Case studies demonstrate capacity for a structured planning process for ecosystem-based fisheries management

Abstract

Structured, systematic processes for decision-making can facilitate implementation of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM). In US fisheries management, existing fishery ecosystem plans (FEPs) are primarily descriptive documents — not action-oriented planning processes. “Next-generation” FEPs extend existing FEPs by translating ecosystem principles into action through a structured process, including identifying and prioritizing objectives and evaluating trade-offs while assessing alternative management strategies for meeting objectives. We illustrate the potential for implementing a structured decision-making process for EBFM by reviewing fisheries management case studies through the lens of the next-generation FEP process, highlighting two perspectives. First, across case studies almost all steps occur, many occurring in multiple regions, indicating scientific and fisheries management capacity exists to conduct structured process components. Second, adjustments would be needed to transition to next-generation FEPs, as existing activity is rarely conducted within a fully structured, integrated process and examples of certain steps are scarce, but existing examples can guide future management. Implementing ongoing activity within next-generation FEPs would likely streamline fisheries management activity, saving time and resources while improving outcomes for stakeholders and ecosystems.

High collocation of sand lance and protected top predators: Implications for conservation and management

“…Inferring predator dependence on prey species through spatial overlap studies may better inform management of prey populations (Eero et al, 2012; Koehn et al, 2020). Further, understanding where and when predators aggregate in response to prey can help in assessing and managing negative interactions between predators and human activities (Santora et al, 2020).…”

Incorporating knowledge of changes in climatic, oceanographic and ecological conditions in Canadian stock assessments

“…In most of the assessments considered in this review, environmental drivers consisted of a single dominant feature of the ecosystem that had undergone substantial change over the stock's history, although sometimes correlated with other features or metrics for the region of interest (e.g., climate and oceanographic indices). Many have advocated for the development of a systematic framework to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of the potential effects of anthropogenic and environmental drivers on aquatic stocks (Koehn et al, 2020; Link et al, 2020; Marshall et al, 2019) and while such proposals have often been aimed in the context of the more holistic ecosystem‐based fisheries management, which is focussed at the multispecies level, the basic principles could serve as a base for the broader application of an EAFM in the Canadian system.…”

“…States considers environmental variables in management advice through detailed Ecosystem Status Reports for large marine ecosystems (Craig et al, 2021;Ferriss & Zador, 2021;Gove et al, 2019;Harvey et al, 2021;Ortiz & Zador, 2021;Siddon, 2021). Ecosystem "report cards" or overviews are also used in Australia (Gaughan & Santoro, 2018), Europe (AORA, 2017;ICES, 2016aICES, , 2016bICES, , 2016cICES, , 2016dICES, , 2017aICES, , 2017b environmental drivers on aquatic stocks (Koehn et al, 2020;Link et al, 2020;Marshall et al, 2019) and while such proposals have often been aimed in the context of the more holistic ecosystembased fisheries management, which is focussed at the multispecies level, the basic principles could serve as a base for the broader application of an EAFM in the Canadian system.…”

Tipping point realized in cod fishery

“…Accounting for productivity changes (here year-class strength) is a first principle of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) and modelling studies have demonstrated that considering environmental changes can prevent fish stock collapses and can help accounting for the effects of climate change 72 – 75 . EBFM implementation is lacking behind in the EU compared to the United States 76 – 80 , while practical use of environmental information in fisheries management is deficient worldwide 81 , 82 . For example, in the advice framework for EU fish stocks, environmental context, although provided in ecosystem overviews, is still not directly incorporated in the advice.…”