seafood-watch-tac-meeting-summary-may-2019

Seafood Watch Fisheries Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Outcome Summary Meeting held in Monterey, CA, May 21-22nd, 2019 Overview: The Monterey Bay Aquarium (MBA) Seafood Watch Program (SFW) convened a meeting of its Fisheries Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) on May 21-22 nd in Monterey, California The primary purpose of this meeting was obtain scientific expert advice on potential revisions to the SFW Standard based on updated scientific knowledge, SFW staff experience applying the current Standard and feedback received during SFW’s first public comment period This summary report provides an overview of the meeting’s key outcomes It is presented in the following sections: (1) Overview; (2) Participants; (3) Meeting Materials and Presentations; (4) Day Overview; (5) Day Overview The meeting agenda is attached as an appendix to this document Participants: The Fisheries TAC is composed of twelve fisheries science experts, 11 of whom attended the two-day meeting Name Loo Botsford, PhD Andrew Boustany, PhD Larry Crowder, PhD Rod Fujita, PhD Robin Pelc, PhD Ellen Pikitch, PhD Margaret Siple, PhD Scott Wallace, PhD Larry Epstein Michael Melnychuk, PhD Julianna Herrera Megan Atcheson Affiliation University of California, Davis Monterey Bay Aquarium Stanford University Environmental Defense Fund California State University, Monterey Bay Stony Brook University University of California, Santa Barbara David Suzuki Foundation Independent Consultant University of Washington Fair Trade USA Marine Stewardship Council In Attendance? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes In addition to the 11 TAC members, the meeting was hosted by the SFW Fisheries Science team, who were also in attendance: Sam Wilding, Dr Sara McDonald, Shelley Dearhart and Lisa Max The first day of the meeting was facilitated by Corey Peet from Postelsia, the second day was self-facilitated Meeting Materials: Prior to the meeting TAC members were provided with the following documents: an agenda, a copy of the Public Comment draft of the SFW Fisheries Standard, a summary of the period public comments received and several topical summaries Day Overview: Topics covered during day included proposed revisions to 1) better define the scope of SFW fisheries assessments (including rated species and bycatch species); 2) better determine bycatch species in the absence of catch composition information via improvements to the SFW “Unknown Bycatch Matrices;” 3) better assess forage fisheries and fisheries for other species whose biomass fluctuates with environmental conditions; 4) improve guidance on appropriate reference points; and 5) improve the Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (used for data absent fisheries/species) Below, in table format, each issue is briefly described, the main challenges discussed with the TAC summarized, and outcomes listed Day – Topic: Scope of SFW Assessments Issue: The scope of a SFW fisheries assessment includes the following: 1) the species/gear/region combinations that are to be rated, 2) the other main species impacted by the fishery, and identifying/clarifying when fishery is a “substantial contributor” to fishing mortality (either targeted, otherwise retained, discarded or harmed) Within this topic, the feasibility of using NOAA’s list of Foreign Fisheries (LOFF) to better determine when a fishery significantly impacts marine mammals Feedback sought: SFW sought guidance from the TAC on how to develop a consistent and quantitative approach to determine assessment scopes that can be applied in data rich and data limited situations TAC Guidance and Action items:  Maintain the highest resolution for species/gear/region combinations in order to reward better performers and potentially push innovation/technology development to increase data and transparency in seafood supply chains  To increase consistency, develop decision trees based on quantitative thresholds to determine the main species included in an assessment, and if possible develop an additional decision tree to determine whether a fishery is a substantial contributor to fishing mortality for any given species  Investigate conducting Cumulative Impacts Analyses (CIA) (to examine relative risk) for each potentially impacted stock to be included as a main species, requiring information on life history characteristics, expert judgement and susceptibility to the fishery  Investigate conducting Productivity Susceptibility Analyses (PSA) for each potentially impacted stock to be included as a main species (which SFW already does for data absent stocks)  Develop a list of research questions related to scoping Day – Topic: Unknown Bycatch Matrices Issue: In data absent situations, SFW uses a series of “Unknown Bycatch Matrices” to determine the susceptibility of taxonomic groups to fishing gear types SFW is conducting an expert elicitation via a series of workshops to improve these matrices for finfish, batoids, forage fish, invertebrates and habitat-forming species (the matrices were updated for highly vulnerable species during the 2015-16 standard revision) Feedback sought: SFW sought advice on how to increase expert sample size and how to address expert response uncertainty TAC Guidance and Action items:  To increase expert sample size 1) solicit expert participation from fisheries observers (SFW notes that the next international observer conference will occur after this revision cycle is complete), 2) solicit experts via the New England Aquarium Bycatch Exchange portal (investigate joining), 3) solicit and train Fishery Improvement Program (FIP) researchers to conduct expert workshops on SFW’s behalf in their regions and 4) continue to seek out conferences and universities where SFW can conduct the expert elicitation workshop  To better understand variation between expert responses 1) compare responses across workshop discussion groups then identify large differences, 2) Analyze catch and bycatch patterns described by expert participants by life history type and gear type and 3) Visualize uncertainty using error bars Day – Topic: Highly Fluctuating Species Issue: While the biomass of all species is driven to some extent by environmental variability, this effect is magnified in “highly fluctuating species,” making assessments of stock status a challenge for these species Some are also “forage species,” which require high levels of precaution when setting harvest control rules to account for the needs of dependent predators (as described by the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force) Feedback sought: SFW sought guidance on 1) appropriate time frames and decision rules for characterizing stock health for these species, 2) whether appropriate biomass based reference points are available or can be developed for these species, 3) how to address high levels of uncertainty in stock status, and 4) how to better assess management for these species TAC Guidance and Action items:  Develop improved characterization and definition for HFS species, including forage species, forage-like species and other species that exhibit large changes in biomass with environmental conditions  Characterize data usefulness for HFS species (based on recency and frequency of collection, length of time series) Factor in whether climactic conditions have permanently shifted over the course of datasets so as to determine whether particular data points remain relevant  Cautiously continue investigating biomass-based approaches to scoring stock status by simulating biomass for different forage fish categories and applying simple biomass based decision rules  Investigate non-biomass approaches including the following: 1) Spawning Potential Ratio/Fraction of Lifetime Egg Production, 2) Scoring species based on productivity and regime 3) Scoring based on attributes of resilience based on a literature review and 4) More heavily weight scoring forage species within the HFS category in the Management Criterion (C3) rather than Stock Status (C1) and consider a management modifier to account for timely, frequent, responsive management SFW acknowledges that there is high uncertainty in stock status for forage species, which require highly precautionary harvest control rules The uncertainty may be too high to score forage species with confidence for C1.1 and 1.2 so SFW may consider 1) developing default scores for C1, 2) developing a generic “yellow” for C1, or 3) not scoring C1 (or C2 for other forage species) Day – Reference Points Issue: To assess stock status for data rich fisheries, SFW assesses a stock’s biomass and fishing mortality relative to biological reference points and assesses the appropriateness of these reference points SFW currently considers MSY-based reference points and their equivalent as the “gold standard” Feedback sought: SFW sought feedback on whether guidance on appropriate reference points should be expanded beyond MSY/MSY equivalents TAC Guidance and Action items:  While continuing to accept MSY based or equivalent reference points, acknowledge that MSY is not the universal “gold standard”, revise the wording in the SFW standard and develop associated guidance to reflect that appropriateness of reference points should be assessed based on principles of conservation and system resilience Day – Topic: Productivity Susceptibility Analysis Issue: SFW uses a semi-quantitative Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (modified from the MSC) as a risk-based approach to conservatively determine species vulnerability for data absent and data poor stocks as a basis to score abundance as high or moderate concern Feedback sought: Although there have been recent criticisms of PSAs in the literature, SFW is likely to retain the PSA due to a lack of alternative methods to score abundance in data absent situations SFW sought feedback from the TAC on potential improvements to the PSA TAC Guidance and Action Items:  Retain the PSA, but with improvements 1) Add and remove productivity attributes suggested in Duffy et al 2017, 2) When feasible, use local or regional life history information, perhaps from the RAM legacy database, 3) Review additional Productivity and Susceptibility Attributes (namely Management Effectiveness)  Test accuracy/precision of PSA (as basis for scoring) by examining results of data rich species PSAs versus data limited/absent Continued over… Day Overview: Topics covered during day included proposed revisions to 1) better assess data limited fisheries, 2) factor in the impacts of climate change on fish stocks, 3) strengthen the Management Effectiveness criterion ,4) strengthen the Habitat and Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management criterion, and 5) better align how SFW assess bait use in fisheries assessments and feed use in aquaculture assessments The final topic was discussed in conjunction with the Aquaculture Technical Advisory Committee Day – Topic: Data Limited Fisheries Issue: Currently, when assessing data-limited fisheries, to score low concern for factor 1.1 or 2.1, SFW requires two appropriate data-limited methods indicating a stable or positive outcome in combination with low or moderate vulnerability (as determined using a PSA as previously discussed) Feedback sought: SFW sought guidance from the TAC on 1) whether the current strategy (described above) is still the most effective, 2) whether the PSA should continue to be used for data-limited stocks, 3) whether appropriate tools exist or can be modified that will enable SFW analysts to assess the appropriateness and quality of data-limited assessment methods TAC Guidance and Action Items:  Review ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) classification of data-limited approaches; determine whether there a similar way that SFW could characterize different methods  Review NRDC Report on data-limited assessment methods  Review information in EDF’s FISHE method matrix and the guidance document: “Choosing Performance Indicators, identifying Reference Points, and defining Harvest Control Rules” in the downloadable FISHE workbook which describes caveats in datalimited assessment methods  Develop a decision tree to ensure consistent application of the SFW data limited approach  Continue to use the PSA for data-limited stocks and consider using it for data-rich stocks Day – Topic: Climate Change and Fisheries Issue: Species responses to climate forcing include shifts in productivity and range Ecological responses to climate change are much more complex than current models describe; range and productivity shifts may be tied to temperature tolerance, environmental carrying capacity/regime shifts, predator-prey dynamics and/or other factors that are not always accounted for in models How management responds to shifts in productivity and range (including coordination across international boundaries) are likely to influence the long-term viability of fish stocks Feedback sought: SFW sought guidance from the TAC on whether species’ responses to climatic shifts should be considered as part of SFW assessments, and if so, where (i.e., in which Criteria) and how? TAC Guidance and Action Items:  The TAC agreed that the SFW Fisheries Standard currently includes the fundamentals necessary to evaluate stock status (C1) and management (C3) in the face of climate impacts While there is not yet enough information to incorporate climate changespecific requirements into either criterion, the TAC suggested that 1) the management criterion address building and maintaining ecological and social resilience and potentially include language on management’s preparedness for and responsiveness to shifts in productivity and range and 2) the Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management factor (C4.3) potentially include aspirational language in regard to understanding and managing changes in ecosystem productivity  Based on recommendations described above, SFW will review literature on resiliency to potentially incorporate into the Management criterion guidance (C3) Day – Topic: Management Effectiveness Issue: A handful of issues were raised during public comment regarding the Management Effectiveness criterion Feedback sought: SFW sought guidance from the TAC on whether 1) in multi-species fisheries, SFW should maintain the current threshold requiring appropriate management measures be in place for 70% of retained species by number or if a volume or other threshold is more suitable, 2) monitoring should be considered part of research activities (C3.3) or enforcement (C3.4) or divided between these factors, 3) the current requirement to comply with legal requirements is equitable given that regulation stringency/conservation intent differs significantly among countries TAC Guidance and Action Items:  Conduct an assessment to determine impact of considering 70% by volume, rather than by number  Review language in factors 3.3 (Research and Monitoring) and 3.4 (Enforcement), considering definitions provided by FAO and others (e.g MSC, Fair Trade) for consistency  Consider legal requirements at the international level, review UN fish stocks agreement which has language on at risk species and habitats and considering sustainability through a cultural lens Day – Topic: Habitat Issue: SFW uses a table to assess impacts of gears on habitats based on Swept Area Seabed Impact (SASI) model that combines gear impacts and habitat recovery times A recent literature review supports the values in the current table Feedback sought: SFW sought advice from the TAC about 1) anchor impacts to coral reefs in dive fisheries, 2) how to score manmade habitats such as restored oyster reefs, 3) what information is necessary to override the tables (in general) TAC Guidance and Action Items:  Consider Local Ecological Knowledge for habitat impacts, including dive fisheries Unless there is evidence that dive fisheries anchor on reefs, score as low impact (4)  Consider manmade structures in the same way as natural structures Day - Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management Issue: Seafood Watch assesses impacts of fisheries on ecosystem function and requires effective spatial management be in place to score at the highest level Feedback sought: SFW sought guidance on whether specific functional groups should be given special consideration TAC Guidance and Action Items:  Consider ecosystem functionality - focus on resiliency rather than species function, which is context dependent Review results of the Ocean Tipping Points project Day – Topic: Bait Use (Fisheries) and Feed Use (Aquaculture) Issue: For fisheries that use bait, SFW evaluates the impacts on bait species as a main species (C2) Feedback sought: SFW jointly asked the Fisheries and Aquaculture TACs to discuss whether bait use should be evaluated in a similar manner in both types of assessments TAC Guidance and Action Items:  Coordinate with the SFW aquaculture team for consistency and consider using the aquaculture scoring table to guide scoring of bait species in fisheries assessments  Develop filters to determine when a bait fishery should be assessed Appendix 1: Agenda Seafood Watch Fisheries Technical Advisory Committee Meeting 21-22 May 2019 Monterey Bay Aquarium, Bing Board Room (Day 1) 886 Cannery Row Monterey, CA 93940 Meeting Objectives To understand the role of the Fisheries TAC, To discuss the public comments received on the Seafood Watch Fisheries Standard, and Discuss revisions proposed by SFW fisheries science staff Day (21 May 2019) 07:50 – 08:30 8:30 – 8:35 08:35 – 08:50    Meet in Lobby of the Clement Hotel Walk over to the Aquarium Breakfast served in the Bing Board Room (starting at 8am) Welcome, Review Agenda, Logistics and Ground Rules Corey Peet - Facilitator Presentation: Overview of the Seafood Watch Program and Future Directions Wendy Norden – Seafood Watch Science Director Introduction of Technical Advisory Committee members  08:50 – 9:20  9:20 – 930 9:30 – 10:00 10:00-10:30 What you think is the most important new development in fisheries science and management? What you think Seafood Watch should be considering moving forward? Presentation: Overview of the Standard Revision Process & Understanding the role of the SFW Fisheries TAC Santi Roberts – Seafood Watch Senior Science Manager Sam Wilding – Seafood Watch Fisheries Program Manager Presentation and questions from TAC: The Seafood Watch Fisheries Sustainability Assessment Criteria: Past, Present, and Future (includes setting the scene regarding data-limited situations which will be discussed with each topic) Fisheries Program Staff Unknown Bycatch Matrix: A review of our work on the tools we use to assess bycatch in the absence of catch composition data How can we improve participation in our workshops? 10:30 – 10:45 10:45 – 12:15 12:15 – 13:00 13:00 – 15:00 15:00 – 15:15 15:15 – 16:15 16:15– 17:15 17:15 – 17:30 18:30 – 20:30 Group Photo and Coffee Break Scoping: A discussion of how Seafood Watch determines which species to include in our assessments, how we define a ‘Substantial Contributor’, and have we gone too far in defining a unit of assessment? Lunch (in the Bing Boardroom) Assessing Highly Fluctuating Species: How should Seafood Watch characterize stock status for species whose abundances vary with both environmental conditions and fishing pressure? Coffee Break Comparing Reference Points: Review of the most appropriate reference points in considering abundance and fishing mortality – Is basing our scoring on MSY-based reference points still the most appropriate method? Productivity and Susceptibility Analysis: Overview of the current Seafood Watch PSA to assess vulnerability of species with unknown stock status, discuss its appropriateness and review potential improvements Summary of Day and Meeting Wrap Dinner at Cannery Row Brewing Company Day (22 May 2019) – Clement Hotel, Library, st Floor 08:00 – 8:30 08:30 – 8:45 08:45 – 10:15 10:15 – 10:30 10:30 - 11:30 11:30 – 12:30 12:30 – 13:30 13:30 – 14:30 Breakfast (provided) Presentation: Review of Day and Overview of Day Data-Limited Assessment Methodologies: Review of our current strategies when considering data limited fisheries Are there new tools that may help us to determine a higher confidence in assessing and scoring these stocks? Coffee Break Climatic Impacts: Climate change affects the productivity and distribution of fisheries stocks, increasing uncertainty in stock status and management - Can we better account for uncertainty? - Does management address climate change? - Do we need to redefine non-native species? Fisheries Management Topics: How we assess management performance in multi-species fisheries, and is monitoring most closely associated with research or enforcement? Lunch at the Clement Habitat Impacts and Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management Topics: A review of how we assess fishing impacts on seabed habitats and a discussion of whether we can/should develop a quantitative system We will also discuss research into whether fishing mid-trophic level species can cause trophic cascades 14:30 – 14:45 14:45 – 15:15 15:15 – 15:30 15:30 – 16:30 16:30 18:00 – 20:30 Bait Use vs Feed Use: A brief preview of our discussion with the Aquaculture TAC where we will consider the similarities and differences between bait us in fisheries and feed use in aquaculture Summary and Closing Walk to Aquarium Joint Session with Aquaculture TAC Closing Dinner with the Aquaculture TAC in the Aquarium’s Open Sea Exhibit