Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T18:20:47.255Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Progress in the use of ecosystem modeling for fisheries management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Villy Christensen
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Canada
Carl J. Walters
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Canada
Villy Christensen
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver
Jay Maclean
Affiliation:
Fisheries Consultant
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

We are moving toward ecosystem-based management of fisheries, and it is clear that ecosystem modeling is an important tool for evaluating scenarios and trade-offs as part of such a move. This chapter evaluates the extent of ecosystem modeling as an active research field, the potential usefulness of the models for fisheries management, and actual use of ecosystem models in fisheries management. In addition we present some recommendations for how the move toward ecosystem-based management can be supported through an adaptive environmental assessment and management process.

It is important at the outset to be careful about what it means to “use” a model in fisheries management. At one extreme, imagine taking model predictions at face value and applying them blindly in setting reference points and regulations; some managers seem to hope for or expect such models to appear, presumably as absolution or excuse for not making thoughtful choices in the face of uncertainty. No fisheries model, whether a highly “precise” single-species assessment or a crude ecosystem biomass flow scheme, will ever be reliable enough to use in such an uncritical way, if for no other reason than unpredictability in environmental conditions. At the opposite extreme, we can certainly use even very simple trophic interaction calculations to screen qualitative policy options and answer very basic questions raised in management settings (e.g., could predation rates by some particular predator that fishers do not like be high enough to ever justify a culling policy?).

Type
Chapter
Information
Ecosystem Approaches to Fisheries
A Global Perspective
, pp. 189 - 206
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bradford, M. J. (1999) Temporal and spatial trends in the abundance of coho salmon smolts from western North America. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 128, 840–846.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, L. B. (2006) Reconstructing Historical Abundances of Exploited Marine Mammals at the Global Scale. Vancouver, Fisheries Centre Research Reports 14 (9). Vancouver, Canada: Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Christensen, L. B. and Martell, S. J. D. (2005) A stochastic framework for reconstructing historical marine mammal abundance from catch records and sparse abundance information: application to the Antarctic blue whale and North Atlantic and Arctic fin whale. ICES, CM, R, 32.
Christensen, V., Beattie, A., Buchanan, C., Martell, S. J. D., Latour, R. J., Preikshot, D., Sigrist, M., Uphoff, J. H., Walters, C. J., Wood, R. J. and Townsend, H. (2009) Fisheries ecosystem model of the Chesapeake Bay: methodology, parameterization and model exploration. NOAA Technical Memorandum. Washington DC: NOAA.Google Scholar
Christensen, V. and Pauly, D. (1992) Ecopath II: a software for balancing steady-state ecosystem models and calculating network characteristics. Ecological Modelling, 61, 169–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, V. and Walters, C. J. (2004) Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities and limitations. Ecological Modelling, 172, 109–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, S. P. and Kitchell, J. F. (2004) Lake Superior ecosystem, 1929–1998: simulating alternative hypotheses for recruitment failure of Lake herring (Coregonus artedi). Bulletin of Marine Science, 74, 671–683.Google Scholar
Essington, T. E. (2004) Getting the right answer from the wrong model: evaluating the sensitivity of multispecies fisheries advice to uncertain species interactions. Bulletin of Marine Science, 74, 563–581.Google Scholar
,FAO (2008) Fisheries management. 2. The ecosystem approach to fisheries. 2.1 Best practices in ecosystem modelling for informing an ecosystem approach to fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries. No. 4, Suppl. 2, Add. 1. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
,FAO/Fishcode (2001) Report of a bio-economic modelling workshop and a policy dialogue meeting on the Thai demersal fisheries in the Gulf of Thailand held at Hua Hin, Thailand, May 31–June 9, 2000. FI: GCP/INT/648/NOR: Field Report F-16 (En). Rome: FAO.
Guénette, S., Christensen, V. and Pauly, D. (2008) Trophic modelling of the Peruvian upwelling ecosystem: towards reconciliation of multiple datasets. Progress in Oceanography, 79, 326–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guénette, S., Heymans, J. J., Christensen, V. and Trites, A. W. (2006) Ecosystem models show combined effects of fishing, predation, competition, and ocean productivity on Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) in Alaska. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 63, 2495–2517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilborn, R. and Walters, C. J. (1992) Quantitative Fisheries Stock Assessment: Choice, Dynamics and Uncertainty. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimura, D. K., Balsiger, J. W. and Ito, D. H. (1996) Kalman filtering the delay-difference equation: Practical approaches and simulations. Fishery Bulletin, 94, 678–691.Google Scholar
Melnychuk, M. C. (2009) Mortality of migrating Pacific salmon smolts in southern British Columbia, Canada. BSc Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Pauly, D., Christensen, V. and Walters, C. (2000) Ecopath, Ecosim, and Ecospace as tools for evaluating ecosystem impact of fisheries. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57, 697–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pine, W. E., Martell, S. J. D., Walters, C. J. and Kitchell, J. F. (2009) Counterintuitive responses of fish populations to management actions: some common causes and implications for predictions based on ecosystem modeling. Fisheries, 34, 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polovina, J. J. (1984) Model of a coral reef ecosystem I. The ECOPATH model and its application to French frigate shoals. Coral Reefs, 3, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polovina, J. J. (2002) Application of Ecosim to investigate the impact of the lobster fishery on endangered monk seals in Hawaii. In Christensen, V., Reck, G. and Maclean, J. L., eds., Proceedings of the INCO-DC Conference Placing Fisheries in their Ecosystem Context. Galápagos Islands, Ecuador, 4–8 December 2000. Brussels: ACP-EU Fisheries Research Reports, 12, 30.Google Scholar
Tovar, H., Guillen, V. and Nakama, M. E. (1987) Monthly population sizes of three guano bird species off Peru, 1953–1982. In Pauly, D. and Tsukayama, I., eds., The Peruvian Anchoveta and its Upwelling Ecosystem: Three Decades of Change. ICLARM Studies and Reviews, 15, 208–218.Google Scholar
Walters, C. (1986) Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Walters, C., Christensen, V. and Pauly, D. (1997) Structuring dynamic models of exploited ecosystems from trophic mass-balance assessments. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 7, 139–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, C. and Kitchell, J. F. (2001) Cultivation/depensation effects on juvenile survival and recruitment: implications for the theory of fishing. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 58, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, C. and Martell, S. J. D. (2002) Stock assessment needs for sustainable fisheries management. Bulletin of Marine Science, 70, 629–638.Google Scholar
Walters, C., Martell, S. J. D., Christensen, V. and Mahmoudi, B. (2008) An Ecosim model for exploring ecosystem management options for the Gulf of Mexico: implications of including multistanza life history models for policy predictions. Bulletin of Marine Science, 83, 251–271.Google Scholar
Walters, C., Pauly, D. and Christensen, V. (1999) Ecospace: Prediction of mesoscale spatial patterns in trophic relationships of exploited ecosystems, with emphasis on the impacts of marine protected areas. Ecosystems, 2, 539–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, C., Pauly, D., Christensen, V. and Kitchell, J. F. (2000) Representing density dependent consequences of life history strategies in aquatic ecosystems: EcoSim II. Ecosystems, 3, 70–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, C. J. and Juanes, F. (1993) Recruitment limitation as a consequence of natural selection for use of restricted feeding habitats and predation risk-taking by juvenile fishes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 50, 2058–2070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, C. J. and Martell, S. J. D. (2004) Fisheries Ecology and Management. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Walters, C. J., Martell, S. J. D. and Korman, J. (2006) A stochastic approach to stock reduction analysis. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 63, 212–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, D. W., Ward, B. R., Smith, B. D. and Eveson, J. P. (2000) Temporal and spatial responses of British Columbia steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) populations to ocean climate shifts. Fisheries Oceanography, 9, 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worm, B. and Myers, R. A. (2003) Meta-analysis of cod-shrimp interactions reveals top-down control in oceanic food webs. Ecology, 84, 162–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×