End-to-end modeling as part of an integrated research program in the Bering Sea

Abstract

a b s t r a c tTraditionally, the advice provided to fishery managers has focused on the trade-offs between short-and long-term yields, and between future resource size and expected future catches. The harvest control rules that are used to provide management advice consequently relate catches to stock biomass levels expressed relative to reference biomass levels. There are, however, additional trade-offs. Ecosystembased fisheries management (EBFM) aims to consider fish and fisheries in their ecological context, taking into account physical, biological, economic, and social factors. However, making EBFM operational remains challenging. It is generally recognized that end-to-end modeling should be a key part of implementing EBFM, along with harvest control rules that use information in addition to estimates of stock biomass to provide recommendations for management actions. Here we outline the process for selecting among alternative management strategies in an ecosystem context and summarize a Fieldintegrated End-To-End modeling program, or FETE, intended to implement this process as part of the Bering Sea Project. A key aspect of this project was that, from the start, the FETE included a management strategy evaluation component to compare management strategies. Effective use of end-to-end modeling requires that the models developed for a system are indeed integrated across climate drivers, lower trophic levels, fish population dynamics, and fisheries and their management. We summarize the steps taken by the program managers to promote integration of modeling efforts by multiple investigators and highlight the lessons learned during the project that can be used to guide future use and design of end-to-end models.

Integrated Modeling to Evaluate Climate Change Impacts on Coupled Social-Ecological Systems in Alaska

“…Movements are determined from an evaluation of the relative quality of the current location with respect to foraging needs (demands on metabolic rate and prey availability) to adjacent cells within the ROMS Bering 10K grid (Figure 3). In longterm projections, small errors can accumulate in a spatial model of this complexity (Punt et al, 2016b). To address this issue, FEAST can be nudged by initiating the model using the projected environmental conditions at mid-century (2030-2050) and end of century (2080-2100) and seeding the starting abundance of FIGURE 3 | Geometry of the ROMS domain.…”

A metabarcoding approach for the feeding habits of European hake in the Adriatic Sea

“…Quantitative assessment of food habits is an important aspect of fisheries management as the knowledge of both predator and prey resources can help guide management efforts aimed at increasing fish production. Accurate description of fish diet and feeding habits in aquatic environments (Chipps & Garvey, ) in fact provides the basis for a more comprehensive understanding of dynamics of target species by including their trophic interactions (e.g., Angelini et al., ; Punt, Ortiz, Aydin, Hunt, & Wiese, ), a basic requirement for ecosystem‐based fishery management (Möllmann et al., ; Pikitch et al., ; Zhou et al., ). For instance, the reconstruction of trophic links between marine fishes allows including food interactions into assessments (Punt et al., ) or more generally may serve as a basis for setting a balanced exploitation across trophic levels (Garcia, Rice, & Charles, ; Garcia et al., ), thereby preventing the fishing‐induced trophic level decline (Shackell, Frank, Fisher, Petrie, & Leggett, ).…”

“…Accurate description of fish diet and feeding habits in aquatic environments (Chipps & Garvey, ) in fact provides the basis for a more comprehensive understanding of dynamics of target species by including their trophic interactions (e.g., Angelini et al., ; Punt, Ortiz, Aydin, Hunt, & Wiese, ), a basic requirement for ecosystem‐based fishery management (Möllmann et al., ; Pikitch et al., ; Zhou et al., ). For instance, the reconstruction of trophic links between marine fishes allows including food interactions into assessments (Punt et al., ) or more generally may serve as a basis for setting a balanced exploitation across trophic levels (Garcia, Rice, & Charles, ; Garcia et al., ), thereby preventing the fishing‐induced trophic level decline (Shackell, Frank, Fisher, Petrie, & Leggett, ). Overall, approaches based on food webs can provide a fisheries management advice based on broader and more realistic context than single species approaches (see Link, ; Mackinson, Deas, Beveridge, & Casey, ; Walters, Christensen, Martell, & Kitchell, ).…”

Recommendations on the Use of Ecosystem Modeling for Informing Ecosystem‐Based Fisheries Management and Restoration Outcomes in the Gulf of Mexico

“…The results of ecosystem models can have conceptual, strategic, or tactical roles in resource management (FAO 2008;Collie et al 2016). Depending on the situation, ecosystem models may be more useful as conceptual models for communication, as strategic analyses to inform resource managers about the broad impacts of management measures (e.g., long-term yields that consider food web interactions; see PFMC and NMFS 2015;Chagaris et al 2015b;Grüss et al 2016c), or as a means of delivering tactical advice (e.g., proposing harvest quotas over a 2-3-year window; see examples in Holsman et al 2016, NPFMC 2016, and Punt et al 2016b). To date, there have been relatively few examples of ecosystem modeling being used for tactical fisheries management advice or broad-scale ecosystem restoration.…”