Ciências e Tecnologia | Relatórios/Documentos de trabalho / Reports/Working papers
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Recent Submissions
- Workshop on the operational use of food web indicators and information (WKFoodWeb; outputs from 2024 meeting)Publication . Belgrano, Andrea; Winter, Anna-Marie; Bauer, Barbara; Planque, Benjamin; Faithfull, Carolyn; Howell, Daniel; Pedreschi, Debbi; Szalaj, Dorota; Andonegi, Eider; Cafferty, Erin; Gal, Gideon; Saygu, Ismet; Laveric, Jack; Bentle, Jacob; Brito, Joana; Woronof, Josephine; Czechowska, Karolina; Ortega-Cisnero, Kelly; Tomcza, Maciej; Castro, María; Torres, Marián; Püts, Miriam; Silvar, Paula; Puntila-Dodd, Riikka; Seixas, Sónia; Corrales, Xavier; Andonegi, Eider; Bentley, Jacob; Torres, Marián; Tomczak, MaciejThe Workshop on the operational use of Food Web indicators and information (WKFoodWeb), held in Copenhagen from February 19–21, 2024, focused on the future integration of food web information into ICES advice and progress towards Ecosystem-Based Management and Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management (EBFM). Key iscussions focused on how food web and ecosystem information could compliment the existing ICES advisory framework, including catch advice and Ecosystem Overviews. Invited presentations addressed ecosystem-informed scientific advice, the use of food web indicators, and the development and availability of food web models. Examples from academics, NGOs, and government advisors showcased how ICES might use food web indicators (such as feeding guild indicators and Ecological Network Analysis indicators) to deliver food web information to requesters which is consistent with their objectives under various policy commitments (e.g., Good Environmental Status; GES). Participants emphasised the need for standardised and accessible methods across ecoregions and ICES expert groups with improved data integration, stakeholder engagement, and transparent and robust communication of uncertainties. Breakout groups discussed options for the integration of food web information in advice, where and when needed, by means of pragmatic mechanisms for EBFM and the inclusion of more informative food web products in Ecosystem Overviews. The workshop concluded with actions and priorities focused on 1) synthesizing information and efforts regarding the development food web indicators across ICES expert groups, 2) developing and communicating options for ecosystem-informed fisheries advice, and 3) creating a roadmap for the systematic and transparent use of food web models within ICES.
- Workshop to compile evidence on the impacts of offshore renewable energy on fisheries and marine ecosystems (WKCOMPORE)Publication . Alexander, Karen; Akimova, Anna; Aonghusa, Catriona; Schreiber, Arias; Arjona, Yolanda; Arrigan, Michael; Balestri, Elena; Beerman, Jan; Belgrano, Andrea; Bicknell, Anthony; Birchenough, Silvana; Bolam, Stefan; Brown, Elliot; Buchholzer, Helene; Buyse, Jolien; Cadrin, Steve; Carlier, Antoine; Carlström, Julia; Carlén, Ida; Causon, Paul; Villanueva, Maria; Coolen, Joop; Cormier, Roland; Costa, Gisela; Daewel, Ute; Dameron, Tom; Dauvin, Jean-Claude; Desroy, Nicolas; Egidazu, Beñat; Evans, Peter; Pardo, Juan; Farrell, Edward; Fernandes, Ana; Gee, Kira; Gill, Andrew; Gilles, Anita; Gimpel, Antje; Grazino, Marcello; Hall, Raymond; Hamdi, Ilhem; Hamon, Katell; Henriques, Sofia; Hjorleifsson, Einar; Hogan, Fiona; Hovstad, Knut; Ibanez-Erquiaga, Bruno I; Janas, Urszula; Jong, Karen; Jongbloed, Ruud; Jon, Patrik; Kannen, Andreas; Kenny, Andrew; Kloppmann, Matthias; Koschinski, Sven; Kraan, Marloes; Lindkvist, Emilie; Lloret, Josep; Lusseau, David; MacDonald, Hannah; Machado, Ines; MacLeod, Ellie; Chai, Stephen; Martine, Roi; Mateo, Maria; Mazaleyrat, Anna; McQueen, Kate; Morrissey, Karyn; Morsbach, Samuel; Muench, Angela; Ndah, Anthony; Neumann, Hermann; Niiranen, Caitriona; Donnell, Aodh; Pascual, Jose; Pirrone, Claudio; Pita, Cristina; Police, Simon; Polte, Patrick; Rebai, Nourhaen; Rehren, Jennifer; Rumes, Bob; Hjøllo, Solfrid; Schulze, Torsten; Silva, Alexandra; Skog, Malin; Stelzenmüller, Vanessa; Tamis, Jacqueline; Thebaud, Olivier; Tierney, Kieran; Trifonova, Neda; Valcarce, Paula; Vanaverbeke, Jan; Velasco, Eva; Villasante, Sebastian; Vinagre, Pedro; Vries, Pepijn de; Waldo, Staffan; Want, Andrew; Watson, Gordon; Wrede, Alexa; White, Jonathan; Wright, Kirsty; Wu, Huixin; Seixas, Sónia; Hamon, Katell; Kannen, Andreas; Vanaverbeke, JanThis report provides a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the current state-of-the art in available evidence and science concerning the economic, social, and ecological impacts of offshore wind farms (OWF) and floating offshore wind farms (FLOW) on fisheries in the Baltic Sea, Celtic Seas, and Greater North Sea. It describes the observed and potential economic, social, ecological and cumulative impacts of OWF and FLOW, with a focus on the scope of the existing evidence base, data and methods to assess impacts, and mitigation options to avoid or reduce unwanted impacts. Overall, the workshop to compile evidence on the impacts of offshore renewable energy on fisheries and marine ecosystems (WKCOMPORE) highlights the need for additional high-resolution data, comprehensive assessments, and stakeholder involvement to better understand and mitigate the impacts of OWF and FLOW on fisheries and marine ecosystems. Specific ‘key findings’ arising from WKCOMPORE include: Economic and Social Impacts: The assessment of economic and social impacts of OWF and FLOW requires high-resolution data on vessel positions, fisheries catch and effort, fisheries economics, and social data. However, existing data are often insufficiently detailed and not well-linked, making comprehensive impact assessments a challenge. Both ex-ante (before) and ex-post (after) methods are used to assess these impacts. Studies have shown that OWF and FLOW can negatively affect income, fishing grounds, catching opportunities, and operating costs. It was concluded there are generally more studies reporting on negative impacts than positive benefits. Context factors such as the type of OWF and FLOW, development phase, and adaptive capacity of fisheries influence the nature and magnitude of impacts. No studies were found on trade-offs between economic impacts on fisheries and OWF and FLOW. Ecological Impacts (benthos and higher trophic levels): OWF and FLOW development phases have known or predicted local impacts on commercially fished species, but no population-level assessments were identified. The requirements for such analyses are, however, described. Assessing the potential impact of offshore wind farms (OWF) (fixed and floating) on commercial species requires a detailed understanding on how related human operations and the pressures they exert cause environmental effects leading to population-level impacts across spatial and temporal scales. Combined pressures caused by OWFs, climate change and other human pressures give rise to cumulative risks, demanding integrated environmental assessments such as cumulative effects assessments (CEA) and multi-scale management strategies. · The trait-based framework (TAFOW) applied in the current study links OWF-induced state changes to population characteristics and response traits, enabled species vulnerabilities to all phases of OWF life cycle to be assessed. · A total of 34 commercial species were assessed in the North Sea, Celtic Sea, and Baltic Sea, using the TAFOW framework, which identified that sediment resuspension was likely to be the most impactful state change, with highest vulnerabilities noted in the Celtic Sea driven by changes in larval dispersal and predator-prey interactions. The present study revealed that from the 34 commercially most important fisheries resources assessed; herring, great scallop, and monkfish are the most vulnerable species across the three regions. Trophic interactions and recruitment survival of fisheries resources are particularly vulnerable to pressures that are exerted by operational OWF. It was concluded there is insufficient evidence to directly assess and quantify the effects of OWF and FLOW on the Western Baltic herring stock, although there is no direct specific evidence to suggest existing OWF sites are impacting Western Baltic herring stocks. Baltic Proper harbour porpoise will likely be directly affected during all stages of offshore renewable energy development, and especially by the introduction of underwater noise. Given the aforementioned critically low population size, even moderate impacts are to be avoided. Cumulative Impacts: WKCOMPORE evaluated existing methods and models with the potential to assess cumulative impacts of OWF and FLOW. Some models and tools were deemed suitable or had potential through further development to quantify cumulative impacts and test mitigation options. An important distinction is made between CEA models/ tools based on risk assessment framework approaches which are useful in identifying ecosystem components in areas at highest risk, from ecosystem models which can quantitatively assess the interactions between specific aspects of windfarm developments and fisheries in support of operational management advice. The models/ tools evaluated in the present study (in terms of their operational utility), classified as ecosystem models, offering the greatest utility to support operationally CEAs were; VMStools, FishSET, Community Profiling Tools. DISPLACE, OSMOSE and EwE/ Ecospace. The importance of developing case studies to demonstrate the practical application of available strategic risk-based assessment frameworks (such as BowTie, FEISA, ODEMM and SCAIRM) should be linked explicitly with the outputs of quantitative (mechanistic) ecosystem models where possible. It was concluded there is no single CEA or ecosystem model/ tool available to provide a comprehensive assessment of all component interactions at a social, economic and ecological level, between windfarm developments and fisheries. The application of a combination of CEA and ecosystem models/ tools is therefore recommended for assessment purposes. The current study concluded the need to increase focus on exploring long time-series fisheries and environmental data (>10 years) to better describe and understand the spatial/temporal dynamics of core fishing areas and climate effects in response to offshore windfarms. Hydrodynamic and Pelagic Ecological Effects: (foodweb, productivity and lower trophic levels): Most commercial species with a pelagic life stage within an ecoregion will overlap in spatial distribution with dynamic cables associated with OWF and FLOW throughout the time that the cables are in the water column (construction, operation and decommissioning). Interactions between species and cables leading to responses will relate to either direct energy emissions, physical effects and/or indirect ecological effects. Only during OWF and FLOW operations will dynamic power cables create energy emissions sufficient to represent potential stressors to commercial pelagic fisheries species. The timing of exposure to energy emissions will be determined by the operational characteristics of the cables and the length of time that species use the pelagic environment around dynamic power cables. An approach to assess the impacts of dynamic power cables on commercial fish species is proposed. Turbines create atmospheric wakes, and underwater structures modify currents and stratification. These changes affect primary production and support communities of filter feeders. Offshore wind farms (OWFs) provide stepping stones for species dispersal across unsuitable environments, benefiting both indigenous and non-indigenous species (NIS), especially benthic species with long larval pelagic phases. However, the relative influence of OWFs compared to other artificial substrates remains unclear. All NIS observations in OWFs had previously been reported from the region. Floating OWFs are likely to harbour non-indigenous species (NIS) and facilitate their spread through turbine transport between ports and wind farms. Evidence from similar structures supports this, but direct studies on floating OWFs are lacking. Impressed Current Cathodic Protection (ICCP) may enhance calcifying organism growth in biofouling communities, with potential regional variations due to environmental factors. Confidence in this effect is however low, as it lacks robust empirical support. Galvanic Anode Cathodic protection (GACP) may impact biofouling communities through metal toxicity effects, but confidence is low due to limited studies. Elevated temperatures on cooling water pipes and dynamic cables in OWFs might influence biofouling community composition and growth rates. However, evidence remains inconclusive, and further studies of this pressure is required. OWF sound pollution may impact biofouling organism behaviour, with variability across species. The relationship between sound and invertebrate behaviour in OWFs is poorly understood, and its ecological significance remains uncertain. Underwater structures can directly affect ocean dynamics by causing friction and flow obstruction. This increases turbulence, reduces current speed, and weakens water stratification up to 400 meters behind the structures. Enhanced mixing induced by OWFs may increase nutrient availability in the euphotic zone, promoting local phytoplankton production in the near-field of the structures. This effect applies primarily to fixed-bottom foundations. Reduced wind speeds within atmospheric wakes decrease wind-driven currents and ocean mixing, strengthening water stratification on scales up to 100 km away from the OWFs. Large wind farms create vertical circulation patterns (upwelling and downwelling). This can increase primary production around and decrease it inside wind farm areas. The currently planned OWF installation in the North Sea can induce changes in hydrographic conditions that might alter spatial and temporal dynamics in the marine ecosystems. In a published model scenario considering the installation of 120GW in the North Sea, local ecosystem changes could reach up to 10% not only at the OWF side but on a regional scale. Mitigation measures Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP): Maritime (or Marine) Spatial Planning (MSP) provides a way to allocate areas to OWF & FLOW and other human activities, and through subordinate planning processes, instruments and supporting procedures contribute to the identification and implementation of management measures, including mitigation options. Multi-use and co-use approaches seek to enable co-existence between users and activities. Stakeholder involvement, engagement and co-design help enable development of mitigation options that are technically, economically, politically, socially and ecologically feasible, and supported, or at least accepted, by stakeholders.
- Joint ICES-SEAwise workshop to quality assure methods to incorporate environmental factors and quantifying ecological considerations in management strategy evaluation tools (WKEcoMSE)Publication . Bartolino, Valerio; Berger, Aaron; Bitetto, Isabella; Bui, Tuan-Anh; Carbonara, Constanza; Carmona, Itsaso; Vaz, Ana Carolina; Carpi, Piera; Chiarini, Matteo; Correa, Giancarlo; Curin-Osorio, Sandra; Cyr, Frederic; Depestele, Jochen; Brooks, Mollie Elisabeth; Gamaza, Maria; Giannoulaki, Marianna; Haltuch, Melissa; Henriksen, Ole; Hernvann, Pierre-Yves; Hicks, Allan; Hordyk, Adrian; Ilanelli, Jim; Ibaibarriaga, Leire; Johannesen, Edda; Jonusas, Stanislovas; Basualto, Maria Jose Zuniga; Kapur, Maia; Kell, Laurence; Kühn, Bernhard; Laborda, Ane; MacKenzie, Brian; Mardones, Mauricio; Perryman, Holly; Peterson, Cassidy; Privitera-Johnson, Kristin; Regular, Paul; Rindorf, Anna; Sanchez-Maroño, Sonia; Sand Jacobsen, Nis; Savina-Rolland, Marie; Schirripa, Michael; Seixas, Sónia; Sgardeli, Vasiliki; Shipley, Madison; Spedicato, Maria; Sys, Klaas; Szalaj, Dorota; Taylor, Marc; Tengvall, Jessica; Travers, Morgane; Trochta, John; Tsoukali, Stavroula; Urtizberea, Agurtzane; Wildermuth, Robert; Wilson, AshleyThe EU project SEAwise (https://seawiseproject.org/) endeavours to enhance existing multi-stock multi-species Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) models so that they can be used to define and evaluate fisheries management strategies that address broad Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) objectives, including in particular identifying Harvest Control Rules (HCRs) that are robust to changes in productivity. The WKEcoMSE workshop was held to: (1) benchmark the approaches used or developed in the project to develop robust and consistent environment-productivity relationships for commercial stocks across selected case studies and integrate them in MSE models used by the SEAwise project and by ICES; (2) to provide context for those approaches within the general field of “environment-enriched” MSEs; and (3) to draw from the participants collective experience some general guidelines about the integration of environmental impacts on stock productivity in MSE tools. 23 presentations were given, both about the work carried out within SEAwise but also by international colleagues working toward similar objectives, and various topics were discussed over eight sessions designed to accommodate participants spread across Europe and Northern America. “Good practices” to incorporate environmental considerations in MSE modelling were then drafted collectively and have been summarized in the panels below. These rely on the experiences of the WKEcoMSE participants and are not exhaustive.
- Working Group on Social Indicators (WGSOCIAL; outputs from 2023 meeting)Publication . Himes-Cornell, Amber; Kraan, Marloes; Bjørkan, Maiken; Ballesteros, Marta; Carvallo, Marianna; Clay, Patricia; Fraga, Ana; Fuller, Jessica; Garcia de Vinuesa, Alfredo; Glyki, Eirini; Gourguet, Sophie; Hind-Ozan, Edward; Jackson, Emmett; Lam, Mimi; Lucas, Chloe; Montova, Arina; Pita, Cristina; Pita, Pablo; Riechers, Maraja; Schreiber, Milena; Seixas, Sónia; Silva, Angela; Steins, Nathalie; Villasante, SebastiánThe Working Group on Social Indicators seeks to improve the integration of social sciences in ICES Ecosystem Overviews and Integrated Ecosystem Assessments through the development of culturally relevant social indicators. To advance progress on this, WGSOCIAL has broadly discussed the context of the social di-mension of fishing. This has led to coordination with other working groups within ICES and outside ICES with the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries Expert Working Group Social and with the Regional Coordination Group on Economics Issues. WGSOCIAL develops methods for qualitative and quantitative approaches. It has also continued providing input to the updating of ecosystem overviews finalizing those of the Celtic Seas and North Sea. WGSOCIAL has advanced work on the definition and context of trade-offs and trade-off analy sis in the social context of fisheries. To assess social and cultural significance of commercial fishing, WGSOCIAL members have advanced case studies in a number of ICES Member Countries: two regions in Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Sweden and Norway. Each case study tackles a different approach with a different context. In addition, WGSOCIAL has advanced work on the topic of what a fishing community is and how the definition can change in different contexts. Lastly, WGSOCIAL has developed a database of social and economic indicators for evaluating fisheries management and identified a comprehensive list of categories and sub-categories of social and economic indicators that could be used to structure the selection of social indicators that inform fisheries managers. As a nest step, WGSOCIAL will identify key social indicators and data gaps for selected ICES Member Countries with recommendations for approaches to close the gaps. To support integrated socio-ecological evaluations in ecosystem-based management, WGSOCIAL has contributed to the development of work on the impacts of wind farms on com-mercial fishing activities. This work will continue in collaboration with WGECON, with whom several parallel terms of reference (ToRs) are shared. WGSOCIAL decided to transfer to the new ICES Human Dimension Steering Group.
- Scoping workshop 3 on next generation of mixed fisheries advice (WKMIXFISH3)Publication . Andersen, Michael; Bourke, Elizabeth; Cole, Harriet; Cook, Robert; Danby, Rufus; Dolder, Paul; Ferraro, Marta; Garcia, Dorleta; Green, Phil; Grossmann, Jenni; Kelly, Ruth; Lamon, Luca; Maginnis, Neil; Marcher, Claire; Moore, Claire; Muench, Angela; Polonio, Virginia; Rodmel, Dale; Rogers, Chloe; Sandel, Jane; Schou, Mogens; Seixas, Sónia; Sulanke, Erik; Sys, Klaas; Taylor, Marc; Tsangarides, Christian; Vermard, YouenWKMIXFISH are a series of workshops bringing together scientists, advice recipients, and stakeholders to identify future research and advisory priorities for mixed fisheries science. The third scoping workshop on the next generation of mixed fisheries advice (WKMIXFISH3) met to review changes to mixed fisheries considerations and progress on method development since the last workshop in March 2023. The workshop focused on three areas of development. First, it reviewed changes and clarifications to mixed fisheries considerations that were incorporated to improve communication around the purpose of and assumptions in the advice. Second, it reviewed the substantial methodological development that has been undertaken by WGMIXFISH-METHODS and EU and UK research projects. The focus of this work was to address an EU/UK joint request to ICES on mixed fisheries science. Third, it discussed the outcome of a workshop on fleet and métier definitions (WKMIXFLEET) that took place the preceding two days. Methodological developments included evaluation of uncertainty in mixed fisheries models, analyses of sensitivity to model assumptions, including fleet and métier structure, and creating new ways to explore mixed fisheries data. It was noted that these, in combination with new tools, guidance, and visualizations, helped to provide greater understanding of the models and advice. While these endeavours are ongoing, there was general support for continued development; in particular, the deployment of a mixed fisheries online app to provide end-users and stakeholders with the ability to interact with the multifaceted outputs from mixed fisheries models. Support for, and engagement with, developments on using the Regional Database Estimation System (RDBES) data to make improvements to fleet and métier definitions was also highlighted. Next steps identified were for WGMIXFISH-ADVICE and WGMIXFISH-METHODS to use the valuable feedback obtained to continue to develop the tools, and implement and receive feedback on them as part of an iterative process. It was noted that further research and dedicated time for scientists was necessary to support the ongoing improvements to mixed fisheries advice and data products, and that this should be a priority.
- Workshop to apply thresholds for the preselected indicators for MSFD D3C3 (WKD3C3THRESHOLDS)Publication . Rindorf, Anna; Scarcella, Giuseppe; Armelloni, Enrico; Bartolino, Valerio; Bellido, Jose; Bolund, Elisabeth; Boulcott, Phillip; Campon-Linares, Victoria; Canal, Gema; Caserman, Helena; Coscia, Ilaria; Fortibuoni, Tomaso; Garnacho, Eva; Giujarro, Beatriz; Gonçalves, Patricia; Griffiths, Chris; Jacobsen, Nis; Kuehn, Bernhard; Maneiro, Isabel; Silva, Ualerson; Probst, Nikolaus; Rowe, Owen; Seixas, Sónia; Tifoura, Amina; Vasilakopoulos, Paris; Villanueva, Ching; Wennhage, Håkan; Zaragoza, NuriaThe WKD3C3THRESHOLDS meeting provided a platform for experts from the EU member states to meet and progress the assessment methodology on Criteria 3 of Descriptor 3 upon request by EC (DGENV). WKD3C3THRESHOLDS is the second of a series of three workshops (WKD3C3SCOPE, WKD3C3THRESHOLDS and WKD3SIMUL) to identify operational indicators for MSFD D3C3. The workshop was organised as a series of presentations of results with intermittent group discussions. The D3C3 indicators agreed at WKD3C3SCOPE were estimated and documented for a selection of stocks representing different life-histories (Tor a). Plots comparing indicators were investigated for stocks with all estimated indicators. The age structure indicators ABI, ASA, POS and SSB/R generally followed the temporal development of SSB and react similarly to F. A gap of up to 10 years was observed between changes in F and subsequent changes in age structure indicators for long-lived species while SSB responded quickly to changes in F. For medium-lived stocks, the four age structure indicators exhibited similar temporal patterns, with SSB divided by R tending to be more variable. Recruitment and mean weight at age documented shifts in productivity, impacting age structure indicators differently when changes occur. Plots of F, recruitment, weight at age and SSB are considered useful for understanding cases where changes in F do not impact SSB as expected (e.g. rebuilding does not occur or stock remains high in spite of high F). Higher proportions of older fish as measured by ABI/ASA/POS or SSB/R did not appear linked to an immediate increase recruitment. A comparison of length-based and age-based indicators for Mediterranean stocks was also conducted. Recruitment detection from survey time series showed uneven patterns over stocks and time series, and in some cases depended on survey timing. Length-based indicators exhibited weak consistency information from stock assessments, and confounding effects of biological variability and sampling timing on observed recruitment pulses were noted. The indicator L90R, calculated from the length-frequency distribution of fish larger than recruiting length, seemed to perform well among those inspected. Thresholds for the D3C3 indicators for stocks representing different life-histories, data availability and MSFD (sub)regions (when possible) were discussed (ToR b and c). The suggested thresholds covered all approaches identified by WKD3C3SCOPE. Clear thresholds where the indicator signifies stock productivity declines could not be identified from the data as none of the age structure indicators showed a positive correlation with stock productivity. As a result, threshold levels cannot be determined based on levels at which stock productivity is either impaired or enhanced. In the absence of clear relationships between the indicators and stock health, the workshop used varying percentages (10th percentile, median/50th percentile) of the simulated or observed distributions of indicators to determine good status of the indicator. The analyses presented emphasized the direct influence of recruitment and growth on fisheries yield and precautionary fishing mortality limits. Finally, a decision tree to choose a threshold setting method was proposed for further testing in WKSIMULD3 on the basis of listed pros and cons discussed by WKD3C3THRESHOLD participants. The SSB/R indicator responded to recruitment in an undesirable manner but there was insufficient evidence to determine which of the three remaining age structure indicators provided a higher signal to noise due to recruitment variability. Selectivity indicators under D3C3 were retained despite unclear guidance in the MSFD guidance document. The retained indicators for medium-lived stocks with age-based assessment data include ABI, POS, ASA, R, ASW, and Fjuv/Fapical. The value of age structure indicators as management indicators was unclear for short-lived and long-lived species. For short-lived species, no strong link was found between age-structure indicators and F or SSB, and high age at spawning may lead to senescence rather than increased viability of spawning products. For long-lived species, age structure indicators appeared to react substantially later than F and SSB, making their added value for management unclear. The definition of thresholds for these indicators will be further investigated in WKSIMULD3. The assessment of stock health under D3C3 relies on crucial data such as recruitment, weight at age, and size/age distribution (ToR d). In the absence of this information, D3C3 assessments cannot be conducted, and Member States were encouraged to enhance data collection efforts. For stocks with age-based assessments, these data are considered essential input and/or output for the assessment, and assessments based on age data are preferred over those based solely on length distributions for the estimation of age structure indicators. Finally, the group drafted a list of actions to be completed for the reparation of WKSIMULD3.
- Workshop to compare the indicators for CFP and MSFD D3 management objectives through simulations (WKSIMULD3)Publication . Armelloni, Enrico; Bartolino, Valerio; Bellido, Jose; Bolund, Elisabeth; Fortibuoni, Tomaso; Garnacho, Eva; Gonçalves, Patracia; Griffiths, Chris; Howell, Daniel; Jacobsen, Nis; Junquera, Susana; Kidd, Peter; Kuehn, Bernhard; Moro, Stefano; Murphy, Natasha; Probst, Nikolaus; Rindorf, Anna; Rowe, Owen; Scarcella, Giuseppe; Seixas, Sónia; Tengvall, Jessica; Tifoura, Amina; Villanueva, Ching; Wennhage, Håkan; Woronoff, Josephine; Zaragoza, Nuria; Zolubas, Tomas; Zorica, BarbaraThe WKSIMULD3 meeting provided a platform for experts from the EU member states to meet and progress the assessment methodology on Criteria 3 of Descriptor 3 upon request by EC (DGENV). WKSIMULD3 is the third of a series of three workshops (WKD3C3SCOPE and WKD3C3THRESHOLDS being the first two) to identify operational indicators for MSFD D3C3. The workshop was organised as a series of presentations with intermittent discussions. The group agreed on a number of stocks to run simulations to explore the relationships between indicators of population traits/dynamics and healthy population structure. The participants found that for demersal stocks in the North Sea, MSE simulations showed decreasing values of D3C3 indicators with increasing fishing mortality. However, the use of age-structure indicators for these stocks is likely to lead to frequent false positives due to the high interannual variability. Age-based simulations were implemented also for pelagic and short-lived stocks, such as mackerel, sprat, and sandeel. The distribution of the threshold values implemented for the stocks did not show a clear response to the fishing regime. As a result, the use of age-structure indicators for these stocks is likely to lead to frequent false positives/negatives. The simulations aimed to validate the population size structure and calculate indicators under different fishing scenarios. In the Mediterranean Sea, length-based simulations were conducted for two hake stocks and one sole stock. The length indicators obtained were compared to historical data to assess the responsiveness of the indicators to exploitation. These results show the behaviour of the length based and of the age-based indicators calculated on observed data. Overall, the indicator status can be well below the average value at Fmsy. Additionally, an exploratory run tested a harvest control rule driven by age-based indicator targets. The outputs can provide directions on how to choose a threshold that can ensure the stock to be in GES. Overall, the workshop findings highlighted the complexity of evaluating indicators for CFP and MSFD D3 management objectives, particularly in relation to the responsiveness of the indicators to fishing pressure and environmental variation. The group emphasized the need for robust and peer-reviewed models to ensure reliable results when evaluating indicators for fish stocks. Additionally, it underscores the challenges associated with using age- and length-based indicators for different species and the importance of considering environmental and recruitment variability in simulations. In conclusion, the series of the 3 workshops contributed valuable insights into the complexities of assessing and comparing indicators for MSFD D3 management objectives, providing important considerations for future assessments and management strategies.
- Workshop on Assessing the Impact of Fishing on Oceanic Carbon (WKFISHCARBON; outputs from 2023 meeting)Publication . Bastardie, François; Belin, Alice; Bentley, Jacob; Berzaghi, Fabio; Bore, Abdirahman; Bradshaw, Clare; Cape, Mattias; Cariou, Thibault; Carvalho, Natacha; Cavan, Emma; Christensen, Villy; Croot, Peter; Miranda, Aderito de; Grossmann, Jenni; Hidalgo, Manuel; Hill, Simeon; Hubbard, Rebecca; Hunter, William; Kuhlmann, Jannis; Kuznia, Ola; Lockhart, Kathy; Lønborg, Christian; Lörinczi, Larissa; Luck, Cian; Marsh, Maija; Martin, Angela; Matias, Ana; Mejri, Randa; Morys, Claudia; Ogbuka, Josiah; Oke, Michael; O'Neill, Barry; Ortega, Miquel; Ottmann, Daniel; Paradis, Sarah; Parker, Ruth; Petitgas, Pierre; Polimene, Luca; Polsenaere, Pierre; Porz, Lucas; Rastrick, Samuel; Reid, David; Eigaard, Ole Ritzau; Sailley, Sevrine; Sala, Antonello; Schnoor, Pernille; Seixas, Sónia; Sutherland-Sherriff, Arielle; Türkmen, Ant; Valanko, Sebastian; Vastenhoud, Berthe; Visser, Andre; Walker, Mike; Wisz, Mary; Witting, Kea; Zhang, WenyanThe Workshop on Assessing the Impact of Fishing on Oceanic Carbon (WKFISHCARBON) was set up to provide ICES and stakeholders with a summary of knowledge on the role of fishing in the process of carbon budgets, sequestration and footprint in the ocean. The workshop addressed the potential impact of fishing on the biological carbon pump (BCP), the possible impacts of bottom trawling on carbon stores in the seabed, as well as considering emissions from fishing vessels. The overall aim was to generate proposals on how to develop an ICES approach to fishing and its role in the ocean carbon budget, and to develop a roadmap for a way forward. The main findings were that knowledge of the BCP in the open ocean was reasonably well developed, but that key gaps existed. In particular, information on the biomass of mesopelagic fish and other biota, and of some of the key processes e.g. fluxes and fish bioenergetics. Knowledge is much weaker for the BCP in shelf seas, where the bulk of fishing occurs. In particular, while biomass of fish was often well quantified, unlike the open ocean, the understanding of the important processes was lacking, particularly for the fate of faecal pellets and deadfall at the seabed. There is extensive scientific knowledge of the impact of fishing on the seabed, but what is un-clear is what it means for seabed carbon storage. There have been numbers of studies, which give a very divided view on this. There has also been open controversy about this in the literature. Physical disturbance to the seabed from fishing can affect sediment transport and has the potential to facilitate remineralization, but precise impacts will depend on habitat, fishing métier, and other environmental factors. From this, it is clear that more research is needed to resolve the controversy, and to quantify the impacts from different fishing gears and on different substrates or habitats in terms of carbon storage. There has been much more research on minimizing fuel use by fishing vessels, and hence emissions, but this has mainly focused on fuel efficiency, fuel use per unit of landed catch, and less on the total emissions. Baselines for fuel use are available at the global level, but are lacking at the national and vessel level. There is a need for standardization of methodologies and protocols, and for improving the uptake of fuel conservation measures by industry, as well as for improving the uptake of existing and potential fuel conservation and efficiency measures by industry. Finally, a roadmap was proposed to develop research and synthesis, on the understandings of the processes involved, the metrics and how to translate this into possible advice for policy-makers. To that end, a further workshop was proposed in 2024.
- Workshop on accounting for fishers and other stakeholders’ perceptions of the dynamics of fish stocks in ICES advice (WKAFPA)Publication . Angu, Chevonne; Balestri, Elena; Ballesteros, Marta; Bloecker, Alexandra; Cadrin, Steve; Christensen, Helle; Curtis, David; Dandy, Rufus; Evan, Derek; Farrell, Edward; Gamaza, Maria; Gollock, Matthew; Haase, Stefanie; Hintzen, Niels; Jones, Andrew; Korsbrekke, Knut; Libun- gan, Lisa Anne; Luedemann, Karin; Macdonald, Paul; Mackinson, Steven; Merce, Anna; Murphy, Patrick; Napier, Ian; Pastoors, Martin; Peixoto, Ualerson; Rasmussen, Jens; Reedtz Sparrevohn, Claus; Roux, Marie-Julie; Rudd, Hannah; Schwermer, Heike; Seixas, Sónia; Steins, Nathalie; Tenbrink, Talya; Torreele, Els; Valeiras, Julio; Vallerani, Matilde; Wood, PeterThe objective of the Workshop on accounting for fishers and other stakeholders’ perceptions of the dynamics of fish stocks in ICES advice (WKAFPA) was to identify where and how stake- holder information could be incorporated in the ICES fisheries advice process. It adopted an operational definition of the concept of perception, where perceptions result from observations, interpreted in light of experience, that can be supported by data, information and knowledge to generate evidence about them. Stakeholder information can be either structured (e.g. routinely collected information in a standardized format) or unstructured (e.g. experiential information) and either of those can inform decisions made during the production of ICES advice. Most notably, the group identified there was a need to engage with stakeholders earlier in the process, i.e. before benchmarks meetings take place and before preliminary assessment results are used as the basis to predict total allowable catches for upcoming advice (Figure 4.2). It was therefore recommended to include in the ICES process the organisation of pre-bench- mark/roadmap workshops where science and data needs of upcoming benchmarks can be iden- tified, followed by making arrangements how scientists and stakeholders can collaborate to ac- cess, prepare for use (where relevant) and document the structured and unstructured infor- mation well ahead of the benchmark meetings. It was also recommended to organise ‘sense-checking’ sessions with stakeholders when prelim- inary assessments are available but not yet used as the basis for advisory production. This would allow stakeholders and assessment scientists to verify available knowledge and data against stock perceptions and provide additional considerations relevant for the production of TAC ad- vice. Next to these two additional activities, it is recommended that communication on differ- ences in stakeholder perception or data derived perceptions are communicated within the ICES assessment reports as well as in the ICES advice in a transparent manner. Not only should dif- ferences or similarities be documented and communicated, in those cases where there are differ- ences in perception between ICES stock assessments and stakeholders, a working group, external to the assessment working groups, should evaluate these differences and describe whether these differences can be logically explained or require further investigation. This outcome of this pro- cess may potentially lead to new data collection or additional analyses suitable for input to benchmarks. Essential in this entire process is making sure the same language is spoken between scientists and stakeholders, that there are clear and transparent processes in place on how to deal with stakeholder information and communicate clearly how this information is used in the prepara- tion of ICES advice.
- Workshop to scope and preselect indicators for criterion D3C3 under MSFD decision (EU) 2017/848 (WKD3C3SCOPE)Publication . Armelloni, Enrico; Bolund, Elisabeth; Canal, Gema; Cardinale, Massimiliano; Coscia, Ilaria; Croll, Jasper; Balic, Daria Ezgeta; Falsone, Fabio; Fortibuoni, Tomaso; Galatchi, Madalina; Garnacho, Eva; Giannoulaki, Marianna; Guijarro González, Beatriz; Griffiths, Christopher; Grossmann, Jenni; Jacobsen, Nis Sand; Junquera, Susana; Kääriä, Petra; Lueiro, Xoán; Maneiro, Isabel; Markovic, Laurent; Mathies, Mo; Moro, Stefano; Palermino, Antonio; Probst, Wolfgang Nikolaus; Raicevich, Saša; Rindorf, Anna; Rodriguez-Ezpeleta, Naiara; Rowe, Owen; Saks, Lauri; Salvany, Lara; Sartor, Paolo; Sbrana, Mario; Scannella, Danilo; Scarcella, Giuseppe; Seixas, Sónia; Sgardeli, Vasiliki; Tifoura, Amina; Vallerani, Matilde; Vasilakopoulos, Paris; Villanueva, Maria Ching; Volwater, Joey; Wennhage, Håkan; Zaragoza, Nuria; Zorica, BarbaraThe workshop to scope and preselect indicators for Descriptor 3 criterion 3 under MSFD Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848 (WKD3C3SCOPE) provided a platform for experts from the EU member states and relevant regional bodies to meet and support development and progress the assessment methodology, based on a request by the EC (DGENV). WKD3C3SCOPE is the first of a series of three workshops (WKD3C3THRESHOLDS and WKSIMULD3) to provide guidance in relation to operational indicators for MSFD D3C3. The workshop was organized as a series of presentations with intermittent group discussions. On the first day of the workshop the participants discussed what defines a ‘healthy population structure’ for species with different life history traits (ToR a). During the following days, the group discussed and identified relevant D3C3 indicators (ToR b) and developed criteria to select among the identified D3C3 indicators to allow further testing and setting of thresholds at WKD3C3THRESHOLDS (ToR c). The participants found that overall, healthy fish stocks are characterized by high productivity, wide age and size structuring in the population, and the ability to quickly recover from disturbances. The groups noted that environmental factors, along with stock biomass and fishing pressure, influence the productivity and health of a stock, with environment playing a particularly large role in the recruitment of short-lived stocks. It was suggested that the age structure of a stock might be more relevant for evaluating the health of long-lived stocks. However, it was acknowledged that not all stocks have sufficient data to evaluate all proposed indicators, and a single indicator is unlikely to suffice for all stocks. Data availability, species- specific factors and regional or sub-regional variation are thus also important considerations. In relation to ToR b, the participants presented their work on potential indicators including: recruitment time-series, proportion of fish larger than the mean size of first sexual maturation, F rec/Fbar, length distribution L 90, relative proportion of old fish above A 90, indicators of spawner quality, and SSB/R. A discussion on pros/cons, benefits to the population of high or low indicator values, benefits supported by empirical evidence, applicability to data-poor stocks and benefits supported by simulation/theoretical considerations followed the presentations. Finally, in relation to ToR c, the difficulty emerged in ranking the indicators alone without considering the data used to estimate them and a new set of evaluation criteria for use in WKD3C3THRESHOLDS were defined. Based on the outputs of the meeting a list of indicators to be further evaluated has been drafted, which also emphasizes the stocks for which studies have empirically demonstrated effects on productivity. In addition to the listed indicators, indicators of genetic diversity and proportion of fish with parasite infestation were mentioned but to the knowledge of the participants, widespread data for these are currently not publicly available.
- «
- 1 (current)
- 2
- 3
- »