information and synthesis for fishery managers

The IEA Loop1 IEA process from goal setting to assessment to strategy evaluation with feedbacks

[1] https://www.integratedecosystemassessment.noaa.gov/national/IEA-approach

4 / 40

State of the Ecosystem: Maintain 2021-2022 structure for 2023

2023 Report Structure

  1. Graphical summary
    • Page 1 report card re: objectives →
    • Page 2 risk summary bullets
    • Page 3 synthesis themes
  2. Performance relative to management objectives
  3. Risks to meeting management objectives

State of the Ecosystem page 1 summary tableState of the Ecosystem page 2 risk bullets

Ecosystem-scale fishery management objectives
Objective Categories Indicators reported
Provisioning and Cultural Services
Seafood Production Landings; commercial total and by feeding guild; recreational harvest
Profits Revenue decomposed to price and volume
Recreation Angler trips; recreational fleet diversity
Stability Diversity indices (fishery and ecosystem)
Social & Cultural Community engagement/reliance and environmental justice status
Protected Species Bycatch; population (adult and juvenile) numbers, mortalities
Supporting and Regulating Services
Biomass Biomass or abundance by feeding guild from surveys
Productivity Condition and recruitment of managed species, primary productivity
Trophic structure Relative biomass of feeding guilds, zooplankton
Habitat Estuarine and offshore habitat conditions
5 / 40

Ecosystem synthesis themes

Characterizing ecosystem change for fishery management

  • Societal, biological, physical and chemical factors comprise the multiple system drivers that influence marine ecosystems through a variety of different pathways.
  • Changes in the multiple drivers can lead to regime shifts — large, abrupt and persistent changes in the structure and function of an ecosystem.
  • Regime shifts and changes in how the multiple system drivers interact can result in ecosystem reorganization as species and humans respond and adapt to the new environment.

6 / 40

State of the Ecosystem report scale and figures

Spatial scale NEFSC survey strata used to calculate Ecosystem Production Unit biomass

A glossary of terms, detailed technical methods documentation and indicator data are available online.

Key to figures

Trends assessed only for 30+ years: more information

Orange line = significant increase

Purple line = significant decrease

No color line = not significant or < 30 years

Grey background = last 10 years

7 / 40

Report structure revised in 2021 to address Council requests and improve synthesis

  • Performance relative to management objectives
    • What does the indicator say--up, down, stable?
    • Why do we think it is changing: integrates synthesis themes
      • Multiple drivers
      • Regime shifts
      • Ecosystem reorganization
  • Objectives
    • Seafood production
    • Profits
    • Recreational opportunities
    • Stability
    • Social and cultural
    • Protected species
  • Risks to meeting fishery management objectives
    • What does the indicator say--up, down, stable?
    • Why this is important to managers: integrates synthesis themes
      • Multiple drivers
      • Regime shifts
      • Ecosystem reorganization
  • Risk categories
    • Climate: warming, ocean currents, acidification
      • Habitat changes (incl. vulnerability analysis)
      • Productivity changes (system and fish)
      • Species interaction changes
      • Community structure changes
    • Other ocean uses
      • Offshore wind development
8 / 40

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2023:

Performance relative to management objectives - Mid-Atlantic

Seafood production decreasing arrow icon, below average icon icon

Profits decreasing arrow icon, below average icon icon

Recreational opportunities: Effort increasing arrow icon above average icon icon; Effort diversity decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon

Stability: Fishery no trend icon near average icon icon; Ecological mixed trend icon near average icon icon

Social and cultural, trend not evaluated, status of:

  • Fishing engagement and reliance by community
  • Environmental Justice (EJ) Vulnerability by community

Protected species:

  • Maintain bycatch below thresholds mixed trend icon meeting objectives icon
  • Recover endangered populations (NARW) decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon
9 / 40

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2023:

Performance relative to management objectives - Georges Bank

Seafood production no trend icon, below average icon icon

Profits no trend icon, above average icon icon

Recreational opportunities: Effort no trend icon, near average icon icon; Effort diversity no trend icon, near average icon icon

Stability: Fishery mixed trend icon, Commercial below average icon icon Rec near average icon icon; Ecological mixed trend icon near average icon icon

Social and cultural, trend not evaluated, status of:

  • Fishing engagement and reliance by community
  • Environmental Justice (EJ) Vulnerability by community

Protected species:

  • Maintain bycatch below thresholds mixed trend icon meeting objectives icon
  • Recover endangered populations mixed trend icon, NARW below average icon icon Gray seal above average icon icon
10 / 40

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2023:

Performance relative to management objectives - Gulf of Maine

Seafood production decreasing arrow icon, below average icon icon

Profits Total no trend icon, above average icon icon; NEFMC Managed decreasing arrow icon, below average icon icon

Recreational opportunities: Effort no trend icon, near average icon icon; Effort diversity no trend icon, near average icon icon

Stability: Fishery mixed trend icon, Commercial below average icon icon Rec near average icon icon; Ecological mixed trend icon near average icon icon

Social and cultural, trend not evaluated, status of:

  • Fishing engagement and reliance by community
  • Environmental Justice (EJ) Vulnerability by community

Protected species:

  • Maintain bycatch below thresholds mixed trend icon meeting objectives icon
  • Recover endangered populations mixed trend icon, NARW below average icon icon Gray seal above average icon icon
11 / 40

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2023:

Risks to meeting fishery management objectives - All regions

Climate: warming and changing oceanography continue

  • 2022 among warmest years on record
  • Heat waves and Gulf Stream instability
  • Mid-Atlantic cold pool becoming warmer, smaller, and shorter in duration
  • Estuarine, coastal, and offshore habitats affected, with range of species responses
  • Distribution shifts complicate management
  • Gulf of Maine fall bloom highest in time series
  • Fish stocks with a mix of good and poor condition
  • Multiple Mid-Atlantic stocks with declining productivity

12 / 40

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2023:

Risks to meeting fishery management objectives - All regions

Other ocean uses: offshore wind development

  • Rapid buildout in patchwork of areas
  • Current revenue in proposed areas
    • 1-31% by port (some with EJ concerns)
    • Up to 17% annual commercial revenue
  • Different development impacts for species preferring soft bottom vs. hard bottom
  • Overlap with known important right whale foraging habitats, increased vessel strike and noise risks
  • Scientific survey mitigation in progress
  • Integrated Ecosystem Assessment is beginning for offshore wind and fisheries in the Gulf of Maine
13 / 40

2023 Performance relative to management objectives

Fishing icon made by EDAB       Fishing industry icon made by EDAB       Multiple drivers icon made by EDAB       Spiritual cultural icon made by EDAB       Protected species icon made by EDAB

14 / 40

Objective: Mid Atlantic Seafood production decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon   Risk elements: ComFood and RecFood, unchanged

Indicators: Commercial landings, total and seafood

Key: Black = Landings of all species;

Blue = Seafood landings;

Red = MAFMC managed seafood landings

Total landings now include Atlantic menhaden

Indicators: Recreational harvest

Multiple potential drivers of landings changes: ecosystem and stock production, management actions, market conditions (including COVID-19 disruptions), and environmental change.

15 / 40

The long-term declining trend in landings didn't change.

Mid Atlantic Landings drivers: Stock status? TAC?   Risk elements: Fstatus, Bstatus, MgtControl

Indicator: Stock status

Most stocks have good status. Butterfish B status has improved. Results from Dec 2022 Research Track assessments shown for Spiny dogfish (F above threshold) and bluefish (B above limit) do not represent official management advice.

Indicators: Total ABC or ACL, and Realized catch relative to management target

Few managed species have binding limits; Management less likely playing a role

16 / 40

Stock status affects catch limits established by the Council, which in turn may affect landings trends. Summed across all MAFMC managed species, total Acceptable Biological Catch or Annual Catch Limits (ABC or ACL) have been relatively stable 2012-2020 (top). With the addition of blueline tilefish management in 2017, an additional ABC and ACL contribute to the total 2017-2020. Discounting blueline tilefish, the recent total ABC or ACL is lower relative to 2012-2013, with much of that decrease due to declining Atlantic mackerel ABC.

Nevertheless, the percentage caught for each stock’s ABC/ACL suggests that these catch limits are not generally constraining as most species are well below the 1/1 ratio (bottom). Therefore, stock status and associated management constraints are unlikely to be driving decreased landings for the majority of species.

Implications: Mid Atlantic Seafood Production

Biomass does not appear to drive landings trends

Key: Black = NEFSC survey;

Red = NEAMAP survey

  • Declining seafood mainly benthos: surfclam/ocean quahog market drivers

  • Declining total mainly planktivores: menhaden fishery consolidation
  • Recreational drivers differ: shark fishery management, possibly survey methodology

Monitor climate risks including warming, ocean acidification, and shifting distributions; ecosystem composition and production changes; fishing engagement

17 / 40

Stock status is above the minimum threshold for all but one stock, and aggregate biomass trends appear stable, so the decline in commercial seafood landings is most likely driven by market dynamics affecting the landings of surfclams and ocean quahogs, as landings have been below quotas for these species. The long term decline in total planktivore landings is largely driven by Atlantic menhaden fishery dynamics, including a consolidation of processors leading to reduced fishing capacity between the 1990s and mid-2000s.

Climate change also seems to be shifting the distribution of surfclams and ocean quahogs, resulting in areas with overlapping distributions and increased mixed landings. Given the regulations governing mixed landings, this could become problematic in the future and is currently being evaluated by the Council.

Objective: New England Seafood production

GB no trend icon below average icon icon GOM decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon

Indicators: Commercial landings

Key: Black = Landings of all species;

Blue = Seafood landings;

Red = NEFMC managed seafood landings

18 / 40

Objective: New England Seafood production

GB no trend icon below average icon icon GOM decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon

Indicators: Recreational harvest


Multiple potential drivers of landings changes: ecosystem and stock production, management actions, market conditions (including COVID-19 disruptions), and environmental change

19 / 40

Although scallop decreases are partially explained by a decreased TAC, analyses suggest that the drop in landings is at least partially due to market disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, we do not anticipate the long-term declining trend in landings to change.

New England Landings drivers: Stock status

Indicator: Stock status

Stocks below BMSY increased from 8 to 9, stocks below ½ BMSY decreased from 6 to 4. Spiny dogfish results from RT are unofficial. Management still likely playing large role in seafood declines

20 / 40

New England Landings drivers

Indicator: Survey biomass


Biomass availability still seems unlikely driver

21 / 40

Implications: New England Seafood Production

Drivers:

  • decline in commercial landings is most likely driven by the requirement to rebuild individual stocks as well as market dynamics
  • other drivers affecting recreational landings: shark fishery management, possibly survey methodology

Monitor:

  • climate risks including warming, ocean acidification, and shifting distributions
  • ecosystem composition and production changes
  • fishing engagement

22 / 40

Objective: New England Commercial Profits mixed trends arrow icon

GB above average icon icon GOM Total above average icon icon, NEFMC-managed below average icon icon

Indicator: Commercial Revenue

Key: Black = Revenue of all species combined;

Red = Revenue of NEFMC managed species

23 / 40

Objective: New England Commercial Profits mixed trends arrow icon

GB above average icon icon GOM Total above average icon icon, NEFMC-managed below average icon icon

Indicator: Bennet--price and volume indices

Implications:

Both regions driven by single species

  • GOM high revenue despite low volume
  • Fluctuations in GB due to rotational management

Monitor changes in climate and landings drivers:

  • Sea scallops and lobsters are sensitive to ocean warming and acidification
24 / 40

Objective: New England Environmental Justice and Social Vulnerability

Indicators: Environmental justice vulnerability, commercial fishery engagement and reliance

New England commercial fishing communities

Implications: Highlighted communities may be vulnerable to changes in fishing patterns due to regulations and/or climate change. When also experiencing environmental justice issues, they may have lower ability to successfully respond to change.

25 / 40

These plots provide a snapshot of the presence of environmental justice issues in the most highly engaged and most highly reliant commercial and recreational fishing communities in the Mid-Atlantic. These communities may be vulnerable to changes in fishing patterns due to regulations and/or climate change. When any of these communities are also experiencing social vulnerability including environmental justice issues, they may have lower ability to successfully respond to change.

Objective: Mid Atlantic Environmental Justice and Social Vulnerability   Risk element: Social

Indicators: Environmental justice vulnerability, commercial fishery engagement and reliance

Mid-Atlantic commercial fishing communities

Implications: Highlighted communities may be vulnerable to changes in fishing patterns due to regulations and/or climate change. When also experiencing environmental justice issues, they may have lower ability to successfully respond to change.

26 / 40

These plots provide a snapshot of the presence of environmental justice issues in the most highly engaged and most highly reliant commercial and recreational fishing communities in the Mid-Atlantic. These communities may be vulnerable to changes in fishing patterns due to regulations and/or climate change. When any of these communities are also experiencing social vulnerability including environmental justice issues, they may have lower ability to successfully respond to change.

Objective: Mid Atlantic Environmental Justice and Social Vulnerability   Risk element: Social

Indicators: Environmental justice vulnerability, recreational fishery engagement and reliance

Mid-Atlantic recreational fishing communities

Implications: There was an increase in recreational fishing activities in the many of the top recreational communities from 2019 to 2020.

27 / 40

Highlighted communities may be vulnerable to changes in fishing patterns due to regulations and/or climate change. When also experiencing environmental justice issues, they may have lower ability to successfully respond to change.

2023 Risks to meeting fishery management objectives

Climate icon made by EDAB       Wind icon made by EDAB

Hydrography icon made by EDAB       Phytoplankon icon made by EDAB       Forage fish icon made by EDAB       Apex predators icon made by EDAB       Other human uses icon made by EDAB

28 / 40

Risks: Climate change Mid Atlantic (a.k.a. indicator shock-and-awe)

Indicators: ocean currents, temperature, seasons

The Gulf Stream is trending north. Ocean summer is lasting longer. In contrast to SST, long term bottom temperature is increasing in all seasons. Few surface and no bottom extreme warming events in 2022.

29 / 40

Seasonal sea surface temperatures in 2022 were above average for most of the year, however late spring storms caused deep mixing, which delayed stratification and surface warming in late spring and early summer. A combination of long-term ocean warming and extreme events should be used to assess total heat stress on marine organisms

Climate risks: offshore habitat

Region
Indicator
Long term trend
Current status
Coastwide


Mid-Atlantic







Georges Bank




Gulf of Maine




Gulf stream index
Warm core rings

Sea surface temperature
Sea bottom temperature
Summer length
Extreme temperature events
Cold pool temperature
Cold pool duration
Cold pool extent

Sea surface temperature
Sea bottom temperature
Summer length
Extreme temperature events

Sea surface temperature
Sea bottom temperature
Summer length
Extreme temperature events
Warm slope water NE channel

Moving north
More numerous

Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
No trend
Increasing
Decreasing
Decreasing

Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
No trend

Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
No trend
Increasing

+
high regime

+
+
+
2 of 9-11 days
+
−
−

+
+
+
1 of 28 days

+
+
+
4 of 5 to 8 days
+

30 / 40

Needs: skillful short term projections (2-5 years) of multiple habitat variables at regional scale

Implications: Climate change and managed species   Risk based on climate vulnerability:

Climate: 18 low, 10 low-mod, 9 mod-high, 3 high risk

Multiple drivers with different impacts by species

  • Seasonal estuarine conditions affect life stages of managed species differently

  • Ocean acidification impact on commercial species
    Mid Seasonal pH

  • Warm core rings important to Illex availability.

DistShift: 2 low, 4 low-mod, 31 mod-high, 3 high risk

New Indicator: protected species shifts

31 / 40
  • Chesapeake suitable habitat for juvenile summer flounder growth has declined by 50% or more
  • Climate change is expected to continue impacting habitat function and use for multiple species
  • Habitat improving in some areas (tidal fresh SAV, oyster reefs), but eelgrass declining
  • Scallops and longfin squid in Long Island Sound and off New Jersey have experienced low aragonite
  • Areas of low pH identified in surfclam and scallop habitat
  • Lab work identified pH thresholds for surfclam growth
  • Fishing effort concentrates on the eastern edge of warm core rings, where upwelling and enhanced productivity ocurr.
  • Fuel cost, plentiful longfin, and fewer warm core rings near the shelf led to lower Illex catch in 2022.

Shifting species distributions alter both species interactions, fishery interactions, and expected management outcomes from spatial allocations and bycatch measures based on historical fish and protected species distributions.

Risks: Ecosystem productivity Mid Atlantic; Element: EcoProd

Indicator: Fish condition

Indicator: Fish productivity anomaly →

Implications: Species in the MAB had mixed condition in 2022. Fish productivity based on surveys and assessments has been below average.

Black line indicates sum where there are the same number of assessments across years.

32 / 40

Methods from (Perretti, et al., 2017).

Risks: Ecosystem structure New England

Indicator: Forage fish index

Indicator: Common tern productivity

Indicator: Gray seal pup production

33 / 40

Risks: Offshore Wind Development Mid Atlantic   Element: OceanUse

Indicators: development timeline, fishery and community specific revenue in lease areas

Council request: which New England ports have significant reliance on Mid-Atlantic managed species?

34 / 40

Risks: Offshore Wind Development Summary

Implications:

  • 1-34% of port revenue from fisheries currently comes from areas proposed for offshore wind development. Some communities have environmental justice concerns and gentrification vulnerability.
  • Up to 17% of annual commercial landings and revenue for Mid-Atlantic species occur in lease areas.
  • Development will affect species differently, negatively affecting species that prefer soft bottom habitat while potentially benefiting species that prefer hard structured habitat.
  • Planned wind areas overlap with important right whale foraging habitats, and altered local oceanography could affect right whale prey availability. Development also brings increased vessel strike risk and the potential impacts of pile driving noise.
35 / 40

Current plans for rapid buildout of offshore wind in a patchwork of areas spreads the impacts differentially throughout the region Evaluating the impacts to scientific surveys has begun.

EAFM Risk Assessment: 2023 Update (all methods to be reviewed/revised this year)

Species level risk elements

Species Assess Fstatus Bstatus FW1Pred FW1Prey FW2Prey Climate DistShift EstHabitat
Ocean Quahog lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest highest modhigh lowest
Surfclam lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest modhigh modhigh lowest
Summer flounder lowest lowest lowmod lowest lowest lowest lowmod modhigh highest
Scup lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest lowmod modhigh highest
Black sea bass lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest modhigh modhigh highest
Atl. mackerel lowest highest highest lowest lowest lowest lowmod modhigh lowest
Chub mackerel highest lowmod lowmod lowest lowest lowest na na lowest
Butterfish lowest lowest lowmod lowest lowest lowest lowest highest lowest
Longfin squid lowmod lowmod lowmod lowest lowest lowmod lowest modhigh lowest
Shortfin squid highest lowmod lowmod lowest lowest lowmod lowest highest lowest
Golden tilefish lowest lowest lowmod lowest lowest lowest modhigh lowest lowest
Blueline tilefish highest highest modhigh lowest lowest lowest modhigh lowest lowest
Bluefish lowest lowest lowmod lowest lowest lowest lowest modhigh highest
Spiny dogfish lowest highest lowmod lowest lowest lowest lowest highest lowest
Monkfish highest lowmod lowmod lowest lowest lowest lowest modhigh lowest
Unmanaged forage na na na lowest lowmod lowmod na na na
Deepsea corals na na na lowest lowest lowest na na na
  • RT assessment decreased Spiny dogfish Assess, risk to low and increased Fstatus risk to high
  • RT assessment decreased bluefish Bstatus risk from high to low-moderate
  • RT assessment increased Illex Assess risk from low-moderate to high

Ecosystem level risk elements

System EcoProd CommRev RecVal FishRes1 FishRes4 FleetDiv Social ComFood RecFood
Mid-Atlantic lowmod modhigh lowest lowest modhigh lowest lowmod highest modhigh
  • Recreational value risk decreased from low-moderate to low

Species and Sector level risk elements

Species MgtControl TecInteract OceanUse RegComplex Discards Allocation
Ocean Quahog-C lowest lowest lowmod lowest modhigh lowest
Surfclam-C lowest lowest lowmod lowest modhigh lowest
Summer flounder-R modhigh lowest lowmod modhigh highest highest
Summer flounder-C lowmod modhigh lowmod modhigh modhigh lowest
Scup-R lowmod lowest lowmod modhigh modhigh highest
Scup-C lowest lowmod modhigh modhigh modhigh lowest
Black sea bass-R highest lowest modhigh modhigh highest highest
Black sea bass-C highest lowmod highest modhigh highest lowest
Atl. mackerel-R lowmod lowest lowest lowmod lowest lowest
Atl. mackerel-C lowest lowmod modhigh highest lowmod highest
Butterfish-C lowest lowmod modhigh modhigh modhigh lowest
Longfin squid-C lowest modhigh highest modhigh highest lowest
Shortfin squid-C lowmod lowmod lowmod modhigh lowest highest
Golden tilefish-R na lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest
Golden tilefish-C lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest
Blueline tilefish-R lowmod lowest lowest lowmod lowest lowest
Blueline tilefish-C lowmod lowest lowest lowmod lowest lowest
Bluefish-R lowmod lowest lowest lowmod modhigh highest
Bluefish-C lowest lowest lowmod lowmod lowmod lowest
Spiny dogfish-R lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest lowest
Spiny dogfish-C lowest modhigh modhigh modhigh lowmod lowest
Chub mackerel-C lowest lowmod lowmod lowmod lowest lowest
Unmanaged forage lowest lowest modhigh lowest lowest lowest
Deepsea corals na na modhigh na na na
  • Management section not updated--to be revised this year
36 / 40

Comments on overall risk assessment for EOP to consider?

Priority requests from managers

  • Highest priority requests in progress
    • System level thresholds and reference points
    • Trend analysis, inflections and break points
    • Regime shifts
  • Identified some gaps
    • Short term forecasts
    • Management complexity
    • Recreational bycatch
  • Stock level indicators best addressed in assessment?

bluefish ESP conceptual model

37 / 40

The Bluefish Research Track ESP was presented December 7 2022, and was well received by CIE reviewers. Reviewers commented that it was the most complete treatment of a stock assessment "ecosystem ToR" they had seen, and formed a good basis for integrating further ecosystem information into the stock assessment in the future. The full ESP document is available as a working paper from the stock assessment data portal.

In addition to the conceptual model, a summary table was developed for bluefish ecosystem indicators. This type of summary could contribute to OFL CV decisions with further information on how these indicator levels affect uncertainty in assessment.

THANK YOU! SOEs made possible by (at least) 71 contributors from 20+ institutions

Kimberly Bastille
Aaron Beaver (Anchor QEA)
Andy Beet
Ruth Boettcher (Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries)
Mandy Bromilow (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office)
Zhuomin Chen (U Connecticut)
Joseph Caracappa
Doug Christel (GARFO)
Patricia Clay
Lisa Colburn
Jennifer Cudney (NMFS Atlantic HMS Management Division)
Tobey Curtis (NMFS Atlantic HMS Management Division)
Art Degaetano (Cornell U)
Geret DePiper
Dan Dorfman (NOAA-NOS-NCCOS)
Hubert du Pontavice
Emily Farr (NMFS Office of Habitat Conservation)
Michael Fogarty
Paula Fratantoni
Kevin Friedland
Marjy Friedrichs (Virginia Institute of Marine Science)
Sarah Gaichas
Ben Galuardi (GARFO)
Avijit Gangopadhyay (School for Marine Science and Technology UMass Dartmouth)
James Gartland (Virginia Institute of Marine Science)
Lori Garzio (Rutgers University)
Glen Gawarkiewicz (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution)
Sean Hardison
Kimberly Hyde
John Kosik
Steve Kress (National Audubon Society’s Seabird Restoration Program)
Young-Oh Kwon (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution)
Scott Large
Gabe Larouche (Cornell U)
Daniel Linden
Andrew Lipsky
Sean Lucey
Don Lyons (National Audubon Society’s Seabird Restoration Program)
Chris Melrose
Shannon Meseck
Ryan Morse
Ray Mroch (SEFSC)
Brandon Muffley (MAFMC)
Kimberly Murray
Janet Nye (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
Chris Orphanides
Richard Pace
Debi Palka
Tom Parham (Maryland DNR)
Charles Perretti
CJ Pellerin (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office)
Kristin Precoda
Grace Roskar (NMFS Office of Habitat Conservation)
Grace Saba (Rutgers)
Vincent Saba
Sarah Salois
Chris Schillaci (GARFO)
Amy Schueller (SEFSC)
Teresa Schwemmer (Stony Brook University)
Dave Secor (CBL)
Angela Silva
Adrienne Silver (UMass/SMAST)
Emily Slesinger (Rutgers University)
Laurel Smith
Talya tenBrink (GARFO)
Bruce Vogt (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office)
Ron Vogel (UMD Cooperative Institute for Satellite Earth System Studies and NOAA/NESDIS Center for Satellite Applications and Research)
John Walden
Harvey Walsh
Changhua Weng
Timothy White (Environmental Studies Program BOEM)
Sarah Wilkin (NMFS Office of Protected Resources)
Mark Wuenschel
38 / 40

Additional resources

References

Bastille, K. et al. (2021). "Improving the IEA Approach Using Principles of Open Data Science". In: Coastal Management 49.1. Publisher: Taylor & Francis _ eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2021.1846155, pp. 72-89. ISSN: 0892-0753. DOI: 10.1080/08920753.2021.1846155. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2021.1846155 (visited on Apr. 16, 2021).

DePiper, G. S. et al. (2017). "Operationalizing integrated ecosystem assessments within a multidisciplinary team: lessons learned from a worked example". En. In: ICES Journal of Marine Science 74.8, pp. 2076-2086. ISSN: 1054-3139. DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsx038. URL: https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/article/74/8/2076/3094701 (visited on Mar. 09, 2018).

DePiper, G. et al. (2021). "Learning by doing: collaborative conceptual modelling as a path forward in ecosystem-based management". In: ICES Journal of Marine Science. ISSN: 1054-3139. DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsab054. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsab054 (visited on Apr. 15, 2021).

Gaichas, S. K. et al. (2018). "Implementing Ecosystem Approaches to Fishery Management: Risk Assessment in the US Mid-Atlantic". In: Frontiers in Marine Science 5. ISSN: 2296-7745. DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2018.00442. URL: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2018.00442/abstract (visited on Nov. 20, 2018).

Muffley, B. et al. (2021). "There Is no I in EAFM Adapting Integrated Ecosystem Assessment for Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management". In: Coastal Management 49.1. Publisher: Taylor & Francis _ eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2021.1846156, pp. 90-106. ISSN: 0892-0753. DOI: 10.1080/08920753.2021.1846156. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2021.1846156 (visited on Apr. 16, 2021).

Perretti, C. et al. (2017). "Regime shifts in fish recruitment on the Northeast US Continental Shelf". En. In: Marine Ecology Progress Series 574, pp. 1-11. ISSN: 0171-8630, 1616-1599. DOI: 10.3354/meps12183. URL: http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v574/p1-11/ (visited on Feb. 10, 2022).

39 / 40











Thank you!

Questions?

40 / 40

Goal: include climate and ecosystem information in management decision processes

Overview

  • What types of decisions are made?

    • Single species catch limits
    • Allocations to fleets or areas
    • Coordination across boundaries and sectors
    • Multispecies and ecosystem level tradeoffs

  • How can ecosystem information support these decisions?

    • Key tools: ecosystem reporting, risk assessment, scenario planning, managment strategy evaluation
    • Developing decision processes along with products

Word cloud based on Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council EAFM Guidance Document

EAFM Policy Guidance Doc Word Cloud

2 / 40
Paused

Help

Keyboard shortcuts

↑, ←, Pg Up, k Go to previous slide
↓, →, Pg Dn, Space, j Go to next slide
Home Go to first slide
End Go to last slide
Number + Return Go to specific slide
b / m / f Toggle blackout / mirrored / fullscreen mode
c Clone slideshow
p Toggle presenter mode
t Restart the presentation timer
?, h Toggle this help
Esc Back to slideshow