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

State of the Ecosystem

Lessons Learned from US Reporting

CAUSES
7 November 2023

Sarah K. Gaichas1, Brandon Muffley2, Geret DePiper1, Kimberly Bastille1, 3,
Kimberly J. W. Hyde1, Scott Large1, Sean M. Lucey1, and Laurel Smith1

1NOAA NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Woods Hole, MA, USA;
2Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Dover, DE, USA;
3Ocean Associates Inc, Arlington, VA, USA

1 / 21

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, 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 / 21

Lessons Learned

Develop reporting for and with a specific audience:

  • Show up to management meetings. Regularly.

  • Center on management objectives.

  • Focus on management implications.

  • Listen, and respond to requests.

  • Iterate.

3 / 21

Lessons Learned

Develop reporting for and with a specific audience:

  • Show up to management meetings. Regularly.

  • Center on management objectives.

  • Focus on management implications.

  • Listen, and respond to requests.

  • Iterate.

"How can we use this?"

  • Collaborate across disciplines, with managers and stakeholders.

  • Prepare some examples.

  • Expect them to be changed!

  • Listen, and respond to requests.

  • Iterate.

3 / 21

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

4 / 21

Northeast US State of the Ecosystem (SOE) reporting

Improving ecosystem information and synthesis for fishery managers

2023 SOE Mid Atlantic Cover Page

5 / 21

Lesson: Synthesize

Characterizing ecosystem change for fishery management with synthesis themes

  • 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 / 21

Lesson: Short and Focused

  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
7 / 21

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2023:

Performance relative to management objectives

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
8 / 21

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2023:

Risks to meeting fishery management objectives

Climate: warming and changing oceanography continue

  • Heat waves and Gulf Stream instability
  • Estuarine, coastal, and offshore habitats affected, with range of species responses
  • Distribution shifts complicate management
  • Multiple fish with poor condition, declining productivity

Other ocean uses: offshore wind development

  • Current revenue in proposed areas
    • 1-34% by port (some with EJ concerns)
    • up to 17% by managed species
  • Different development impacts for species preferring soft bottom vs. hard bottom
  • Overlap with important right whale foraging habitats, increased vessel strike and noise risks
  • Rapid buildout in patchwork of areas
  • Scientific survey mitigation required

 
 
     
 

9 / 21

(not) 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.

10 / 21

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 Change Implications: focus on managed species

Climate*: 6 low, 3 low-mod, 4 mod-high, 1 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.

 
 
     

*Climate vulnerability and Distribution Shift risk levels from climate vulnerability analysis (Hare, et al., 2016)

DistShift*: 2 low, 9 mod-high, 3 high risk species

  • Managed species shifts already impacting allocation discussions

New Indicator: protected species shifts

11 / 21

SOE use in management: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC)

US East Coast map highlighting Mid-Atlantic council jurisdiction

MAFMC fishery management plans and species

Source: http://www.mafmc.org/fishery-management-plans
12 / 21

Integrated Ecosystem Assessment and the MAFMC Ecosystem Approach

Diverse stakeholders agreed that an ecosystem approach was necessary. Developing and implementing EAFM is done in collaboration between managers, stakeholders, and scientists. https://www.mafmc.org/eafm

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

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

Mid-Atlantic EAFM framework with full details in speaker notes

  • Direct link between ecosystem reporting and risk assessment
  • Conceptual model links across risk elements for fisheries, species
  • Management strategy evaluation includes key risks
13 / 21

(Gaichas, et al., 2016) The Council’s EAFM framework has similarities to the IEA loop. It uses risk assessment as a first step to prioritize combinations of managed species, fleets, and ecosystem interactions for consideration. Second, a conceptual model is developed identifying key environmental, ecological, social, economic, and management linkages for a high-priority fishery. Third, quantitative modeling addressing Council-specified questions and based on interactions identified in the conceptual model is applied to evaluate alternative management strategies that best balance management objectives. As strategies are implemented, outcomes are monitored and the process is adjusted, and/or another priority identified in risk assessment can be addressed.

State of the Ecosystem → MAFMC Risk assessent example: Commercial revenue

This element is applied at the ecosystem level. Revenue serves as a proxy for commercial profits.

Risk Level Definition
Low No trend and low variability in revenue
Low-Moderate Increasing or high variability in revenue
Moderate-High Significant long term revenue decrease
High Significant recent decrease in revenue

Ranked moderate-high risk due to the significant long term revenue decrease for Mid-Atlantic managed species (red points in top plot)

Key: Black = Revenue of all species combined; Red = Revenue of MAFMC managed species

14 / 21

State of the Ecosystem → MAFMC Risk assessent example: Commercial revenue

This element is applied at the ecosystem level. Revenue serves as a proxy for commercial profits.

Risk Level Definition
Low No trend and low variability in revenue
Low-Moderate Increasing or high variability in revenue
Moderate-High Significant long term revenue decrease
High Significant recent decrease in revenue

Ranked moderate-high risk due to the significant long term revenue decrease for Mid-Atlantic managed species (red points in top plot)

Key: Black = Revenue of all species combined; Red = Revenue of MAFMC managed species

Risk element: CommRev, unchanged

SOE Implications: Recent change driven by benthos. Monitor changes in climate and landings drivers:

  • Climate risk element: Surfclams and ocean quahogs are sensitive to ocean warming and acidification.
  • pH in surfclam summer habitat is approaching, but not yet at, pH affecting surfclam growth
14 / 21

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
15 / 21

SOE use in management: MAFMC

  • Based on risk assessment, the Council selected summer flounder as high-risk fishery for conceptual modeling

Mid-Atlantic EAFM framework

16 / 21

In this interactive circular graph visualization, model elements identified as important by the Council (through risk assessment) and by the working group (through a range of experience and expertise) are at the perimeter of the circle. Elements are defined in detail in the last section of this page. Relationships between elements are represented as links across the center of the circle to other elements on the perimeter. Links from a model element that affect another element start wide at the base and are color coded to match the category of the element they affect.Hover over a perimeter section (an element) to see all relationships for that element, including links from other elements. Hover over a link to see what it connects. Links by default show text for the two elements and the direction of the relationship (1 for relationship, 0 for no relationship--most links are one direction).For example, hovering over the element "Total Landings" in the full model shows that the working group identified the elements affected by landings as Seafood Production, Recreational Value, and Commercial Profits (three links leading out from landings), and the elements affecting landings as Fluke SSB, Fluke Distributional Shift, Risk Buffering, Management Control, Total Discards, and Shoreside Support (6 links leading into Total Landings).

 
 
 

static conceptual model discards

MSE results: can improve on current management, but distribution shifts lower expectations

Results for 2 of 16 performance metrics:

Summer flounder MSE results by OM

August MAFMC briefing materials and full results on the web

17 / 21
  • Linked recreational demand and population dynamics model
  • Alternative operating model included northward distribution shift as change in availability by state
  • Rank order of management options maintained, but degraded performance when considering ecosystem change

Lesson: Prioritize 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

18 / 21

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.

Entry points for ecosystem information in management decisions: where to start?

Management decisions

  1. What are our issues and goals?
  2. Current decisions
    • Stock assessments
    • Advice on catch levels
    • Harvest control rules
  3. New (current) decisions
    • Habitat change or restoration
    • Changing species distribution and interactions
    • Tradeoffs between fisheries
    • Tradeoffs between ocean use sectors

Methods and tools

  1. Stakeholder engagement, surveys, strategic planning
  2. Add information to current process
    • Ecosystem ToRs, overviews, SOE
    • Risk or uncertainty assessments
    • Management strategy evaluation
  3. Integrate across current processes
    • Risk assessment
    • Conceptual models
    • Scenario planning
    • MSE (again)

State of the Ecosystem data on github https://github.com/NOAA-EDAB/ecodata

19 / 21

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
20 / 21

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).

Gaichas, S. K. et al. (2016). "A Framework for Incorporating Species, Fleet, Habitat, and Climate Interactions into Fishery Management". In: Frontiers in Marine Science 3. ISSN: 2296-7745. DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00105. URL: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2016.00105/full (visited on Apr. 29, 2020).

Hare, J. A. et al. (2016). "A Vulnerability Assessment of Fish and Invertebrates to Climate Change on the Northeast U.S. Continental Shelf". In: PLOS ONE 11.2, p. e0146756. ISSN: 1932-6203. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146756. URL: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0146756 (visited on Mar. 01, 2016).

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).

21 / 21

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, 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 / 21
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