Managing Forage Fish in the Mid-Atlantic A Revised White Paper to Inform the Mid- Atlantic Fishery Management Council MAFMC Baltimore, MD 8 December 2014 P. Clay, G. DePiper, J. Hare, E. Houde, S. Gaichas, R. Seagraves
Overview of Council, SSC, and Public Comments on October draft With summary responses and links to the document
Social and Economic considerations? Analysis of social and economic tradeoffs needs to be central to forage fish management policy development Document completely restructured to clarify the central nature of social and economic considerations and tradeoffs in developing management policy Included additional data on coastal communities and SMB complex
Which species are included? Consider adding American shad, hickory shad and white mullet to forage species list; Alosines are included in the forage species time series plots and are included in the diet data examined. Table 2 is based on the MAFMC SSC forage definition which requires that species be small throughout their lifespan. American shad, hickory shad, and mullet are important forage species for the council to consider and would be included in aggregate "forage base" assessments but either (like hakes) outgrow the MAFMC SSC forage definition, or are generally south and inshore of the primary MAFMC area. Provide analysis of NEAMAP food habits data base to identify additional forage species found inshore. NEAMAP food habits data added to Table 5 and Figure 1.
Current management, future options Develop list of specific management options for managed forage species similar to those developed for unmanaged species. This would be addressed in specific FMP analyses. However, we have outlined more clearly what the different management options might be. Describe historical abundance of predators and forage base. Need better visual display of current or historical F v M for managed forage species. What degree of precaution is already built into current management policies for managed forage species? Added time series where available for historical abundance and added B/Bmsy and F/Fmsy to Table 2.
Wider literature, ecosystem indicators? Check literature for additional diet data for billfish. Billfish are included in the literature, and references are available from different regions but were considered less relevant to the MAFMC. We will continue to look for other references as possible. Can we manage the forage base at the guild of functional group level? Describe aggregate forage biomass and consider annual updates of aggregate forage biomass in NEFSC State of the Ecosystem Report. We (NEFSC and collaborators) are actively developing an indicator-based assessment framework for the forage base in aggregate and look forward to working with MAFMC on this. Basic requirements are included in the document. We also welcome additional comments on the draft State of the Ecosystem report and will work with MAFMC so that it meets management needs.
Forage life history management For many, if not all forage species, there appears to be no quantifiable stock-recruitment relationship. Therefore, the question was asked if we can expect predictable benefits from not harvesting forage species at F msy levels as contemplated under Magnuson Act. Document should include more discussion about impacts and tradeoffs related to leaving larger forage populations in the ocean. Included more discussion on this point. Forage management policy should recognize that forage species are characteristically short lived and exhibit highly variable population dynamics driven largely by environmental factors. In addition, productivity of forage species can vary greatly as a function of ecosystem/environmental regime shifts which complicates specification of biological reference points. Included more discussion on this point.
Unfished and unmanaged forage species Moratorium on development of new fisheries for forage should be considered but term moratorium sounds draconian and alternative descriptor should be developed; others commented that the term moratorium implies a temporary situation and is appropriate. See staff memo. There were numerous written and verbal comments (Council and public) supporting pre-emption of the development of new fisheries for forage species until scientific analyses can demonstrate the ecosystem level impacts of those fisheries. See staff memo.
Outline: Revised Forage Fish White Paper Current status of MAFMC managed fisheries and management objectives Evaluating management changes and tradeoffs between objectives Ecosystem services and forage species Supporting service: energy transfer to exploited and protected species MAFMC SSC Forage definition based on supporting services Provisioning service: fisheries for food, use in other industries Forage Species in the Mid-Atlantic Ecosystem(s) Forage species list based on definition, with landings and current status if known Forage species list based on predator diets (NEFSC, NEAMAP, literature values) Managed forage abundance trends Mid Atlantic food web Assessing the forage base in the Mid-Atlantic region Communities and fleets landing Squid-(Atlantic) Mackerel-Butterfish (SMB) Background on forage species management Potential alternative management measures for Mid-Atlantic forage species Targeted, currently managed forage species (SMB) Unfished and unmanaged forage species
Current status of MAFMC managed fisheries
Management objectives
Evaluating management tradeoffs Tradeoffs between forage species indirect in situ value Prey value to high valued predator fisheries Recreational Commercial Prey value to Endangered/Protected species Whale watching industry Cultural importance (historical river herring runs) and direct market value Directed fisheries (food, agricultural and industrial products) Changing consumer tastes: slow food Inter-fishery linkages Herring and lobster Extreme variability between species case by case analysis Understand key predators needs (species, amount, seasons, areas) Understand forage role in economy (value, substitutability)
Manage prey for predator productivity? Predator Reliance on prey? Where/when? Prey Seasonal migration Other factors affecting availability Figures courtesy John Manderson
Consider Human Responses Does decreasing forage fish landings increase fishing pressure on other susceptible species? Effort pushed into less well managed/new fishery? Are there differential impacts due to seasonal migrations? How to handle potential increased market demand due to increased consumer interest in eating low on the food chain? All trade-offs must be carefully weighed
Ecosystem services and forage species
MAFMC SSC Ecosystems Subcommittee Forage Fish Definition Small throughout lifespan Major prey throughout lifespan For fish, marine mammals, birds >5% of diet, 5 or more years High mortality due to consumption Central in food webs, highly productive Trophic level between 2 and 4 Many trophic links, energy conduit Production >1/100 th ; biomass >1/1000 th of system primary production Often Schooling, pelagic High recruitment variability
Forage species of the Mid Atlantic 1. By definition 2. By predator type a. list predators b. what do they eat?
1. Mid Atlantic Forage Fishes (by definition) Common name Species Fished Y/N Mean Annual Landings (mt) (2008-2012) Current status B/Bmsy; F/Fmsy Management Authority Atlantic herring Clupea harengus Y 82,422.4 3.3; 0.52 NEFMC/ASMFC Y Atlantic menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus Y 210,776.0 0.22-1.4* ; 3.36 ASMFC N Atlantic mackerel Scomber scombrus Y 12,003.2 Unknown, unknown MAFMC Y Butterfish Peprilus triacanthus Y 244.1 1.7; 0.025 MAFMC Y Alewife Alosa pseudoharengus Y 605.2 Depleted ; unknown ASMFC Y Blueback herring Alosa aesitvalis Y 6.2 Depleted ; unknown ASMFC Y Longfin squid Doryteuthis pealii Y 9,892.0 1.284; unknown MAFMC Y Illex squid Illex illecebrosus Y 11,227.5 Unknown, unknown MAFMC Y Bay anchovy Anchoa mitchilli N Unassessed N Striped anchovy Anchoa hepsetus N Unassessed N Silver anchovy Engraulis eurystole N Unassessed N Bycatch Important Y/N Round herring Etrumeus teres N Unassessed N? Thread herring Opisthonema oglinum Y 0 Unassessed Y, small Spanish sardine Sardinella aurita Y 0 Unassessed Y, small Sand lance Ammodytes americanus N 0 Unassessed N and A. dubius Atlantic silverside Menidia menidia Y 6.4 Unassessed N Further south (but coming north?): white mullet, scaled sardine. Offshore: Atlantic saury. Outgrow definition: American and hickory shad, hakes, drums, scup.
2a. Mid Atlantic predator list fish MAFMC managed Spiny dogfish Summer flounder Monkfish Butterfish Scup Atl. mackerel Bluefish Black sea bass Tilefish ESA listed Atlantic sturgeon Shortnose sturgeon Highly Migratory Large coastal sharks Pelagic sharks Billfish Tunas Other managed Little skate Spotted hake Silver hake Fourspot flounder Windowpane Atlantic herring Winter skate Smooth dogfish Red hake Winter Flounder Weakfish Clearnose skate Ocean pout Blueback herring Yellowtail flounder N. Searobin Witch flounder Rosette skate Spot Atlantic croaker Gulf Stream flounder Sea raven Cusk eel Longhorn sculpin Striped bass American shad
2a. Mid Atlantic predator list all others Baleen Whales Fin whale Humpback whale Sei whale Minke whale N Atlantic right whale Toothed Whales and Dolphins Pilot whale White-sided dolphin Common dolphin Bottlenose dolphin Harbor porpoise Seals Harbor seal Gray seal Sea Turtles Loggerhead Leatherback Kemp s ridley Pelagic seabirds Herring gull Great black-backed gull Laughing gull Bonaparte's gull Black-legged kittiwake Red phalarope Red-necked phalarope Pelagic seabirds continued Northern gannet Northern fulmar Wilson's storm-petrel Leach's storm-petrel Great shearwater Cory's shearwater Manx shearwater Audubon's shearwater Sooty shearwater Common tern (spring) Royal tern Razorbill Bald eagle Coastal birds Great cormorant Double-crested cormorant Loons Brown pelican American bittern Great blue heron Great egret Snowy egret Tricolored heron Little blue heron Green heron Black-crowned nightheron Common merganser Red-breasted merganser Osprey Black skimmer
2b. Mid Atlantic major forage by predator Fish in NEFSC database Crabs and shrimp Amphipods Other zooplankton Fish (incl. unid.) Anchovies Hakes Sandlance Herrings Molluscs Unid. cephalopods Loligo sp. Bivalves Annelids Ctenophores Fish in NEAMAP database Crabs and shrimp Fish (incl. unid) Anchovies Butterfish Sand lances Scup Menhaden Drums Amphipods Polychaetes Molluscs Bivalves Longfin squid Mysids Highly migratory fish Large coastal sharks: Fish (unid, bluefish, summer flounder) Skates/rays/sharks Crabs Large pelagics: Squids (incl. Illex sp.) Fish (unid, mackerel, butterfish, bluefish, hakes, sandlance) ESA listed fish Annelids Shrimp Other benthic invertebrates
2b. Mid Atlantic major forage, by predator Baleen Whales Krill Herrings Other zooplankton Sandlance Large gadids Mackerels Other fish Toothed Whales and Dolphins Squids Mackerels Other fish Small gadids Herrings Mesopelagics Seals Other fish Sandlance Small gadids Flatfish Herrings Large gadids Squids Sea Turtles Crabs Fish (scavenged?) Ctenophores and jellyfish
2b. Mid Atlantic major forage, by predator Pelagic seabirds Gulls: fish, offal and fish scavenged from commercial fishing operations, euphausiids Shearwaters: fish (sandlance, saury), squids Storm petrels and Phalaropes: zooplankton, fish eggs and larvae Gannets: fish (menhaden, mackerel, saury Fulmars: euphausiids, squids Coastal birds Fish and crustaceans; extremely varied diet along salinity gradients Osprey, Cormorants and Pelicans Menhaden, herring, estuarine fish (mullet, drums, anchovy )
Key forage of managed fish 1. Summer flounder 2. Bluefish NEFSC and NEAMAP
100 100 90 Unid fish Unid fish All others 90 Unid fish Unid fish Unid fish 80 Unid crabs/shrimp Unid crabs/shrimp Unid 80 70 60 50 40 Porgies and pinfish Mackerels Herrings Hakes and cods Porgies and pinfish Other fish Mysids Sandlance Porgies and pinfish Other fish Mysids Mackerels Herrings Hakes and cods Drums 70 60 50 40 Herrings Cephalopods Butterfish Butterfish Hakes and cods Cusk-eels Bluefish 30 Crustacea Cephalopods 30 Anchovies 20 Cephalopods Cephalopods Butterfish Bluefish 20 Anchovies 10 Anchovies 10 Anchovies 0 Summer Flounder NEFSC Summer Flounder NEAMAP 0 Bluefish NEFSC Bluefish NEAMAP
Managed forage abundance trends
Managed forage abundance trends
1. Energy flow 2. Predators and prey of commercial forage 3. Key fishery links Food webs of the Mid Atlantic
Assessing the forage base: ICES advice
Incorporated into herring assessment: predation evidence increased recent M Deroba et al. 2012 SAW /SARC 54
Primary production and zooplankton
Fish condition, seabird reproductive success
Communities and fleets landing Squid- (Atlantic) Mackerel-Butterfish (SMB) Wide geographic range Consider in broader context of all landings Wide range of community dependence
Community Pounds (2012) North Kingstown/Saunderstown, RI 18,972,719 Cape May, NJ 18,776,939 Narragansett/Point Judith, RI 10,288,046 Montauk, NY 3,903,965 Hampton Bays, NY 3,625,168 New Bedford, MA 3,460,644 New London, CT 1,656,386 Gloucester, MA 1,477,881 Stonington, CT 1,357,003 Hampton, VA 682,747 Point Lookout, NY 567,555 Woods Hole, MA 492,742 Belford, NJ 463,610 Point Pleasant, NJ 361,013 Fall River, MA 346,158 Newport, RI 219,726 Sandwich, MA 133,950
Community Value (2012) Narragansett/Point Judith, RI $10,953,170 North Kingstown/Saunderstown, RI $10,495,820 Cape May, NJ $8,564,656 Montauk, NY $4,941,669 Hampton Bays, NY $3,294,589 New London, CT $2,089,494 New Bedford, MA $1,506,719 Stonington, CT $1,417,898 Point Lookout, NY $535,135 Belford, NJ $514,341 Woods Hole, MA $455,104 Point Pleasant, NJ $268,772 Gloucester, MA $220,924 Hampton, VA $193,469 Newport, RI $190,148 Sandwich, MA $144,237 East Lyme, CT $136,992 Falmouth, MA $111,086
Forage species management considerations Tradeoffs in conserving provisioning and supporting ecosystem services
Lenfest report and recommendations
SSC National Workshop IV: EBFM and Forage Fish Issues Need better ways to estimate forage biomasses Need better ways to estimate predator demand Determining M2 is important Ecosystem forage buffers vs single-species buffers? Social and economic tradeoffs, habitat considerations, data poor methods, spatial and temporal tools?
Pacific Fishery Management Council http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/cps_fmp_as_amended_thru_a13_current.pdf http://www.pcouncil.org/wpcontent/uploads/i1a_att1_eco_initiative1_forage_apr2014bb.pdf
Potential ABC/OFL framework for forage species Questions for Sarah?
Exploited Forage Stocks NS1 advises Councils to maintain forage stocks at levels higher than B msy to protect ecosystem structure and function Implications for biological reference points
Managed Forage Species Atlantic mackerel Long-finned squid Illex squid Butterfish All in one FMP!
Exploited Forage Stocks BRP Options Maintain MSA based reference points and potentially apply additional buffers Define ecological reference points - biological reference points modified based on ecological importance and scientific uncertainty Currently little or no National guidance on how to implement either approach
Forage OFL/ABC Control Rules Maintain existing MSA based OFL definition (F msy or proxy) and add additional buffers Probability of Overfishing 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 P* = 0.40 P* < 0.35 typical atypical P* = 0.35 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 B/Bmsy One option: ABC based on P* = P*- f(m gradient)
Potential Ecosystem-Based Reference Points for Forage F Mortality-based reference points Source F = M Beverton 1990 F = 0.87 M Zhou et al. 2012 F = 0.67 M Patterson 1992 F ERP = (0.2, 0.5 or 0.75) F MSY Lenfest 2012 Biomass-based reference points Source B ERP = 0.75 B 0 FAO 2003, Smith et al. 2011 B ERP = (0.8, 0.4, or 0.3) B 0 Lenfest 2012
Maintain minimum biomass threshold for FS Specify minimum biomass at which directed fishery would be greatly reduced or closed (PFMC includes this provision in the CPS FMP) Originally included in mackerel ABC control rule but removed after 1996 MSA compliance amendments Consider adding to SMB complex BRP control rules
BRPs for Forage Species No simple one size fits all solution EAFM WG to develop framework for analysis of social and economic tradeoffs as well as complex biological considerations and environmental influences on managed FS Guidance document will provide comprehensive framework to evaluate BRP control rules for managed FS (applied within existing FMPs)
Potential management alternatives for unfished forage species No Action Ecosystem Component Species Develop a Forage Species Plan Declare Moratoria on New Forage Fisheries
Ecosystem Component Species Unfished forage species, or a complex of species, could be declared EC species in FMPs (prey for managed species or bycatch in the managed fishery) EC species not included as managed species in the FMPs, but abundances and habitats monitored Council adjust measures in FMPs in response to changes in abundance of the forage species complex or key species in that complex Being proposed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC 2014)
Develop a Forage Species Plan Need to consider FS role in supporting managed MAFMC species, but also within context of greater ecosystem Not an FMP but a mechanism that could allow tracking of abundance of ecosystem forage species biomass complex Would help address questions related to adequacy of forage base in Mid-Atlantic ecosystems
Prohibit New Forage Fisheries Anticipating potential development of new fisheries on forage species, declare moratoria. Fisheries still could be developed, but it would insure formal processes are followed before a fishery could be initiated, including need for stock assessments, determination of effects on existing fisheries, FMPs, and the ecosystem. Pacific Fishery Management Council Ecosystem Initiative 1
PFMC Ecosystem Initiative 1 Prohibit the development of new directed fisheries on forage species not currently managed until the Council has had an adequate opportunity to assess the scientific information relating to any proposed fishery and to consider potential impacts to existing fisheries, fishing communities, and the greater marine ecosystem.
PFMC Ecosystem Initiative 1 Approach Formed ad hoc EW to develop ways of achieving protection of FS by incorporating them into one or more of its FMPs Council approved preliminary preferred alternative of using Ecosystem Trophic Pathways approach
Comprehensive Ecosystem-Based Amendment 1 would modify all four PFMC FMPs (CPS, Groundfish, HMS, Salmon) Designation of FS as ecosystem component species identified as bycatch or prey of FMP species New directed EEZ fishing for these species would be prohibited (some di minimus landing allowed) until impact analysis adequate
MAFMC Staff Recommendation Council should pursue options to prohibit or restrict development of new fisheries for forage species (generally following PFMC model) MAFMC approach will need to account for differences in ecosystems, fisheries, and governance structure between US West and East coasts
MAFMC Staff Recommendation task EAFM WG (or alternate group) with development of a strategy and specific options to accomplish goal of protection of unfished/unmanaged forage species associated with Council managed species and the ecosystems that support them take into account Atlantic Coast conditions and contingencies
MAFMC Unfished Forage Initiative Issues Should it be strictly defined forage species or low trophic level? For example, much of the forage base identified for Mid-Atlantic ecosystem not classically defined FS (e.g., substantial portion comprised of crustaceans)
MAFMC Unfished Forage Initiative Governance/Jurisdiction PFMC has jurisdiction over virtually the entire W. Coast CA Current ecosystem (through four FMPs) E. Coast involves three Councils, ASMFC (15 States) and NMFS HMS through 49 FMPs What are the jurisdictional limits of a unilateral action by MAFMC?
Unfished Forage Initiative Draft Purpose and Need The purpose of this action is to prohibit new directed commercial fishing in Federal waters on unmanaged, unfished forage species until the Council has had an adequate opportunity to both assess the scientific information relating to any proposed directed fishery and consider potential impacts to existing fisheries, fishing communities, and Atlantic Coast Marine Ecosystem (ACME). This action is needed to proactively protect unmanaged, unfished forage fish of the U.S. Atlantic East Coast Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in recognition of the importance of these forage fish to the species managed under the Council s FMPs and to the larger ACME. This action is not intended to supersede state or federal fishery management for these species, and coordination would still occur through the existing Council process
End Forage Presentation Questions?
Climate White Paper Update Draft white paper near completion Review draft will be presented at February Council meeting (coincidental with NOAA Climate Strategy Briefing aka Dr. Merrick) Major need identified is development of capacity to conduct Risk Analysis and Management Strategy Evaluations
Comprehensive Management Strategy Evaluation Identified as major research need in MAFMC 5 year research plan, National SSC IV, MONF III Conference, Forage and Climate White Papers Council should place high priority on Comprehensive MSE development Involve EAFM WG in MSE development for Atlantic Mackerel and black sea bass
Comprehensive Management Strategy Evaluation National SSC V (Feb 2015) will include discussion of MSE development on East (Wilberg) and West (Punt) coasts Offers excellent opportunity to leverage these discussions and to plan Council s EAFM Species and Fisheries Workshop (central theme will be comprehensive MSE for MAFMC managed species)
End Climate Presentation Questions?