1. An MSE for Pacific Sardine Lecture 15

2. Fisheries Management (or what goes up must…) 2 Murphy (1966) & Hill et al. (2009)

3. Fishery Development and Management-I Fishery developed during World War I Peak catch over ~700,000t (largest fishery in the western hemisphere in the 1930s and 1940s). Southeast shift in catch as fishery collapsed. Landings stopped in – 1947-48 in the Pacific Northwest – 1953-52 off San Francisco 3

4. Fishery Development and Management-II In the early 1980s, sardines were taken incidentally with Pacific and jack mackerel Incidental fishery for sardines ended in 1991 Management authority for the fishery transferred to the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) in January 2000 The Coastal Pelagic Species Management Plan includes: – Pacific sardine, Pacific mackerel, jack mackerel, anchovy, market squid 4

5. Pacific Sardine Recovery and Expansion  1980 s :  low abundance, confined to SCA; minor fisheries in SCA & Mexico  1990 s :  Expansion offshore and north to Central California;  CCA fishery begins;  Pop’n growth = 33%;  Sardine in Oregon Washington and Canada  2000 s :  Fisheries in PNW  Seasonal movements N-S, inshore/offshore San Pedro Ensenada Washington Oregon Monterey British Columbia 2000 s 90 s 80 s

6. Challenges for Assessment and Management-I Multinational fishery: – US, Mexico, Canada Time-varying migration Multiple fisheries in the US (Southern California, Central California, Pacific Northwest) Environmental-related variation in biomass 6

7. Challenges for Assessment and Management 7 Sardine scale-deposition in the Santa Barbara Basin (Soutar & Isaacs 1969; Baumgartner et al. 1992). Extreme population variability even in absence of fishing; periods of peak abundance ~ 50-60 years link to environmental forcing is assumed Typical population dynamic for an ‘R-selected’ species: small body, rapid growth, early maturation, high fecundity, short generation time, and the ability to disperse offspring widely

8. NSP Distribution and Fishing Areas U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 8 Northern Subpopulation Distribution Fishing Areas, & Modeled Fleets Summer/Fall (Feeding) Winter/Spring wning) (Spawning) So. Calif. (SCA) Ensenada (ENS) Washington (WA) Oregon (OR) Monterey Bay (CCA) Vancouver Island (BC) PacNW Fleet MexCal Fleet Southern subpopulation

9. NSP Distribution & General Survey Areas U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 9 So. Calif. (SCA) Ensenada (ENS) Washington (WA) Oregon (OR) Monterey Bay (CCA) Vancouver Island (BC) NWSS Aerial Survey (summer): 2009-2012 Summer ATM Surveys: 2008, 2012, 2013 SWFSC Spring Survey: DEPM/TEP 1994-2013; ATM 2006-2013

10. Estimated Stock Biomass Series from Base Model and Previous Stock Synthesis Models

11. Harvest Control (US) 11 HG 2010 = (BIOMASS 2009 – CUTOFF) FRACTION DISTRIBUTION To determine an appropriate (sustainable) FRACTION value: F MSY = 0.248649805(T 2 )−8.190043975(T)+67.4558326 where T ( o C) is the running average sea-surface temperature at Scripps Pier during the three preceding seasons (July-June), and exploitation FRACTION is bounded between 5% and 15%. Maximum catch allowed = 200,000 mt Stock biomass (age 1+, mt)Cutoff (mt) Harvest Fraction U.S. Distribution U.S. Harvest for 2011 (mt) 537,173150,0000.150.8750,526

12. Pacific Sardine: Management Process (Amendment 8 & 13) Overfishing Level (OFL) Harvest Guideline (HG) Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) P*P* 1+ biomass OFL Increasing SST 1+ biomass HG

13. Calculate OFL OFL=Biomass*Fraction*Distribution Calculate ABC ABC=OFL*P* Calculate HG HG=(Biomass-Cutoff)* Fraction*Distribution Final HG SST E MSY Select the minimum from these two quantities The HG is set following this basic process

14. Risk Assessment Framework OFL, ABC, HG Control Rules Remove catch from population Recruitment Environmental Driver Monitoring data

15. Performance measures 15 The performance measures are selected to quantify performance relative to [some] management goals. Average catch (total) Average population size (1+ biomass) Probability [total] catch is less than some threshold (e.g. 50,000t) Probability 1+ biomass is below a threshold.

16. SIO is the index being used in the current harvest control rule. CalCOFI is the index that better explains recruitment SIO and CalCOFI indices have different scales, and are representative of different geographical areas. SIO

17. Recruitment is related to both environment and spawning biomass 17 SeriesAICR2R2 SST_CC_ann44.490.76 SIO_SST_ann56.810.61 ERSST_ann55.30.63 The relation between several environmental indices and recruitment was evaluated. CalCOFI SST provides a better fit than SIO or ERSST to the stock-recruitment data for 1984-2008 From PFMC 2013, Table App.E.6

18. Modeling environmental drivers Fit the environmental variable to the ERSTT time series

19. Calibrating the “CalCOFI” HG control rule SE MSY PFMC June Meeting; Costa Mesa, CA, June, 2013

20. Calibrating the “CalCOFI” HG control rule Maximum harvest rate for computing OFL

21. CalCOFI-based harvest control rule OFL control rule HG control ruleHG control rule < ABC Cutoff Maxcatch Maximum harvest rate for OFL Maximum harvest rate for HG PFMC June Meeting; Costa Mesa, CA, June, 2013 The harvest control rule depends on both the 1+ biomass and the CalCOFI SST

22. This is a comparison of model runs using ERSST (left) and CalCOFI (right) as the environmental driver of recruitment, and no catches PFMC June Meeting; Costa Mesa, CA, June, 2013

23. 23 “current” HG Performance measures are defined over many cycles of the environmental variable and are not predictions of short-term catches / biomass. 45% harvest rate & high CUTOFF (variant 5) No CUTOFF (variants 3&4)

24. 24 “current” HG 45% harvest rate & high CUTOFF (variant 5)

25. 25 Performance depends on the values for the parameters determining, for example, how the environment impacts recruitment. More extreme variation in the environment than assumed for the base-case Base-case

26. 26 Key Major Sensitivity: The assumption everyone follows the US control rules (for this test Mexico and Canada are assumed to have a constant fishing mortality rate no matter what)

27. Control Rules and MSE-I Design of the operating model – Single-species: Workshop with Council involvement (Council members, staff, SSC, advisory bodies) – Multi-species: Ongoing – currently being funding through a Packard grant – Operating model reviewed by the Council Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) Selection of OFL control rules: the SSC! 27

28. Control Rules and MSE-II Selection of HG control variants: – Initially based on those considered when the current Harvest Guideline control rule was adopted – Additional options added by: The Coastal Pelagic Species management team The public (via the Council) – Software made available to the public who provided suggestions based on their analyses. 28

29. Control Rules and MSE-III Performance measures for the MSE: Initially based on those considered when the current Harvest Guideline control rule was adopted Performance statistics added based on input from the: – Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team, – Coastal Pelagic Species Advisory Subpanel, and – Public (NGOs, industry). 29