SEAwise report on the effects of fishing on food webs and community diversity aimed at populating the MSFD Descriptor 4 and based on food web and end-to-end modelling.

The SEAwise project works to deliver a fully operational tool that will allow fishers, managers, and policy makers to easily apply Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) in their fisheries. This SEAwise report describes work that aims to provide a strong evidence base supporting the use of ecological indicators in fisheries management through statistical studies and end to end modelling. Our aim is to support the use of ecological indicators to guide managers towards strategies that lead to an ecologically safe space for fisheries, which we define as a range of states that provide yields for sustainable fisheries, maintains ecosystem functions and leads to low risk of overexploitation of species and loss of diversity. We show from an analysis of the past, using stock assessment model products for the northeast Atlantic and observations from scientific survey data of the North Sea, that fishing has already impacted ecosystems. Fishing on commercial fish stocks altered the balance of functional groups within the ecosystem of the northeast Atlantic, with depletions in the biomass of fish during the 1980s followed by stock rebuilding since the early 2000s, such that the biomasses of benthivorous fish and planktivorous fish are now much greater than that of piscivorous fish, which may be a sign of an improving ecosystem. Within the North Sea, fishing also appeared to have depleted the biomass of fish during the 1980s (particularly in the southern North Sea) and led to a change in the composition of species and the proportion of large individuals in the ecosystem (particularly in the northern North Sea).We use comparative ecosystem modelling, employing multiple model types, to investigate the response of foodweb and community diversity indicators under a range of fishing strategies. We consider ‘no fishing’ scenarios, under prevailing environmental conditions, as a measure of the unimpacted state of the ecosystem i.e., its carrying capacity. Our modelled unimpacted state is our ‘yardstick’ - a standard from which we can measure the impact on the ecosystem due to current levels of fishing in the current conditions. We propose that the depletion of species, the difference in biomass of each species from their unimpacted levels under prevailing environmental conditions, can provide a basis from which to evaluate the risk of loss across impacted groups within the ecosystem.We investigate if any of our selected food web and community indicators, including those used within the regional sea convention OSPAR, can support the use of assessment thresholds that may help managers reduce the risk of depletion of species or degradation of ecosystems by fishing. We explore management scenarios, linked to changes in levels of fishing impact due to current fisheries (so not favouring one type of fishing over another), to demonstrate how reducing or increasing activity levels will alter the risk of depletion of species and demonstrate how ecological indicators are expected to change given alterations in the structure of the ecosystem. We contrast these management scenarios to additional scenarios in which seabed-impacting gears only are restricted to avoid damage to habitats. This latter scenario promotes fishing on pelagic fish, such as herring and sprat, in the future and inhibits trawling for demersal fish such as sole, plaice and cod.In each model, we find clear predictable relationships between fishing mortality overall (averaged across all model groups) and the depletion risk within the ecosystem. The biomass of apex predators typically decreases as fishing mortality increases. Similarly, as the size-structure of demersal fish communities decreases, risk within the communities increase. In contrast, the balance of trophic guilds in the ecosystem and the Shannon diversity overall or by group respond in differing ways (increases and decreases with increased fishing) dependent on the type fishing strategies modelled. The indicator targets for recovery and risk-based limits proposed here will be explored further in WP6 of the project.Read more about the project at www.seawiseproject.org</p

SEAwise Data Management Plan

   This report describes the SEAwise data procedures and guidelines with the aim to increase the awareness about the data collected, processed and stored in the project, to ensure that all relevant data collected and used in the project is available in a well-documented, discoverable, standardised and easily accessible form, to give information on data quality and sampling protocols and, to clearly state the usage rights on the different data and to ensure use and handling of data is in accordance with Regulation 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation, GDPR).  Sharing research knowledge and data is integral to the SEAwise project and this is attained through implementing the FAIR principles, employing dedicated quality assurance processes and carefully considering ethical aspects of knowledge and data storing and sharing. </p

SEAwise Report on effects of environmental and ecological factors on stock productivity for online tool

The SEAwise project works to deliver a fully operational tool that will allow fishers, managers, and policy makers to easily apply Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) in their fisheries. This SEAwise report aims to synthesise the results of population dynamic modelling tools used in a single species mode to demonstrate the effect of integrating the impact of environmental drivers on our perception of stock productivity, as well as the effect of different environmental scenarios, all other things being equal. At this stage, the stocks of interest have been parametrised in the different modelling tools (FLBEIA, BEMTOOL, BEE, SMS) and for each of them a baseline scenario, in which the productivity of the stock (weight/length at age, maturity and natural mortality) and the exploitation pattern (selectivity, discards) remain aligned to the stock assessment has been parametrized and run.Overall, the baseline runs presented here are considered to be realistic and consistent with perception of long-term stock productivity under current management and reference points. However, several stocks are currently in a benchmarking process and the baseline simulations conducted under this task will be updated in the future.Read more about the project at www.seawiseproject.org</p

SEAwise first synthetic summary report on social and economic aspects of fishing for online tool

The SEAwise project works to deliver a fully operational tool that will allow fishers, managers, and policy makers to easily apply Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management. This SEAwise report synthesizes social and economic aspects of fishing, providing an idea of the indirect impact of the fisheries on the local and coastal communities in terms of relevant indicators (e.g. full equivalent employment and added values) to describe the sale and purchase interdependencies between producers and consumers within national and regional economies. An accurate representation of the link between fisheries and societal benefits is of paramount importance to summarise all socio-economic effects of specific management.The key social and economic aspects of fishing explored in this deliverable are:Comparison of small-scale fisheries (SSF) and large-scale fisheries (LSF) in terms of capacity, economic and social indicators,Evaluation of the direct effect of fishing sector on connected economic sectors for SSF and LSF,Definition of the fishing communities as one of the aspects of relevance to look at to better understand the social and economic importance of fishing,Evaluation of the impact of the fuel price on the fish prices, as an element affecting both demand and supply,Overview of the fishing footprint in terms of CO2 emissions, influenced by the gear utilized and the vessel length across 7 different fisheries in Europe by Country.The fisheries considered are specifically:Demersal fisheries operating in Western Waters (Bay of Biscay), including vessels from Spain and France;Demersal fisheries operating in Western Waters (Celtic Sea), including vessels from Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Ireland and England;Pelagic fisheries operating in Western Waters (Bay of Biscay), including vessels from Basque Country;Demersal fisheries operating in North Sea, including vessels from Belgium, Denmark, England, France, Scotland, Germany, Nederland, Scotland and Sweden;Demersal fisheries, operating in Central Mediterranean Sea (Adriatic and Western Ionian Sea), including vessels from Italy, Croatia, Slovenia, Albania and Montenegro;Demersal fisheries, operating in Eastern Mediterranean Sea (Eastern Ionian Sea), including vessels from Greece;Trawl fisheries operating in the Western Baltic Sea, including vessels from Denmark, Sweden, and Germany.Across the different regions considered, the SSF is more represented in Mediterranean than in Western Waters and North Sea, although the definition of SSF utilised was not the same. In all case studies, SSF carbon footprint is lower than the one of LSF, due to the higher fuel consumption associated to active gears. Moreover, LSF generally fish far away from the home port, further increasing the use of fuel to reach fishing grounds.Although SSF has generally a landing value lower than the LSF, from a social point of view, especially in Mediterranean, the number of employees is quite even and, in some cases, SSF has more employees than LSF.The fuel price influences fish price for the stocks characterizing the landings of the specific fisheries. In Mediterranean case studies, deep-water rose shrimp and mullets prices were affected by the fuel price. In Germany, the fuel impacts were significant only for whiting, while for Spain the correlation was found weakly significant only for haddock (small scale fleet) and sole (large scale). No significant relationship was found for Ireland, while for France a weak significance was observed for haddock and whiting (large scale). The testing of linear correlation between fish price and fuel price by stock highlighted for Belgium a significant dependence for Nephrops in area VII and for Sole in area 27.VII.e for large scale fleet. Turbot price was significantly affected by the fuel price in North Sea in several Countries.The fuel costs impacted GVA of LSF more than of SSF across the case studies, although the capital and the labour costs represent also a key element of the economic performance of both fleets. The recent increase in fuel price is expected to impact both fleets negatively (STECF, 2022), with increasing fish price impacting only a few species of the considered fisheries while operating costs are increased.The fuel consumption and the GVA were identified as the most important economic indicators, while the number of employees and the average wage were considered the most important from a social point of view. The carbon emissions were also identified as a major aspect of fishing in terms of human footprint.In the context of governance, the 2013 reform of the CFP emphasized that the policy rests on the three dimensions of sustainability: social, economic, and environmental. In this report, we have highlighted preliminary findings focused on the social and economic aspects of fishing within the EU.The key indicators and suggestions described in this report to enhance the prototype will be used in the further work in SEAwise on the EBFM toolbox.Read more about the project at www.seawiseproject.org</p

SEAwise Report on key drivers and impacts of changes in spatial distribution of fisheries and fished stocks

   An ecosystem approach to fisheries management requires the consideration of spatially explicit management measures and other impacts on species and the links between the distribution of fished species, their surrounding environment and productivity. Quantification of the spatial aspects of fisheries and ecology of commercially fished stocks may improve the accuracy of the predicted changes in fish productivity, fisheries yield and costs, benefits and selectivity.  To provide a knowledge base for spatially explicit considerations, SEAwise consulted stakeholders throughout Europe and conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature. As a first step, engagement with relevant stakeholder groups in each Case Study identified key issues of relevance to spatial management. The input from this stakeholder consultation was supplemented by a systematic literature review with careful consideration of the objectives, search terms, inclusion/exclusion criteria, the method for data/knowledge extraction and ultimately how these data and knowledge will be used. The purpose of the task was to quantify the key drivers and pressures behind the changes occurring in commercial fish stocks and fisheries distribution that have a spatially explicit content, map the relevant existing scientific knowledge and provide input to the subsequent SEAwise tasks.  The words identified by the stakeholders consulted focused on factors causing changes to the distribution of commercial fish/shellfish (climate change, MPAs, species interactions, pollution, habitats and invasive species) and fisheries (windfarms, MPAs, Marine spatial planning) as well as the other human impacts. The systematic review extracted data from 331 papers. The most frequently studied topic was the distribution of fish and the region with most papers was the North Sea with about the twice the amount of papers in each of the other regions. The most frequently studied species in the literature were cod, hake and plaice and by far the most frequently studied fisheries was demersal trawl fisheries.  Among the issues identified by stakeholders as key, the effects of environmental conditions on the distribution of fish were particularly well represented in the reviewed material. In contrast, factors determining the distribution of fisheries were almost exclusively studied in trawl fishing in the North Sea and papers on the effect of area restrictions on fish and fisheries were largely restricted to Western waters and the North Sea. While knowledge on the effects of habitats on species did exist, this was restricted to the Baltic Sea and North Sea and papers addressing this outside these areas were close to non-existent. This points to important areas for future work in SEAwise. This report describes part of the results of the SEAwise project. More information about the project can be found at https://seawiseproject.org/ </p

SEAwise Report on the key drivers of stock productivity and future environmental scenarios

An ecosystem approach to fisheries management requires the consideration of commercial species as components of an ecosystem and the acknowledgement of the links between their productivity and the surrounding environment. To provide a knowledge base for such links, SEAwise consulted stakeholders throughout Europe and conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature. The systematic review resulted in 2050 articles from the literature search that were screened for their tile and abstract. 516 of them were retained for data extraction. The majority of studies were conducted in the Baltic Sea and the North Sea, followed by the Western Waters, and with only a few dozen papers in the Mediterranean Sea. Cod and herring were the most studied species, temperature and more generally climate and hydrodynamics indicators were the main drivers investigated, and reproduction was the main productivity-related process. The output of the systematic review is a database of scientific articles organised by regions, species, environmental drivers and productivity-associated processes and where outcomes, but also spatial and time scales, analytical methods etc. are described in a standardised fashion. This database will be analysed in the coming months and used in the downstream tasks of WP3. The most frequently driver identified by stakeholders across regions was climate change followed by species interactions, cod, pollution, commercial fish/shellfish and plankton. Climate change effects on stocks through temperature and salinity are relatively well covered in the literature as are effects of plankton and species interaction. Studies of the effects of pollution do not occur frequently and as a consequence require a dedicated effort is made in SEAwise to remedy this. Species reported frequently by the stakeholders included cod, seabass, sardine, sole, crabs, flatfish, Norway lobster, octopus, shrimps, herring, sprat, anchovy, hake, new species (species increasing in abundance as a result of climate change as well as invasive species of commercial interest) and sandeel. Among these, more than 10 papers were retrieved for cod, sardine, sole, herring, sprat, selected flatfish, anchovy, hake and sandeel. For the remaining species, a dedicated effort must be made in SEAwise if they are to be included in stock models.  This report describes results of the SEAwise project. More information about the project can be found at https://seawiseproject.org/</p

SEAwise Report on the key species and habitats impacted by fishing

The implementation of ecosystem-based fisheries management requires knowledge on the ecological impact of fishing activities on species and their habitats – those both targeted and not targeted by fisheries. To identify which ecological impacts are key and what is known about them, SEAwise consulted stakeholders through European Advisory Councils and conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature to map the available knowledge and evidence. Specific reference was given to the bycatch of Protected, Endangered and Threatened (PET) species, benthic habitats, food webs and biodiversity, and impact from fisheries-related litter and ghost nets.  At the stakeholder consultations, sharks and/or elasmobranchs, turtles, species interactions, and seals or marine mammals were identified as top ranked in at least three out of the five regions. Other terms identified by at least two Case Study regions were: seabirds, sensitive species, benthic habitats, litter, PET species, invasive species and species interactions.  Relevant data were extracted from 549 retained papers. The majority of studies were conducted in the Mediterranean Sea, whereas only few papers reported on fishing impacts in the Baltic Sea (see figure below). Bony fish (teleosts) and benthos were the most studied ecosystem components in all Case Study regions, whereas marine mammals and cartilaginous fish were often studied in relation to bycatch of PET species.  Out of the 549 papers, most of them were related to fishing impacts on food webs and biodiversity and benthic habitats, followed by bycatch of PET species and other fishing impact studies (not related to any task). Fewest studies were related to the impact of fisheries-related litter and ghost nets. Demersal trawls were by far the most studied gear in studies on commercial fishing impacts. For recreational fisheries, hooks and lines, in particular angling, was the most studied fishing activity.  Among the items identified by the stakeholders, marine mammals, seabirds and reptiles were all covered in at least 25 papers each, indicating that there is a considerable body of knowledge even though not all areas may have information for all species. Litter was the key item that was least frequently reported on in the literature, especially outside the Mediterranean, where scientific papers were rare. As a consequence, areas outside the Mediterranean may lack information for further analysis unless a dedicated effort is made in SEAwise to remedy this. The regional differences in topics identified by stakeholder scoping did not reflect the regional amount of papers available.  This report describes results of the SEAwise project. More information about the project can be found at https://seawiseproject.org/</p

SEAwise Report on the impacts of fisheries on stocks and landings under existing management plans

The SEAwise project works to deliver a fully operational tool that will allow fishers, managers, and policy makers to easily apply Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM). This SEAwise report investigates the impact of existing management plans on the stocks and landings. The analyses are based on the simulations carried out for deliverables 6.4 and 6.7 in Task 6.3 and Task 6.4, respectively. A wide range of models has been applied to various case study areas across the Northeast Atlantic and Mediterranean.The work provides important information on likely impact of different management scenarios on the stocks and the landings at different time horizons. The scenarios investigated include management related to attaining Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) in both a strict MSY approach and a Pretty Good Yield (PGY) approach (allowing sustainable deviations from single species FMSY point estimates). Additionally, two additional scenarios were run to evaluate the impact of a management regime based on MSY and the landing obligation. In one of the scenarios the effort level was maintained at current level and in the second a more realistic fleet dynamic constrained by catch quotas and not constrained by a landing obligation was implemented.The current fisheries management, based on MSY target with implementation of landing obligation, led to an increase in SSB, a fishing mortality level well below the target in most of the cases, and an increase in landings in the long term. The increase in landings was large in the case studies that had stocks at very low level at the beginning of the simulation, but limited in other cases. The change in average age of the stock was case study dependent and any increase was not related to the status of the stocks.The PGY scenario where the fishing mortality ranges were used to introduce flexibility in the TAC and quota system did not solve the problem of choke species in the mixed fisheries. Each case study used a different approach to use the ranges but none of them resulted in significant decrease in the loss of fishing opportunities. A management scenarios that seemed to significantly improve the fisheries status is the one explored in the Mediterranean case study where a substantially lower loss in fishing opportunities (difference between fishing mortality and fishing mortality target) was attained. This may be linked to the use of effort management, which is, at least in simulations, very effective.The illustrations in this report provide readily usable input for the web interface summarising the impacts under different management scenarios.Read more about the project at www.seawiseproject.org</p

SEAwise Report on consistency of existing targets and limits for indicators in an ecosystem context

The SEAwise project works to deliver a fully operational tool that will allow fishers, managers, and policy makers to easily apply Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) in their fisheries. This SEAwise report investigates the consistency of existing targets and limits from the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). Trade-offs between different objectives (ecological, economic, social), targets and limits are highlighted. A wide range of model types (from bio-economic to full ecosystem models) has been applied to various case study areas across the North East Atlantic and Mediterranean. Although model predictions are by nature uncertain, this study provides important information on likely inconsistencies between existing targets and limits and trade-offs expected under ecosystem- based fisheries management (EBFM). The scenarios investigated include the current range of management applied in terms of the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) concept (i.e. strict MSY approach vs. Pretty Good Yield (PGY) approach allowing sustainable deviations from single species FMSY point estimates). The landing obligation is a key aspect of current fisheries management and was fully considered, in particular for mixed demersal fisheries.Maintaining current fishing effort without further management measures was the least sustainable option in nearly all cases studies. This approach led to increased risk of stocks falling below critical biomass limits. Although the fishing effort adaptions needed is highly case specific, this indicates that further management measures are likely to be needed to ensure a sustainable exploitation of all stocks.Scenarios applying a strict MSY approach in combination with the landing obligation (i.e. FMSY as upper limit with fisheries ending when the first stock reaches FMSY) in most case studies led to the lowest fishing effort. This had positive effects on MSFD related indicators such as bycatch of Protected, Endangered and Threatened (PET) species, benthic impact and the Large Fish Indicator as well as global indicators such as CO2 emission or ecosystem-based indicators like catch per km2. However, this scenario often led to the lowest catches from mixed demersal fisheries due to strong choke effects because fleets had to stop when their first quota was exhausted. This reduces social indicators such as food security, employment and wages. In terms of economic performance, the gains and loses were highly case specific. Scenarios applying the Pretty Good Yield concept and allowing sustainable deviations from the FMSY point estimate when stocks are in a healthy state often outperformed the scenarios applying FMSY as strict upper limit. Such scenarios, applying a more flexible interpretation of the MSY concept, led to reduced fishing effort compared to the status quo effort, but relaxed choke situations in mixed demersal fisheries to some extent leading to higher gross profits and in some case studies also to higher catches. Hence, they may constitute a compromise between the need to attain social as well as ecological objectives. Whether the associated effort levels lead to conflicts with MSFD objectives must be analysed when more internationally agreed thresholds become available for e.g., bycatch of PET species or benthic impact.The majority of case studies exceeded suggested thresholds for the global ecosystem indicators catch per km2 or primary production even under scenarios with high effort reductions. This can be explained to some extent by the fact that these indices are mainly driven by pelagic and industrial fisheries not always part of the models applied. Nevertheless, it indicates potential conflicts with such more holistic ecosystem indicators in their current form.Additional trade-offs in terms of yield were identified within the food web if e.g., demersal piscivorous predators feed on small pelagic fish and both groups are fished. Further, in case studies where small-scale fisheries (SSF) play an important role (e.g., Eastern Ionian Sea) additional trade-offs became apparent as different scenarios led to different ratios between revenues from small scale fisheries and revenues from large-scale fisheries. This adds another level of complexity when such aspects need to be taken more into account in future fisheries management under EBFM.The modelling assumed current selectivities and catchabilities will be maintained in the future. Especially trade-offs arising from fleets having to stop fishing when their first quota is exhausted or when e.g., a threshold for bycatch of PET species is reached may be resolved by improving selectivities via technical measures (e.g., closed areas or innovative gears) in the future. Deliverable 6.8 in month 36 will test such scenarios. Furthermore, the list of indicators and their targets and limits will be updated based on research within and outside SEAwise. Predictive capability of models will be enhanced by incorporating improved biological and economic sub-models in relation to environmental change. Climate change scenarios will be run and new harvest control rules (HCRs), proposed by SEAwise, will be tested. Finally, consistent targets and limits will be proposed for implementing EBFM.</p