Abstract
Management strategy evaluation (MSE) provides a simulation framework to test the performance of living marine resource management. MSE has now been adopted broadly for use in single-species fishery management, often using a relatively simple ‘operating model’ that projects population dynamics of one species forward in time. However, many challenges in ecosystem-based management involve tradeoffs between multiple species and interactions of multiple stressors. Here we use complex operating models, multi-species ecosystem models of the California Current and Nordic and Barents Seas, to test threshold harvest control rules that explicitly address the linkage between predators and prey, and between the forage needs of predators and fisheries. Our investigation led to three main results. First, consistent with studies based on single-species operating models, we found that compared to constant F=FMSY policies, threshold rules led to higher target stock biomass for Pacific hake (Merluccius productus) in the California Current and mackerel (Scomber scombrus) in the Nordic and Barents Seas. Performance in terms of catch of these species varied depending partly on the biomass and recovery trajectory for the simulated stock. Secondly, the multi-species operating models and the harvest control rules that linked fishing mortality rates to prey biomass (zooplankton) led to increased catch variability; this stemmed directly from the harvest rule that frequently adjusted Pacific hake or mackerel fishing rates in response to zooplankton, which are highly variable in these two ecosystems. Thirdly, tests suggested that threshold rules that increased fishing when productivity (zooplankton) declined had the potential for strong ecosystem effects on other species. These effects were most apparent in the Nordic and Barents Seas simulations. Further developing and testing such ecosystem-level considerations can be achieved with the Atlantis end-to-end ecosystem models applied here, which have the added benefit of tracking the follow-on effects of the harvest control rule on the broader ecosystem.
Highlights
Management strategy evaluation (MSE) provides a simulation framework to test the performance of living marine resource management (Sainsbury, 2000; Punt et al, 2016a)
We focus on major target fish stocks in the California Current and the Nordic and Barents Seas: Pacific hake and mackerel (Scomber scombrus), respectively
Median effects across simulations were as high as 15%, and the performance of individual simulations varied, for metrics related to primary production (“PP”) and for Mean Trophic Level of Biomass
Summary
Management strategy evaluation (MSE) provides a simulation framework to test the performance of living marine resource management (Sainsbury, 2000; Punt et al, 2016a). We focus on major target fish stocks in the California Current and the Nordic and Barents Seas: Pacific hake and mackerel (Scomber scombrus), respectively For these target species, we simulate alternative threshold harvest control rules that either increase or decrease fishing rates when forage productivity declines, and compare these rules to a simpler threshold harvest control rule that approximates current management policy in these regions. For the California Current, this was a 79% reduction in fishing mortality rate from the simple threshold rule (based on 79% of hake diet from euphausiids in the base case; Wippel et al, 2017), and for the Nordic and Barents Seas this was a 75% reduction in fishing mortality rate (based on Iversen, 2004) This strong reduction in fishing illustrates a case where fishery managers institute very precautionary policies, assuming little ability of hake or mackerel to locate zooplankton aggregations or switch prey when productivity declines. The biomass responses of modeled groups in the last years of the simulation were plotted relative to biomass in the FMSY case, and were aggregated into guilds, as in Olsen et al (2018): “mammals,” “seabirds,” “shark,” “demersal fish,” “pelagic fish,” “squid,” ”filter feeder,” ”epibenthos,” ”zooplankton,” ”primary producer,” and “infauna.”
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
