Transcript SSC Report to CFMC

SSC Report to CFMC
152nd CFMC Meeting held April 21-22, 2015
SSC Meeting held March 24-26, 2015
National SSC Workshop V
• ABC Specification for Data-Limited and ModelResistant Stocks
• Implementation of National Standard 2 in the
Face of Uncertainty
• Evaluating existing ABC control rules: issues,
challenges and solutions
• Incorporating ecological, environmental, and
climate variability in stock assessment and
ecosystem based fishery management
• Building habitat condition in the stock
assessment process and fishery management
strategies
National SSC Workshop V
• Data limitations -- Caribbean and Western Pacific were clearly at a
disadvantage compared to other RFMCs.
• Suggests the two Councils could work collaboratively toward new
metrics for assessment, with a first step being the development
of a white paper on the issue.
• New guidance coming for Natl. Std. 2 that may allow alternatives
• E.g., mean length or catch-per-unit-effort to monitor stocks and
adjust ACLs. Multiple indicators may be robust.
• Approach would require annual evaluations, but these could be
automated.
• New metrics would not replace attempts to estimate MSY, but
would be an interim approach.
National SSC Workshop V
• A review of habitat information (including water
quality parameters such as temperature) showed that
these could be valuable co-variables that could be used
to enhance stock abundance estimates and refine
distribution models.
• The Caribbean was relatively rich in habitat data
relative to other RFMCs, but this was balanced by the
fact that much of our reef resources were very habitat
dependent, so our needs are perhaps greater.
• At the moment within the US Caribbean, habitat
information is not being used in any assessment, either
with fishery-independent or –dependent data.
National SSC Workshop V
• Climate change – Caribbean may have species that are
more restrictive in their potential for response.
• Organisms are thought to be near their thermal limit
• There is no continuous habitat for species adapted to
higher temperature to migrate into the region, or for
current species to move to cooler waters (except by
going deeper).
• Climate change impacts area already evidenced in the
region:
– occurrence and severity of coral bleaching
– loss of commercial sponges
Short Issues
Video from Grammanik Bank
• Showed large Agaricia formations with recent damage,
potentially from boats attempting to anchor.
• The SSC recommends that this video be presented at the next
CFMC meeting
ACL Overages (for Puerto Rico)
• No overages were reported - no action was required by the SSC.
ABC Control Rule for Data-poor Stocks
• Tiered system depending upon data available.
• Data-poor stocks would occupy the lowest tier, with 2 sub-tiers
– (1) species are considered overfished or undergoing overfishing, (2) other
species.
– Difference between these two would be the size of the buffer to be applied.
• Data poor approaches will be addressed in the upcoming SEDAR
Best Practices Workshop.
Red Hind – St. Thomas/St. John
• Red hind was just reviewed under the last SEDAR
• No way to assess status relative to the ACL with
the available data.
– no way to determine an acceptable reference point
– MSY is supposed to be the basis for setting OFL  ACL
• Assessment was hampered by:
– limited length data since the initial closure
– survey data from spawning aggregation were equally
limited in recent years.
Red Hind – St. Thomas/St. John
1. The 2000-2005 period used to set the OFL/ACL incorporated the
increase in the spawning fish density at the Hind Bank . The
increase in red hind occurred from 2000 to 2004, with no net
improvement since 2005.
2. The overall correlation between total grouper landings and density
of aggregating red hind breaks down in the most recent years.
3. The landings data do no warrant an increase in the ACL since
current landings are substantially below the ACL, and dropping.
4. On the basis of the above, there is no rationale for thinking that a
higher ACL could be developed or justified.
5. There is still only a limited time series for red hind specific data,
and this time series is too short for assessment purposes. These
data do show that red hind constitute between 85 and 91% of the
grouper catch.
Red Hind – St. Thomas/St. John
• The SSC notes that any alterations to the
existing ACLs will require the input of new
data.
• The SSC recommends that an assessment of
the performance of the new reporting forms
be conducted to ensure they are providing the
necessary information for future stock
assessment
Island-Based Plans (IBPs)
The SSC questioned the proposed objectives of
the IBPs:
• The SSC had not been involved in the rationale
or discussion by the CFMC in their decision to
move to IBPs
• Relevant to issue of species selection
• Concern that there may be unreasonable
expectations relative to matters in which the
SSC will have to be involved, especially the
setting of OFLs and ABCs.
Island-Based Plans (IBPs)
Objectives are stated within the EIS and were
summarized as follows:
• Constituent – Fishers within each area felt
their fisheries differed significantly with
respect to species, gears, habitats, etc.
• Management – Differences above warrant
separate management programs.
• Science – There are aspects of stock structure
that may be different among islands (The SSC
felt that benefits here could fall either way)
Species Selection Criteria
Concerns and Considerations
Species selection in a larger context, e.g.,
• Action 1 – Select species to include under
management
• Action 2 – Designation of FMUs (and indicator
species?)
• Action 3 – Determination of reference points
• Action 4 – Determination of ecosystem species
Species currently under the Coral FMP
Species Selection Criteria - Recommendations
Guiding Principles
• Ecosystem-based Approach – given the complex
nature of marine ecosystems and the many potential
ways in which they can be exploited, it is better to
include species within the plan unless there is basis for
exclusion.
• Precautionary Principle – in the face of uncertainty, it
is better to include a species for management than to
exclude it.
• Simplification of Management – the number of
species that can be individually managed is limited
with currently available resources (the SSC
recommends that species be grouped into a much
smaller set of FMUs)
Species Selection Criteria - Recommendations
Guiding Principles
• The availability and quality of data for many species are
insufficient for developing hard cut-off points in the
application of selection criteria
• Actual selection process (application of the selection
criteria) will be a subjective process that will require
the collective use of expert judgment in almost all
cases.
• The SSC recommends that the actual species selection
process be conducted by an independent group of
experts representing key stakeholders (NGO and
academic scientists, agency personnel, fishers
(commercial recreational and aquarium), etc.).
Species Selection Criteria - Recommendations
• Biology – defined as question of
vulnerability/productivity. Is species particularly at
risk?
• Habitat Specificity– defined as a question of
vulnerability due to particular dependence on limited
or vulnerable habitat during some life stage
• Range – defined as whether species is either 1)
effectively limited to local waters, 2) limited to EEZ, 3)
spans both, or 4) is a HMS
• Economic Importance – defined as total economic
value, not just ex-vessel price. This would include, for
example, nonconsumptive use, recreational value,
targeted species, “filler” species and socio-cultural
importance
Species Selection Criteria - Recommendations
• Target species vs Bycatch
• Landings – to be used first to establish lower and upper
thresholds for automatic rejection from or inclusion in
an FMP, respectively.
• Ecological Value – defined as having a unique or large
ecological function relative to habitat (esp. coral reefs),
or trophic/community structure, e.g., keystone species,
apex predator, key forage species such that
management is needed to sustain that function.
• Protected/Management Status – defined as whether
the species is fully protected or partially protected
within an existing management framework within EEZ
or local waters.
Application of Criteria – Recommendations
Species Currently Under Management
STARTING LIST 1 1All species currently in Reef Fish, Conch, Lobster FMPs
↓
RANGE = EEZ → No (= Estuarine, Coastal, Intertidal) → Excluded
↓
Yes
↓
RANKING2 ON: 2Based on expert opinion guided by available data
Biological Vulnerability │
Habitat Specificity
│ —→ High on Any one → Stay included
Ecological Value
│
↓
No
↓
RANKING ON:
Economic Importance3 │
By-Catch4
│—→ Low on All three → Excluded
Effective Range5
│ 5degree occurs or is exploited within the EEZ (critical life stage)
——————
↓ High on any
Stay included
Application of Criteria – Recommendations
Species Not Currently Under Management
STARTING LIST1 1in comm. or recr. landings, TIP data or other indicators
↓
RANGE = EEZ → No (= Estuarine, Coastal, Intertidal) → Not included
↓
Yes
↓
Not included
UNDER HMS MGT → Yes →
↓
No
↓
2Species landings
WITHIN 90% CUM. LANDINGS2 → Yes → Include
approximately 1% of total
↓
No
↓
RANKING ON:
Biological Vulnerability
│
Habitat Specificity
│
Economic Importance
│—→ High on any one → Include
Ecological Value
│
Effective Range = EEZ
│
↓
No
↓
Not included
Application of Criteria – Recommendations
Species in Coral FMP
• SSC recommends that all species currently under
the Coral Plan initially be brought into each island
FMP
• SSC recommends that ALL species of stony coral
and soft coral documented for the region (deep
and shallow) and not currently within the Coral
FMP be added
• SSC recommends that additional species be
added based on ecological value or vulnerability,
e.g. sponges
• For aquarium species only, evaluate distribution
relative to EEZ