Upload
magdalene-harrell
View
218
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Science, Service, & Stewardship NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office Status of Chesapeake Bay Fisheries Ecosystem: Overview Ecopath module has been completed. –45 trophic groups –218 diet links –1950 model gives a snapshot of what the Chesapeake was like 50 yrs ago Ecosim module –“Tuned” to some time series data; 60+ data sets and assessments to replicate the current status and dynamics of the Chesapeake –Simulations can be run to explore policy options (i.e., fisheries management plans) Technical Report (220 pages) is complete and out for review –Data review by Ecosystem Modeling Technical Advisory Panel (EMTAP) –Dynamics review by another panel? Center for Independent Experts?
Citation preview
NOAA Chesapeake Bay
OfficeFisheries
Ecosystem Modeling Efforts
Howard Townsend, Hongguang Ma, and
Maddy SigristNOAA
Chesapeake Bay Office
National Ecosystem Modeling Workshop
(NEMoW)29-31 August 2007, Southwest Fisheries
Science Center, Santa Cruz Laboratory
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Ecosystem Modeling: Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE)
Ecopath
Ecosim
Ecospace
Ecotrace
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Status of Chesapeake Bay Fisheries Ecosystem: Overview• Ecopath module has been completed.
– 45 trophic groups– 218 diet links– 1950 model gives a snapshot of what the Chesapeake was like 50
yrs ago
• Ecosim module – “Tuned” to some time series data; 60+ data sets and assessments
to replicate the current status and dynamics of the Chesapeake – Simulations can be run to explore policy options (i.e., fisheries
management plans)
• Technical Report (220 pages) is complete and out for review– Data review by Ecosystem Modeling Technical Advisory Panel
(EMTAP)– Dynamics review by another panel? Center for Independent
Experts?
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Status of Chesapeake Bay Fisheries Ecosystem: OverviewFocus for the past few years has been on…
1) Data (You can’t have a good model without good data)a) Basic input data for mass balanced snapshot
i. Biomass, Production/Biomass, Consumption/Biomassii. Diet Composition, Catch, and bycatch
b) Time series data for drivers and validation
2) Exploratory simulationsa) Menhaden and Striped Bass interactionb) Blue crab and hypoxia
Drivers• Fishing mortality rates• Fleet effort• Biomass (force) • Time forcing data (e.g.,
prim. prod., SST)
Validation• Biomass (relative, absolute)• Total mortality rates• Catches• Average weights• Diets
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Data Pedigree
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
CBFEM PlansApplications• Support development of ecosystem-based fisheries management
planning process• Tool for exploring ecosystem impacts of fisheries management
decisions in developing EBFM• Provides 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• Link FEM with Water Quality and other physico-chemical models• Explore influence 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.
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Need for Technical Review• Currently the model can be used for organizing data and heuristic
exploration of ecosystem/food web interactions. Ultimate plan is for the CBFEM to be used as one of many tools (along with single-species assessments) for ecosystem-based management of fisheries resources
• Heuristic Tool → Management Model– Acceptance by resource managers
» Exposure» Input from Chesapeake research community
– Ensuring best available science is incorporated» Thorough review of data» Thorough review of dynamics
• Under the Information Quality Act (2000), NOAA has to have procedures in place for ensuring and maximizing the “quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity” of information (including statistical information) disseminated by federal agencies. – Necessary for any influential information or information synthesis
product (such as models and fisheries management plans) from NOAA to be publicly disseminated
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
CBFEM Plans: Research and Management Community Involvement
Management and Application
Research and Academia
FisheriesEcosystem
Model
NOAA-Chesapeake Bay Office&
University of British Columbia
Chesapeake Bay Fisheries Ecosystem Model
Ecosystem Modeling Technical
Advisory Panel
Working with research and academic partners to develop ecosystem tools for resource managers
- Data Compilation & Review- Understanding Ecosystem Dynamics
- Strategic Exploration of Policy Options- Understanding Interconnected Outcomes of
Management Policy
CBP -Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel
Chesapeake Fisheries Steering
Committee
CBP Modeling Subcommittee
(and others)
Developing linkages to Environmental Models
Chesapeake Community Modeling Project
Making connections with multiple managers
Ensuring Scientific Quality
Ensuring Utility to Managers
Chesapeake Research Consortium
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Chesapeake Bay Regional Estuarine Ecology Model (CBREEM)
• CBREEM is a simple, linearized, barotropic, two-layer hydrodynamic model; it uses historical climatological, hydrologic, and nutrient loading data to estimate historical patterns in primary productivity for a regional estuary
• Designed to better encapsulate the Chesapeake Bay’s ecosystem history, and improve the CBFERM’s fit to time series data, a method to capture fluctuations in productivity attributable to primary production was necessary
• Approach developed by Walters et al for Florida Bay
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
CBREEM – Chlorphyll a index
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Nut
rient
load
ing
(rela
tive)
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Impaired Water
Water Quality Model• Over 90% of the Bay and
its tidal rivers are impaired due to episodic low dissolved oxygen levels and poor water clarity, all related to nutrient and sediment pollution.
• Linking EPA Watershed and Water Quality (Eutrophication) Model to the Fisheries Ecosystem Model to explore how effects of H2O quality on fisheries
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Background Info - WQM
Water Quality Model (2002) 13k Cell
• Focus on DO, clarity, and chlorophyll.
• Identified nutrient/sediment allocations which removes water quality impairments.
• Few key living resources (SAV and benthos) included.
• Used to develop the first Chesapeake sediment allocation.
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Broad indirect coupling
WQM Output Ecosim forcing function Upper trophic level effects
Monthly average Chlorophyll a from WQM
Striped Bass, Menhaden,
Blue crabs, Oysters
Science, Service, & Stewardship
NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
What we are learning from dynamic simulations and linkages to water quality model, in general?• Though the Chesapeake Bay has historically been a well-
studied system, relatively little information on all but a few fisheries species (esp., blue crab, striped bass, oysters)
• Trophic linkages for many important forage species (e.g., Atlantic Menhaden) have not been clearly defined – i.e., we know what eats them, but we do not know what they eat and effects of water quality
• Limited data available for lower trophic levels and species/groups that are not targeted for harvest
• Historical catch data (and biomass data) for some species is not available or of limited value, so diamond mining of data is necessary
• Connections between habitat, water quality, and fisheries have not been thoroughly tested, but lots of just-so stories circulating
• Integrated fish surveys and water quality monitoring would be valuable