“Index of fisheries management effort”

1. “Index of fisheries management effort” An index to communicate the status of fisheries management LivRAW

2. Background • LivRAW challenged to establish index late in the process • Why? • Large hole in the report if an index is not provided • GAO stated that integrated fish index needed (4x)

3. Pages 1, 4, 15 The Bay Program has over 100 measures to assess progress toward meeting certain restoration commitments and providing information to guide management decisions. However, the program has not yet developed an integrated approach that would allow it to translate these individual measures into an assessment of overall progress toward achieving the five broad restoration goals outlined in Chesapeake 2000. For example, while the Bay Program has appropriate measures to track crab, oyster, and rockfish populations, it does not have an approach for integrating the results of these measures to assess progress toward the agreement’s goal of protecting and restoring the bay’s living resources.

4. Purpose of the index Important component of the January restoration report • “An assessment of the restoration of Chesapeake Bay and its watersheds 2005. Part 1: Restoration efforts” • Report needs to provide an overview of fisheries management status (as well as the details)

5. Presented as a summary figure But will be supported with: • Explanatory text: interpretation of the results • Supporting documentation: • Methods, rationale, point allocation etc • Review ???

6. Index approach • The challenge: each fishery is very different • Unique life histories • Unique fishing community • Unique gears employed • Unique fishing histories • Each population can be in different “states” at any point in time Difficult to unite under a single index approach… is stocking good or bad or effective? – crabs, shad, stripers, oysters is a moritorium appropriate, is one good or bad? - shad is gear control appropriate/possible - menhaden

7. Index approach • How to craft a unified approach across species • Acknowledges fisheries restoration occurs through management actions

8. Index approach • How to craft a unified approach across species • Acknowledges fisheries restoration occurs through management actions • Best when there is a strategic approach proscribed in the form of a formal fisheries management plan • Emphasizes the level of management plan sophistication or completeness used for each species • Each plan can deal with the uniqueness of each fishery

9. Index approach • How to craft a unified approach across species • Acknowledges fisheries restoration occurs through management actions • Best when there is a strategic approach proscribed in the form of a formal fisheries management plan • Emphasizes the level of management plan sophistication or completeness used for each species • Each plan can deal with the uniqueness of each fishery

10. Index approach • How to craft a unified approach across species • Acknowledges fisheries restoration occurs through management actions • Best when there is a strategic approach proscribed in the form of a formal fisheries management plan • Emphasizes the level of management plan sophistication or completeness used for each species • Each plan can deal with the uniqueness of each fishery

11. Index approach Based on the evolution of fisheries management 0 points • Single species management • Single species management with multispecies considerations • Ecosystem based fisheries management 100 points • Why this approach? • Accounts for both past effort and the progress towards the ultimate goal -EBFM • Logical and easy to explain • Defendable: Linked to established goals

12. Defendable because it is linked to established goals C2K 1cBy 2001, establish harvest targets for the blue crab fishery and begin implementing complementary state fisheries management strategies baywide. Manage the blue crab fishery to restore a healthy spawning biomass, size, and age structure. 2a-b. By 2007, revise and implement existing fisheries management plans incorporate ecological, social, and economic considerations; multispecies fisheries management; and ecosystem approaches. 3b. By 2005, develop ecosystem-based multispecies management plans for targeted species. Chesapeake Bay agreement 1a. “By July 1989, to develop, adopt and begin to implement Bay-wide management plans for oysters, blue crabs and American Shad. Plans for other major commercially, recreationally, and ecologically valuable species should be initiated by 1990.” NOAA “Ecosystem-based Fishery Management”, report to congress 3a-c. “FMPs for single species or species complexes should continue to be the basic tool of fisheries management for the foreseeable future. However, managements actions under FMPs alone are not sufficient to implement an ecosystem approach. A mechanism is required to integrate FMPs and include the ecosystem Principles, Goals, and Policies in a way that will be meaningful. That mechanism is the Fisheries Ecosystem Plan (FEP).”

13. The categories Challenge  How to assign points

14. Allocation of points – major categories Why 45% of points to SSFM? • Foundation of mulit-species and EBFM • The most important phase • Framework for successful management of any population

15. Allocation of points – subcategories Rewards action more than development of a plan (but recognizes the importance of plan/documentation)