| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Almqvist, Gustaf, et al.
(author)
-
Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Baltic Cod Stocks (WKBALTCOD)
- 2015
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- The ICES Benchmark Workshop on Baltic Cod Stocks (WKBALTCOD), chaired by External Chair Jean-Jacques Maguire, Canada and ICES Chair Marie Storr-Paulsen, Denmark, and attended by two invited external experts Verena Trenkel, France and Meaghan Bryan, USA met in Rostock, Germany, 2–6 March 2015 with 39 participants and six countries represented. The objective of WKBALTCOD was to evaluate the appropriateness of data and methods to determine stock status and investigate meth-ods appropriate to use in the single-stock assessment for the cod stock in SD 22–24 and cod in SD 25–32 in the Baltic. Participants in the workshop were a large group with diverse backgrounds representing the industry, fisheries, NGOs, managers and scientists.The single-stock analytic assessment of the eastern Baltic stock was not accepted by the assessment working group (WGBFAS) in 2014 due to severe problems with the input data. The advice for the eastern Baltic cod was, therefore, based on the ICES approach for data-limited stocks. As an outcome ICES decided to establish a bench-mark for both cod stocks and to scope an integrated assessment for the Baltic cod stocks. The first meeting (WKSIBCA) was therefore meant to introduce the interces-sional work conducted since the assessment working group in April 2014, and to reach some conclusions on how to proceed both in the short term (Benchmark in March 2015) and longer term (2–3 years) and was seen as a data compilation work-shop, there is produced a separate report from this workshop. The WKBALTCOD was the 2nd meeting in the benchmark process and was intended to come up with a final stock assessment method, stock annex and input data for both stocks. As it was not possible to reach conclusive decision on the final model to be used for the east Baltic cod stock during the benchmark meeting and as more work on the preferable models was needed, it was decided by the ACOM leadership to prolong the bench-mark process until the assessment working group meeting in April 2015. This deci-sion has led to a relatively long process partly mixed with the assessment working group WGBFAS.It became clear during the benchmark process that although large effort has been put into explaining the underlying processes leading to the changes in the Baltic ecosys-tem, there is still some lack of understanding of the present situation in the eastern Baltic cod stock. Therefore, it was not possible to reach firm conclusions on the final model to be used and therefore not possible to set reference points. It was decided to continue to explore the most promising models and to continue to improve the input data until the assessment working group started in April.The main challenges still to be solved for the Eastern Baltic cod stock is the quantifi-cation of increased natural mortality and decrease in growth. Through several presentations during the workshop (both WKSIBCA and WKBALTCOD) it became clear that natural mortality very likely has increased in later years, due to decreased condition and increased parasite infection. A decrease in growth also seems plausible duo to a decrease in condition and/or selectivity-induced mortality of the largest in-dividuals. However, as none of these parameters are easily estimated, especially with the severe ageing problems, different model assumptions made the output very shaky.For the western Baltic cod, stock identification issues were examined in area SD 24, the intermediate area: based on otolith characteristics and genetics. Due to the results showing a large proportion of east cod in this area, it was decided to split the catch2 | ICES WKBALTCOD REPORT 2015and survey from SD 24 into either the western or eastern Baltic cod stock. It was pos-sible to derive proportions of eastern and western cod in SD 24 back to the mid-1990s.For the western Baltic cod stock a modelled survey indices was included in the as-sessment covering the western part of SD 24 and Area 22+23 and based on a smoothed ALK.Both cod stocks have in the past used commercial tuning fleet to have a better cov-ered of older age groups. It was decided to abound this time-series duo quality issues such as a limited coverage and problems with technical creeping.WKBALTCOD was not able to explore and define reference points for the Western Baltic cod stock during the meeting due to time constraints, but these were calculated and decided by correspondence after the meeting. The recent protocols on estimation procedures developed by WKMSYREF3 for stocks with a full analytical assessment and for data-limited stocks served as objective guidelines to obtain reference point estimates.
|
|
| 5. |
- Bergström, Lena, et al.
(author)
-
Interim Report of the ICES/HELCOM Working Group on Integrated Assessments of the Baltic Sea (WGIAB) : 18-22 April 2016 Helsinki, Finland
- 2016
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- The ICES/HELCOM Working Group on Integrated Assessments of the Baltic Sea (WGIAB) meeting was held in Helsinki (Finland), 18-22 April 2016. The meeting was attended by 26 participants from five countries and chaired by Laura Uusitalo, Fin-land, Saskia Otto, Germany, Martin Lindegren, Denmark, and Lena Bergström, Swe-den. This was the first year of the new three-year Terms of Reference (ToR) for WGIAB. The main working activities in 2016 were to A) develop the trait-based ap-proach of understanding the ecosystem function, and B) explore the social-ecological system, including indicator development, revising the conceptual model, and devel-oping case studies. As a primary outcome of the ToR A, we built on our previous work on integrated ecosystem assessments (IEAs) in the Baltic Sea, but extended it beyond considering changes in abundances of a few dominant species, to accounting for community-wide changes in a number of key traits across multiple trophic levels. These traits represent various ecosystem functions upon which we derive important ecosystem services. By investigating temporal changes in the community weighted mean traits of phyto-plankton, zooplankton, zoobenthos, and fish, we demonstrated whether trait reor-ganizations at the level of entire communities occurred in the Central Baltic Sea as a result of the 1980s regime shift. Using in total 29 traits combined for all groups we found indications of two breakpoints across all four taxonomic groups over the last decades, i.e. one around 1990 and one around 2000. Further work will focus on ex-ploring the nature of the changes in trait composition and on standardizing the num-ber of traits and data types (i.e. binary, continuous or categorical) across taxonomic group.In addition, we collected data on key functional groups and abiotic variables in all main sub-basins of the Baltic Sea, setting the stage for a cross-regional comparison of temporal patterns and trends in lower trophic level in the face of recent develop-ments in climate-related drivers.With reference to Tor B, to explore how social indicators could be used in parallel with biological indicators in an integrated assessment framework, we developed a conceptual model of interrelationships between ecosystem and society. We used the model as a basis for mapping factors to be accounted for in the ecosystem-based management using the Baltic salmon and clupeid species as case studies. The models depict 1) the structure of the foodweb relevant to the target species, 2) the key com-munity level and population traits that contribute to the state of the species, 3) main pressures affecting the foodweb and their effects on the species, 4) key management measures, and 5) benefits that the species can produce for society.To support the development of Ecosystem Overview the group members evaluated the probability of occurrence and the magnitude of the effect of 15 pressures occur-ring in the Baltic Sea. The top five pressures identified were input of nutrients, in-creased temperature, decreased salinity, input of hazardous substances, and input or spread of non-indigenous species.The work will continue intersessionally and the next meeting of WGIAB is planned to be held in Lisbon, Portugal, back-to-back with WGCOMEDA and WGEAWESS.
|
|
| 6. |
- Bergström, Lena, et al.
(author)
-
Report of the ICES/HELCOM Working Group on Integrated Assessments of the Baltic Sea (WGIAB)
- 2015
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- The ICES/HELCOM Working Group on Integrated Assessments of the Baltic Sea(WGIAB) was established in 2007 as a forum for developing and combining ecosystembasedmanagement efforts for the Baltic Sea. The group intends to serve as a scientificcounterpart and support for the ICES Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group(WGBFAS) as well as for efforts and projects related to Integrated Ecosystem Assessments(IEA) within ICES and HELCOM. The group works in cooperation with similargroups within the ACOM/SCICOM Steering Group on Integrated Ecosystem Assessments(SSGIEA).The 2015 WGIAB meeting was held in Cádiz, Spain, from 9–13 March, back-to-backwith the meeting of its counterpart in the Working Group on Ecosystem Assessmentof Western European Shelf Seas (WGEAWESS). The meetings had joint sessions as wellas WG specific work, and some participants effectively participated in both meetings.The WGIAB meeting was attended by 27 participants from nine countries. The meetingwas chaired by Christian Möllmann, Germany, Laura Uusitalo, Finland and Lena Bergström,Sweden.This was the last year of the ongoing three-year Terms of Reference (ToR) for WGIAB.The main working activities in 2015 were to i) conduct studies on Baltic Sea ecosystemfunctioning with the goal to publish case studies from different parts of the Baltic Seain peer-reviewed journals, ii) work on the demonstration exercise to develop ecosystem-based assessment and advice for Baltic fish stocks focusing on cod (DEMO) withmultiple approaches, iii) plan further how to integrate the social and economic aspectsmore tightly in the WGIAB work, and iv) discuss the future focus and format of theWGIAB work.The Baltic ecosystem functioning activity focused on identifying and exploring keytrends and linkages in the Baltic Sea foodweb. This was pursued by presentation andfurther discussion of ongoing intersessional work on foodweb modelling and integratedanalyses, and by exercises to develop conceptual models Baltic Sea foodwebsand the links to ecosystem function. Long-term monitoring datasets on the abiotic andbiotic parts of the Baltic Sea Proper ecosystem were updated for use in the continuedwork to develop environmental indicators for fisheries and marine management.The focus of the DEMO 3 (DEMOnstration exercise for Integrated Ecosystem Assessmentand Advice of Baltic Sea cod) was on finding a way to use the results from theDEMO1 and DEMO2 workshops in short and midterm projections/scenarios of Balticcod dynamics based on different types of modelling, as well as designing methodologyand modelling data for practical implementation of Integrated Advice for Baltic cod.The WGIAB was positively inclined towards including social and economic aspectsinto the integrated assessment. Openings to this path were provided by presentationon ongoing project work, and discussing their linkages to ecological aspects. It wasseen as crucial that experts on social and economic analysis should be included andtake an active part in the future work of the group.The group concluded that its upcoming work should focus more closely on functionaldiversity, which was identified as a recurring issue in the Baltic Sea. This approach wasalso identified as a useful connection point between scientific and management aspectsin order for the group to continue serving as a forum for developing ecosystem-basedmanagement efforts in the Baltic Sea. A focus on functional diversity was also seen as2 | ICES WGIAB REPORT 2015a potentially feasible way of bringing together management aspects for different sectors,by linking to ecosystem services concepts.The group proposed Saskia Otto, Germany and Martin Lindegren, Denmark as newincoming Chairs, together with Lena Bergström, Sweden and Laura Uusitalo, Finland.Having four Chairs is justified due to the wide scope of the group's work, as well asthe increased work load due to the planned new foci.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Hinrichsen, Hans-Harald, et al.
(author)
-
Report of the Workshop on DEveloping Integrated AdviCE for Baltic Sea ecosystem-based fisheries management (WKDEICE) : 18-21 April 2016 Helsinki, Finland
- 2016
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- The first ICES Workshop on DEveloping Integrated AdviCE for Baltic Sea ecosystem-based fisheries management (WKDEICE) had the aim to start identifying and devel-oping ways to include environmental and economic considerations into ICES advice on Baltic Sea fish stocks. The WKDEICE meeting was held in Helsinki, Finland, on18–21 April 2016, with 12 participants from three countries and was chaired by Chris-tian Möllmann (Germany), Rudi Voss (Germany), and Maciej T. Tomczak (Sweden). Focusing on Eastern Baltic cod (subdivisions 25-32), WKDEICE addressed five main topics:1)developing a strategy for integrating environmental and economic infor-mation in fish stock advice;2)conducting an integrated environmental assessment;3)conducting a socio-economic assessment;4)conducting short-term projections informed by environmental and economic conditions; and5)communicating the approach and the results.Eastern Baltic cod has been selected as a case study. The exercise will likely be ex-tended to the baltic clupeid stocks of herring and sprat.A central point of the meeting was to discuss and design a concept of operationalized Integrated Ecosystem Assessment (IEA) including short-term predictions, to be used in advice on the main Baltic Sea fish stocks. The group developed an operational strategy, and started to quantify potentially useful environmental indicators, focusing on hydrographic conditions influencing cod recruitment. Economic short-term fore-casts were established to include the human dimension, and to provide additional quantitative information on fishing options. The suggested integrated advice frame-work will be further developed using simulation modelling during a next meeting in 2017. This meeting will be coordinated with the ICES/HELCOM Working Group on Integrated Assessments of the Baltic Sea (WGIAB) and the Baltic Fisheries Assess-ment Working Group (WGBFAS) to test concepts, apply Management Strategy Eval-uation (MSE) models, and have direct feedback for relevant ICES bodies.
|
|
| 9. |
- Karp, Melissa A., et al.
(author)
-
Increasing the uptake of multispecies models in fisheries management
- 2023
-
In: ICES Journal of Marine Science. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1054-3139 .- 1095-9289. ; 80:2, s. 243-257
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Multispecies models have existed in a fisheries context since at least the 1970s, but despite much exploration, advancement, and consideration of multispecies models, there remain limited examples of their operational use in fishery management. Given that species and fleet interactions are inherently multispecies problems and the push towards ecosystem-based fisheries management, the lack of more regular operational use is both surprising and compelling. We identify impediments hampering the regular operational use of multispecies models and provide recommendations to address those impediments. These recommendations are: (1) engage stakeholders and managers early and often; (2) improve messaging and communication about the various uses of multispecies models; (3) move forward with multispecies management under current authorities while exploring more inclusive governance structures and flexible decision-making frameworks for handling tradeoffs; (4) evaluate when a multispecies modelling approach may be more appropriate; (5) tailor the multispecies model to a clearly defined purpose; (6) develop interdisciplinary solutions to promoting multispecies model applications; (7) make guidelines available for multispecies model review and application; and (8) ensure code and models are well documented and reproducible. These recommendations draw from a global assemblage of subject matter experts who participated in a workshop entitled “Multispecies Modeling Applications in Fisheries Management”.
|
|
| 10. |
- Tam, Jamie C., et al.
(author)
-
Towards ecosystem-based management : identifying operational food-web indicators for marine ecosystems
- 2017
-
In: ICES Journal of Marine Science. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1054-3139 .- 1095-9289. ; 74:7, s. 2040-2052
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Modern approaches to Ecosystem-Based Management and sustainable use of marine resources must account for the myriad of pressures (interspecies, human and environmental) affecting marine ecosystems. The network of feeding interactions between co-existing species and populations (food webs) are an important aspect of all marine ecosystems and biodiversity. Here we describe and discuss a process to evaluate the selection of operational food-web indicators for use in evaluating marine ecosystem status. This process brought together experts in food-web ecology, marine ecology, and resource management, to identify available indicators that can be used to inform marine management. Standard evaluation criteria (availability and quality of data, conceptual basis, communicability, relevancy to management) were implemented to identify practical food-web indicators ready for operational use and indicators that hold promise for future use in policy and management. The major attributes of the final suite of operational food-web indicators were structure and functioning. Indicators that represent resilience of the marine ecosystem were less developed. Over 60 potential food-web indicators were evaluated and the final selection of operational food-web indicators includes: the primary production required to sustain a fishery, the productivity of seabirds (or charismatic megafauna), zooplankton indicators, primary productivity, integrated trophic indicators, and the biomass of trophic guilds. More efforts should be made to develop thresholds-based reference points for achieving Good Environmental Status. There is also a need for international collaborations to develop indicators that will facilitate management in marine ecosystems used by multiple countries.
|
|
