Fisheries Ecosystem Models: Technical Details and Prospects for Partnerships

1. Fisheries Ecosystem Models: Technical Details and Prospects for Partnerships

Howard Townsend, Ph.D. NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office (NMFS) - Cooperative Oxford Lab (NOS/NCCOS) January 15, 2008

2. "It was the Law of the Sea, they said. Civilization ends at the waterline. Beyond that, we all enter the food chain, and not always right at the top."

-Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

3. Presentation Outline

Introduction Chesapeake Bay Fisheries Ecosystem Model NOAA/NMFS Ecosystem Modeling and International Efforts: NEMoW UN Reports Technical Details (Major Models/Model Types/Software) Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) Atlantis Gadget Opportunities for Partnerships NEMoW Members Plans for future NEMoW

4. CB Fisheries Ecosystem Model

Developed in cooperation between NOAA CBO/Oxford, CRC, UBC with support from many bay researchers using Ecopath with Ecosim software (code base) A companion to the CB Fisheries Ecosystem Plan Technical report (230 p) completed/in review Chesapeake Bay tidal waters 45 functional groups Replicates ecosystem history 1950 � present

7. Inputs and Links to EwE

Input Monitoring Stock assessment Literature CBREEM Mediation Forcing Habitat and water quality (e.g., SAV, DO) Management scenarios Ecopath Ecosim Inputs: monitoring provides biomass; stock assessment for fishing mortality and catching; Literature and lab studies for diet composition. CBREEM output provide historical pattern in primary production. In addition, water quality data and habitat information can be used to generate mediation and forcing function for EwEInputs: monitoring provides biomass; stock assessment for fishing mortality and catching; Literature and lab studies for diet composition. CBREEM output provide historical pattern in primary production. In addition, water quality data and habitat information can be used to generate mediation and forcing function for EwE

8. Chesapeake Bay Regional Estuarine Ecology Model (CBREEM)

Purpose Generate historical patterns in primary productivity for EwE Introduction & Methods Two layer, simple hydrographic model (monthly time steps for 50+ years) Use wind, rainfall, gage inflow, and relative loading as inputs Solve for equilibrium velocity fields on Richardson grids and make chemical mass-balanced calculations (Wright et al. 1986, Hunter and Hearn 1991) Results Chla (used as nutrient loading forcing function for EwE)

9. Forcing Data (Input) for CBREEM

Wind Thomas Point, Maryland (TPLM2, 1985-2002, NOAA National Buoy Data Center) and trigonometric functions (1950-1985) Rainfall Monthly average from ten stations (1950-1997, NOAA National Climate Data Center) and a reference index in Washington D.C. (1998-2002) Gage inflow Nine gauged rivers (USGS) Relative loading (Nitrogen) 1984 to 2003 from monitoring (average: 0.9126 mg/l) Susquehanna river (1945-1984) from Dr. Hagy Other eight rivers (1945-1984) � monthly average from 1984 to 2003

10. Model Interface

Chla

11. Summary

Input Monitoring Stock assessment Literature CBREEM Mediation Forcing Habitat and water quality (e.g., SAV, DO) Management scenarios Ecopath Ecosim Habitat mediation for blue crab YOY via SAV Physical forcing through DO for striped bass Menhaden B changes under different SB Fs DO data (1985-2006) Long-term forcing function Sij

12. CBFEM Plans

Applications Support development of ecosystem-based fisheries management plan Tool for exploring ecosystem impacts of fisheries management decisions in developing EBFM Provide guidance in identifying research, monitoring and assessment needs Development Review of current model data (basic input, drivers, and validation) guided by EMTAP under the purview of FSC Improve data and ensure we have adequately mined data (Maddy) Link FEM with Water Quality and other physico-chemical models (Hongguang) Explore other ecological, climatological, etc. impacts on the Chesapeake fisheries ecosystem The ultimate goal is to use CBFEM (and other ecosystem management models) in a process similar to single species stock assessment models. The CBFEM will be developed, reviewed, applied and updated on a regular cycle with oversight from a technical committee.

13. NOAA/NMFS and International Ecosystem Modeling Efforts

Fisheries Ecosystem Modeling is new and needs regulatory/management foundations

14. NOAA Ecosystem Modeling Team

Funding NEMoW National Ecosystem Modeling Workshop Approved and Sponsored by NMFS Science Advisory Board Meeting 1st meeting August 2007 to exchange ideas on approaches and develop best practices for fisheries ecosystem/multi-species models A national workshop to standardize methodologies and approaches when using ecosystem, bio-physical and multispecies models Responsive to a wide range of calls for EAM/EAF/IEA/etc.

15. Why NEMOW?

There have been only limited and ad hoc efforts to provide a standardized approach for Eco/MS models: software packages recommendations for use parameterization protocols validation protocols data requirements

16. We do this for stock assessments, rarely for other elements of the ecosystemWe do this for stock assessments, rarely for other elements of the ecosystem

17. What � NEMoW Products

Workshop Report Howard Townsend, Jason Link, Kenric Osgood, Todd Gedamke, George Watters, Jeff Polovina, Phil Levin, Ned Cyr, and Kerim Aydin. 2008 (Submitted). Report on NOAA National Ecosystem Modeling Workshop. NOAA/NMFS Technical Memorandum) Evaluation of Models Recommendations for National EM Standards/Guidelines of use & review Recommendations for Standardized Approaches

18. International Efforts

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization Report on Classes/Categories and uses of Ecosystem Models for Fisheries (out Aug 2007) Reference: Plag�nyi 2007. Models for an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical paper 477 ? Report of Modelling Ecosystem Interactions for Informing an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries: Best Practices in Ecosystem Modeling, Tivoli, July 3-6, 2007 (out soon)

19. Conclusions from External Efforts

Ecosystem Models and Management Advice Conceptual/understanding: of the structure, functioning and interactions of the ecosystem, or sub-system, under consideration. May not be used explicitly in decision-making or scientific advice but forms the underlying context for any detailed management planning and decision-making Strategic decisions: linked to policy goals and are generally long-range, broadly-based and inherently adaptable Tactical decisions: aimed at the short-term (e.g. next 3-5 years), linked to an operational objective and in the form of a rigid set of instructions e.g. tactical decision to change quota Model types Whole ecosystem models: models that attempt to take into account all trophic levels in the ecosystem Minimum Realistic Models (MRM): limited number of species most likely to have important interactions with a target species of interest Dynamic System Models (Biophysical): represent both bottom-up (physical) and top-down (biological) forces interacting in an ecosystem Extensions of single-species assessment models (ESAM): expand on current single-species assessment models taking only a few additional inter-specific interactions into account

20. Conclusions from NMFS & International Efforts

21. Technical Details (Major Models/Model Types/Software)

EwE, Atlantis, and Gadget

22. EwE: An Overview

Data Model Research Application Biol.: B, P/B, Q/B, diet. Fleet catches Manual Ecoranger Automatic Pedigree ? M.Carlo Vulnerability, mediation, � Mass-balance (Ecopath) Time-dynamic (Ecosim) Spatial-dynamic (Ecospace) Nutrient-O2 seagrass, � Habitat preference, dispersal, migration etc. Spatial cost of fishing Prim.prod.(SeaWIFS) Runoff, nutri-ents, depth, � Persistent pollutants Tracer- dynamic (Ecotrace) Who eats whom? Network analysis Biol. & fishing time series Fisheries vs. environment Protected area dynamics. Spatial effort allocation Environmental time series Policy exploration Economics, social info. Fisheriesmanagement Functionalresponse, etc. Ocean zoning Academic (ecol. theory) MPA size (Ecoseed) Seaso-nality Sensitivity analysis

23. EwE - Simpler Overview

ECOPATH Began with Polovina 1984, updated by Christensen and Pauly (early 1990s) - statistics added until current (year 2000) version. But basic equations are unchanged (and well-examined) for over 10 years. ECOSIM (and ECOSPACE) Recent work to make a food web dynamic, theory and practice new (some is un-reviewed with ad-hoc corrections). Designed for quick running and exploring policy scenarios Strengths Unified format is strength Recent re-programming (Visual Basic 6? .NET) October 2007 Allows easier access to code and Facilitates 2-way model coupling (interoperability) Enhanced visualization Developers are creating basic database-driven models of all LMEs

24. Practical Application of EwE: Ecosystem Trophic Modeling

Ecopath is used to organize data (esp. historical) on trophic interactions and population sizes. Has routines for entry of key data on the biology and exploitation of ecosystem groups, and for creating a mass-balance �snapshot� of an ecosystem. Ecosim builds dynamic predictions by combining the data with foraging arena theory. Provides dynamic simulation of effect changes in fishing or environmental regimes may have on fisheries catches (volume and value) and the abundance of various groups in the ecosystem. Ecospace for addressing spatial policy questions, esp. marine protected areas. Ecotrace for exploring ecosystem effects of persistent pollutants

25. What are the strengths of EwE model approach?

Ecosim is freely available, large user community Improved understanding of data systems (multiple agency, multiple scale data assimilation) Functional response parameterization is very flexible, much more advanced than many published forms Simulates a wide variety of fishing scenarios, including spatial management in Ecospace Simulates changes in production regimes Ability to represent age structure for many groups Biomass dynamics of whole ecosystem considered, see both direct effects and side effects of scenarios Broad user-group

26. Ecosystem models can improve our understanding of interactions between species, climate, fishing, and habitat. The Atlantis ecosystem model (Fulton et al. 2004) is a strategic tool used to:1. synthesize this information; 2. simulate possible ecosystem responses;3. identify key processes that govern ecosystem condition Atlantis is programmed in C++ and is freely available (and become increasingly well-documented)

Atlantis (code base)

27. Al Hermann, PMEL Al Hermann, PMEL

28. Uses for Atlantis: Management Strategy Evaluation

29. Pros Flexible options for predation, reproduction, growth, gape limitation MSE (monitoring, assessments, indicators, economics, management) Nutrient handling, and interfaces with ROMS oceanography output (and other hydrodynamics model output) Migrations out of region

Cons Build time (6-12 months) Run time (hours- days) Lacks balancing routines Cumbersome parameterization Atlantis � Pros & Cons Adaptive environmental assessment (AEA) tradition for ecospace Sensitivity runs difficult Adaptive environmental assessment (AEA) tradition for ecospace Sensitivity runs difficult

30. GADGET

Forward simulation model Create a virtual population within the model Follow the fish through their lives Fishing, mortality, growth, maturation, etc. Process driven E.g. percentage becoming mature, not percentage mature at age

31. GADGET - Software

Written in C++ Can be run under UNIX/Linux and PC (using cygwin) Source code has to be downloaded, and then compiled on local computer Code has been used for many years � well tested Documentation and examples available on-line Graphics not included in package � only numerical output Further development of code not decided at the moment � main programmers have got new jobs

32. Gadget - Strengths

Flexible tool May integrate a wide variety of information on different resolution (biological/spatial/temporal) Model and data independent Well documented Suitable for modelling systems with a few main species/interactions (e.g. boreal ecosystems) Age data not needed Gaps in data/knowledge may be identified � no hidden assumptions

33. Opportunities for Parterships

NEMoW Steering Committee, Current Software Developers

34. Potential Partners in NEMoW (NMFS)

NEMoW Steering Committee (NMFS) Jason Link Northeast FSC Howard Townsend NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office Kerim Aydin Alaska FSC Ned Cyr Office of Science & Technology Kenric Osgood Office of Science & Technology Todd Gedamke Southeast FSC Jeff Polovina Pacific Islands FSC Phil Levin Northwest FSC George Watters Southwest FSC NEMoW Web Site http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st7/nemow.htm

35. Potential Partners for Software Development

Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) Villy Christensen, University of British Columbia Fisheries Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia Atlantis Beth Fulton, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Hobart, Tasmania GADGET - Globally applicable Area Disaggregated General Ecosystem Toolbox, www.hafro.is/gadget Bjarte Bogstad, Institute of Marine Research, Bergen, Norway