MAR 580: Models for Marine Ecosystem Based Management

Lecture 1

Course Introduction�

01 September 2022

Today’s Outline

• Introductions
• Course Description (syllabus)
• Objectives
• Readings
• Evaluation Procedures
• Schedule
• Whats and Whys of EBM
• Review of Fisheries Assessment Models

​

Course Website: 1 stop shop for info & materials

gavinfay.github.io/mebm-models

Instructor contact information

​

Gavin Fay

gfay@umassd.edu

508-910-6363

SMAST-E 228

​

Student hours: by Calendly appointment�Tue am, Wed am, Thur pm

Instructor: Gavin Fay

Empirical and mechanistic tools for

• Population assessment
• Quantifying tradeoffs among management objectives
• Evaluating robustness to uncertainty and performance of decisions
• Risk analysis for ecosystem consequences of climate change

Statistics & Simulations

Course Description

• Instruction, demonstration, and exercises in quantitative modeling tools used for Ecosystem Based Management (EBM) of living marine resources.
• Apply fisheries stock assessment and population models that include ecosystem effects, and consider the policy implications of including this information.
• Multiple-use and human dimensions models including models for marine spatial planning.
• Whole-of-ecosystem models and how these can be used to provide strategic advice for marine management and consider a broad suite of objectives.

​

Objectives

​

• Familiarity with a range of models used for ecosystem-based management and experience using some of them.
• Understanding of the benefits, challenges, and limitations of using these models to provide scientific advice for management.

​

Readings

• No required text.
• Recommended papers distributed via website
• Useful books:

​

Evaluation procedure

Five Homework Assignments (12% each)

​

Final Project (40%)

Apply one/some of the modeling methods covered during the course to a research-related task.

2-paragraph description due Sep 22 (5%)

Brief meeting with GF to discuss outline

Project plan (outline) due Oct 27 (5%)

Final paper in form of draft manuscript (20%)

Verbal presentation (final exam) (10%)

​

University Academic Integrity policy applies

​

Class Schedule

Tuesdays & Thursdays 1:00 – 2:30

​

TMB workshop Sep 6 & Sep 8

​

Other events

WGSAM MS-KeyRuns Review

ICES WGSAM

​

Step through overview of course schedule

Creating our community for the semester

Whats and Whys of �Ecosystem Based Management

EBM Definitions

“Ecosystem based management is an integrated approach to management that considers the entire ecosystem, including humans. The goal of EBM is to maintain an ecosystem in a healthy, productive and resilient condition so that it can provide the services humans want and need. EBM differs from current approaches that usually focus on a single species, sector, activity or concern; it considers the cumulative impacts of different sectors”

​

(McLeod et al. 2005)

EBM Definitions

“U.S. ocean and coastal resources should be managed to reflect the relationships among all ecosystem components, including human and nonhuman species and the environments in which they live. Applying this principle will require defining relevant geographic management areas based on ecosystem, rather than political, boundaries.”

​

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy

​

Ecosystem-Based Management:�Balancing human activities & environmental stewardship in a multiple use context

M. Dickey-Collas

Dolan et al. 2016

Key elements in EBM definitions

• Connections
• between marine ecosystems and social systems
• Cumulative Impacts
• Effects of multiple activities on ecosystem services
• Multiple Objectives
• Range of benefits we receive from marine systems, rather than a single service.
• Ability to embrace change
• Resilience science
• Multiple possible states, abrupt changes
• Adaptive management

Coupled social-ecological systems

Ecosystem�Services

Broader�suite than�under fisheries�management.

What does an Ecosystem Approach provide that we can’t get from single-species?

• Address effects of fishing on:
• non-target species
• habitat,
• ecological interactions, and
• system-wide processes
• Recognizes that marine ecosystems provide “goods & services” other than fishery harvest
• Explicitly addresses biomass tradeoffs
• Increases leverage from new stakeholders
• Changes the burden of proof

​

Origins and history of EBFM

​

Thomas Huxley (1883)

“all the great sea-fisheries are inexhaustible; that is to say nothing we can do seriously affects the number of fish.”

​

Key literary foundations to EBM

• Leopold 1949 �“Sand County Almanac”
• Carson 1962 �“Silent Spring”
• Holling 1978 �“Resilience and Stability �of Ecological Systems”
• Walters 1986 �“Adaptive Management”

​

Where did EBM and related approaches more recently and formally come from?

• International recognition in the 1970s, 1980s, to early 1990s that the earth’s ecosystems were being/had been seriously impacted by human use.
• to the point that future human development, economic benefits and well-being would be threatened.
• Creation of the sustainable development agenda, related international agreements, and in some cases national enabling arrangements
• For individual uses / industry sectors as well as the cumulative impact of all uses in regional ecosystems.

​

Sainsbury 2004

Origins and history of EBM

• Stockholm Conference on Human Development (1972)
• Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (1973)
• Bonn Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals (1979)
• UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982)
• World Commission on Environment and Development (1987)

​

Origins and history of EBM/EBFM

• UN Convention on Environment and Development (1992)
• clearly established the Sustainable Development agenda.
• Convention on Biological Diversity (1992)
• Jakarta Mandate (1995)
• FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (1995)
• Reykjavik Conference (2001)
• World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002)

​

Example Efforts at Defining EBM

Marine

• Larkin 1996
• Botsford et al. 1997
• EPAP 1999
• Link 2002
• Pikitch 2004
• USCOP 2004
• POC 2004
• Browman & Stergiou�2004

​

General/Terrestrial

• Slocombe 1993
• Grumbine 1994, 1997
• Haueber 1996
• Christensen et al. 1996
• Yaffee et al. 1996
• Franklin 1997
• Boyce & Haney 1997
• Lackey 1998

Why a course on models for EBM?

Kinds of Management advice

There are generally 3 levels of advice in a natural resource management context.

​

1. Heuristic
2. Strategic
3. Tactical

​

Heurism

• Understanding ecosystem functioning
• Relative importance of different processes
• Advancing scientific theory

​

Strategic management

• Assessing biomass tradeoffs
• System level emergent properties
• Evaluating major processes
• Alternate stable states
• Long term recruitment bottlenecks
• General “What If” scenarios and gaming, long term trends
• What needs to be done
• BOUNDING IN SCOPE

​

Tactical management

• Revised stock assessments
• Yield adjustments
• Biological reference points, etc.
• Direct impacts on target, non-target species, protected species, habitat, aggregate groups
• Specific “What If” scenarios and gaming
• How to do what needs to be done.
• BINDING IN SCOPE

​

Link’s Three Pillars of EBM

2. Assessing [Ecosystem] Status (Multivariate metrics)

1. Goal Setting (Priorities & Allocation of Biomass)

3. Achieving [Ecosystem] Goals (Management Tools)

Models used here

NOAA Fisheries IEA program

Holsman et al. 2017. Ecosys. Health & Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1002/ehs2.1256

A spectrum of tools, a spectrum of uses

Stock/Single Species

Ecosystem

Aggregate Biomass

Single stock models

Multiple stock assessments integrated

Stock assessments with add-ons: explicit M2 or habitat or climate considerations

Multi-species assessments

Functional group models

Whole system models

Integrated ecosystem assessments

Multi-species

Economic assessments, social impacts

Distinguish between models

for TACTICAL, STRATEGIC, and HEURISTIC use / advice.

Dealing with Tradeoffs

• Some tradeoffs may be easier than others.

Objective 1

Objective 2

Gain on one, lose on the other.

Don’t have to give up much to gain.

Strong tradeoff, not able to gain on one without giving up a lot on the other.

Evaluating Trade-offs

• View performance of management strategies against multiple objectives or system traits.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

• A, B, and D are management options that are optimal solutions for one objective given a value for the other.
• Management options in red are sub-optimal for both objectives.

Ecosystem Objective 1

Ecosystem Objective 2

Evaluating Trade-offs

• Operational objectives may indicate nonviable options (e.g. minimum stock size thresholds).

​

​

​

​

​

​

• Can quantify effects of alternatives.
• Here very little loss in profit from A to B is associated with large gain in biomass.

Worm et al. (2009)

Ecosystem models to

quantify tradeoffs�between biodiversity, �catch, and �employment.

​

Able to gain �biodiversity with�small loss in fishery�yield.

Outstanding research questions for marine EBM

• What can we learn from how humans have interacted with coastal and marine environments in the past?
• How do we translate knowledge developed at the local scale to broader geographic scales?
• What are the cumulative impacts of human activities on ecosystem health and human well-being?
• How can trade-offs among ecosystem services and sectors be more systematically assessed?
• How do we evaluate the success of ecosystem-based management efforts?

(McLeod & Leslie 2009)

Outstanding research questions for marine EBM

• What can we learn from how humans have interacted with coastal and marine environments in the past?
• How do we translate knowledge developed at the local scale to broader geographic scales?
• What are the cumulative impacts of human activities on ecosystem health and human well-being?
• How can trade-offs among ecosystem services and sectors be more systematically assessed?
• How do we evaluate the success of ecosystem-based management efforts?

(McLeod & Leslie 2009)

What is EBM?

• Questions?

BREAK

EBM models taster

Use of models in fisheries and conservation

• How many of animal X are there?
• Estimating extinction risk.
• How many can we harvest?
• System relationships and dynamics
• How well are hypotheses supported by data?
• Designing management programs

45

A spectrum of tools, a spectrum of uses

Stock/Single Species

Ecosystem

Aggregate Biomass

Single stock models

Multiple stock assessments integrated

Stock assessments with add-ons: explicit M2 or habitat or climate considerations

Multi-species assessments

Functional group models

Whole system models

Integrated ecosystem assessments

Multi-species

Economic assessments, social impacts

Distinguish between models

for TACTICAL, STRATEGIC, and HEURISTIC use / advice.

Plagányi 2007

Ecosystem modeling approaches (Plagányi 2007)

Ecosystem models we will cover

Tactical Models

• Single species
• Single species with ecosystem considerations
• Multi-species
• Aggregate biomass
• Spatial planning

​

Strategic & Heuristic Models

• Multi-species
• Aggregate biomass
• Biophysical
• Food web
• Conceptual/Qualitative
• Valuation of Ecosystem Services
• Full system

​

Extended single-species models in fisheries

• Intended Purpose:
• Assess the status of fish stocks with additional factors added in.
• Also known as:

Minimal Realistic Models

Models of Intermediate Complexity

• Pros:
• Enhanced biological/ecological/ environmental realism
• Same model outputs as standard fisheries models
• Cons:
• Extra data requirements
• Harder to insert into �management process
• Data Needs:
• Standard plus stomach or environmental.

​

Hollowed et al. 2000. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57: 279–293.

Szuwalski & Punt 2012. ICES J. Mar. Sci. doi:10.1093/icesjms/fss182.

Minimal Realistic Models�a.k.a. Models of Intermediate Complexity

​

Objective of these models is to consider the interactions among a small number of species and components.

• Focus on ‘key’ system properties/components relevant to the research or management questions.
• May include a suite of model types for each component.
• Perhaps statistically estimate model parameters using data similar to single-species models.

​

Barents Sea Minke Whales-Cod-Capelin EXAMPLE

• Several models:
• GADGET,
• BORMICON,
• MULTSPEC, etc.
• Explores tradeoffs among 4 main species interactions.
• Environment and fishing contrasted.

Bogstad, B., Hauge, K. H., & Ulltang, Ø. (1997). MULTSPEC–a multi-species model for fish and marine mammals in the Barents Sea. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science, 22(317-341), 1-1.

Multivariate autoregressive (MAR) models

• Take the form

​

​

​

​

• B matrix can be VERY big
• Simplified dynamics
• Estimating parameters is often non-trivial
• BUT, statistical machinery exists.

e.g. Ives et al. 2003 Ecol. Monographs, Holmes et al. 2012. R journal.

Aggregate Biomass Models in Fisheries

Intended Purpose:

• Assess the status of resources as major groups (e.g. guilds, taxa), not as individual stocks.

Pros:

• Establishes ability to address trade-offs among fisheries.
• Model outputs are still in familiar, albeit aggregated, form.

Cons:

• Minimizes stock-specific information
• Assumptions of amalgamated vital rate parameters across groups of diverse species & life histories.

Data Needs:

• Biomass and catch data, maybe some stomach, but clustered.
• Some flows among groups

Gaichas, S., Gamble, R., Fogarty, M., Benoît, H., Essington, T., Fu, C., ... & Link, J. (2012). Assembly rules for aggregate-species production models: simulations in support of management strategy evaluation. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 459, 275-292.

Motivation is that functional groups stable over time despite species mix changing

Field and Francis 2006

Ecosystem models we will cover

Tactical Models

• Single species
• Single species with ecosystem considerations
• Multi-species
• Aggregate biomass
• Spatial planning

​

Strategic & Heuristic Models

• Multi-species
• Aggregate biomass
• Biophysical
• Food web
• Conceptual/Qualitative
• Valuation of Ecosystem Services
• Full system

​

Food web models in Fisheries

Intended Purpose:

• Evaluate species interactions, energy flows, and network structure of system surrounding fishery stocks

Pros:

• Enhanced ecological realism
• Establishes ability to address trade-offs among fisheries
• Often serves as a catalog for future work

Cons:

• Transparency of models
• Assumptions of functional forms
• Model outputs atypical for historical fisheries context

Data Needs:

• Standard plus stomach, many vital rates, many more taxa than just targeted species
• Flows among compartments and rates within compartments

​

Size spectra models

• Simple metabolic models.
• Feeding ecology based on theoretical size-based relationships
• Focus on size distribution of communities rather than individual species.
• Model evaluation by changes to the slopes of the size spectra.

Hartvig et al. 2011

Whole-of-system models in fisheries

Intended Purpose:

• Evaluate fish in context of all the potential uses of an ecosystem

Pros:

• Inclusive of effectively every possible factor that can influence fish stocks
• Excellent for strategic, multiple sector management

Cons:

• Models quickly become unwieldy
• Multiple functional forms to choose from
• Model outputs may or may not be familiar

Data Needs:

• Standard plus stomach, many vital rates, many more taxa groups than just targeted species
• Flows among compartments and rates within compartments
• Economic, socioeconomic and governance drivers

End to end models allow for evaluation of tradeoffs across broader suite of objectives at system level.

Fulton EA, Smith ADM, Smith DC, Johnson P (2014) An Integrated Approach Is Needed for Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management: Insights from Ecosystem-Level Management Strategy Evaluation. PLoS ONE 9(1): e84242. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0084242

http://127.0.0.1:8081/plosone/article?id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0084242

Conceptual ecosystem models

Highlight links between species and key ecosystem drivers, components, and goals.

​

Understand how human well-being is affected by changing conditions.

​

NOAA NEFSC

What is most important for your system?

Qualitative Modeling to address uncertainty

• Only specify the directions and signs of the interactions between system components.
• Seeks qualitative �predictions of the system’s �response to a perturbation.
• Useful for limited or �inequities in data.
• Can be built in real time �with stakeholders.

​

Dambacher et al. 2003

Challenges of ecosystem models:�finding the sweet spot

​

Tradeoff in bias vs. estimation uncertainty

Collie et al. 2014. Fish & Fisheries

Handling uncertainty in ecosystem models

• Problems with classical treatment of parameter uncertainty
• Ecosystem models typically have many more parameters than single-species models
• High-dimensional parameter space
• Can be computationally expensive
• Structural uncertainty
• How to link system components
• What functional forms to choose for relationships
• Which system components to choose?
• Now mostly being addressed through multimodel inference / ensemble modeling

Additional models: EBM and spatial management

• Much of the work on marine EBM has taken the form of regional spatial planning.
• Marine Spatial Planning and Ecosystem Service Valuation often involve creating maps.
• GIS software often at the core of these exercises.

Evaluating cumulative impacts�Spatial mapping, then weighting of ‘footprint’

• Halpern et al. (2009) Cons. Lett.

Right whales in Massachusetts, shipping lanes

• Risk analysis of ship-strike to whales using maps of whale sightings, habitats, human uses and information on whale feeding ecology.

​

• Shifted shipping lane to reduce ship-strikes.

​

(NOAA Office of Protected Resources)

Dynamic Ocean Management

Spatial multispecies distribution models

• e.g. habitat modeling, species distribution, abundance index derivation, biological variation, monitoring effectiveness, etc.

Key takeaways

• There are LOTS of models out there.
• For EBM, models can be used to:
• Assess ecosystem status
• Understand ecosystem function / behavior
• Risk analysis
• Evaluate performance of management options.
• Quantify tradeoffs among sectors / objectives
• There is generally no one “right” model to use,�multi-model inference is a hot topic and probably preferable.
• Adaptive management emphasizes a flexible approach to implementation.

Fisheries and Ecosystem Models

• Questions?

Next time on Models for Marine EBM….

• Template Model Builder Workshop
• Fitting complex statistical models to data