1 / 32

Management strategy evaluation for North Sea haddock using FLR

Jo King:. Management strategy evaluation for North Sea haddock using FLR. Coby L. Needle (FRS). Fisheries Management Evaluation Frameworks in Action: The EFIMAS Conference Renaissance Hôtel, Brussels, 11-12 March 2008. Outline. Management plan evaluation (MSE) - rationale

fishman
Download Presentation

Management strategy evaluation for North Sea haddock using FLR

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Jo King: Management strategy evaluation for North Sea haddock using FLR Coby L. Needle (FRS) Fisheries Management Evaluation Frameworks in Action: The EFIMAS Conference Renaissance Hôtel, Brussels, 11-12 March 2008

  2. Outline • Management plan evaluation (MSE) - rationale • North Sea haddock management plans • History of evaluation • The original and revised plans • The results • Conclusions and future work • Stakeholder view (Mike Park, SFF)

  3. Management simulations: rationale • Simulation models: • Framework for evaluation of management strategies • Test many different strategies • Determine risk of adverse outcomes • Avoids “real-world experiments” • Facilitated by FLR tools developed under EFIMAS – COMMIT - FISBOAT

  4. Management simulations: conceptual loop Define starting state Biology Simulate “real” population Growth models Recruitment Knowledge Simulate sampling Uncertainty Simulate assessment Management Simulate management advice Risk analysis Harvest control rules

  5. Management simulations: evaluation loop Start Management proposal Discuss problems with managers and stakeholders and suggest solutions Draw high-level conceptual flowchart of proposal 1 Preliminary analysis Consistent? no yes Draw low-level flowchart of HCR evaluation simulation (including high-level flowchart of proposal) and validate problems? 2 Write pseudo-code and validate problems? no Implement in computer code and test yes 3 Meets objectives? Finish

  6. NS haddock: background • North Sea haddock are managed jointly by the EU and Norway • Plan agreed in 1999 • Came into force in January 2005 • Review carried out during 2006 • Revision agreed in November 2006 • Revised plan implemented January 2007 • Further review during 2007 • Second revision by December 2009

  7. NS haddock: history of evaluation • Several previous attempts at evaluation • Two examples: • EU-Norway Expert Group, June 2004 • ICES Ad hoc Group on Long-Term Advice, April 2005 • Hampered by inadequate software and lack of clarity • Development of FLR increases flexibility • Implementation still difficult

  8. NS haddock: history of evaluation • Evaluation of original plan: • Scottish stakeholder meetings, Aberdeen, April and July 2006 • ICES Methods WG, Galway, June 2006 • ICES WGNSSK, Copenhagen, September 2006 • ICES ACFM, Copenhagen, October 2006 • EU-Norway Consultations, Bergen and Brussels, November 2006 • ICES WK on Limit and Reference Points, Gdynia, January 2007

  9. NS haddock: history of evaluation • Evaluation of revised plan: • ICES Methods WG, Woods Hole, March 2007 • Poster at Haddock 2007 symposium, Portsmouth NH, October 2007 • Paper for Fisheries Research

  10. Original plan: text

  11. Current year = y Assessment to y-1 Year? Risk? Forecast to y+2 Original plan: flowchart yes SSBy+2 < Blim? no ??? “Keep SSB > B(lim)” Set TACy+1 so that mean Fy+1 = 0.3 Ages? “Target F = 0.3” “Unless B < Bpa” SSBy+2 < Bpa after application of Fy+1? “Exploitation pattern” yes ??? no Several holes and cannot be fully evaluated in current form Finish

  12. Revised plan: text

  13. Revised plan: changes • Constraint (± 15%) on interannual quota variation • Specific time to measure biomass • Sliding-F rule (see next slide) • Agreed at EU-Norway November 2007 • But not evaluated • To be reviewed by end 2009

  14. Revised plan: sliding F rule

  15. Revised plan: flowchart

  16. Revised plan evaluation: assumptions • FLR objects used • Some FLR methods also • But some needed rewriting • Growth • Fixed weights-at-age in simulation • Discards • Fixed proportion-at-age • Compliance • Assumed 100% • Recruitment • Assumed one large year-class every ten years

  17. Revised plan evaluation: assumptions Discard assumptions

  18. Revised plan evaluation: assumptions Historical recruitment

  19. Revised plan evaluation: assumptions

  20. Revised plan: results

  21. Revised plan: results

  22. Revised plan: results

  23. Revised plan: results

  24. Revised plan: results

  25. Revised plan: results

  26. Revised plan: results

  27. Revised plan: results

  28. Future work • Banking and borrowing • Improved biological modelling: • Recruitment • Growth • Multispecies & spatial aspects • Improved fisheries modelling: • Discarding • Multifleet & spatial aspects • Sensitivity analyses • Code optimisation

  29. Would a simpler case study be better?

  30. Would a simpler case study be better?

  31. Would a simpler case study be better? • Possible scenario: the “lake” model • One lake • One species • One vessel • Explore management implications • Apply lessons to real-world situations • Long-term project

  32. References

More Related