marine life protection act initiativedfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/agenda_040109k1.pdf · model outputs •...
Post on 23-Oct-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
Spatial Bioeconomic Model Evaluations of Round 1 Draft MPA Arrays/Proposals
Dr. Christopher Costello, MLPA Master Plan Science Advisory Team andUniversity of California, Santa Barbara
Dr. Will White, University of California, Davis
Presentation to the MLPA Master Plan Science Advisory TeamApril 1, 2009 • Los Angeles, CA
Marine Life Protection Act Initiative
K.1
Packet Pg. 283
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Inputs
• Geographic– Habitat maps– Proposed marine protected area (MPA) boundaries
and regulations• Species-specific
– Life history (growth, natural mortality, fecundity)– Adult movement (home range diameter)– Larval dispersal (pelagic larval duration, spawning
season, some behavior)– Dispersal patterns from UC Los Angeles / UC Santa
Barbara circulation model– Egg-recruit or settler-recruit relationship (critical to
population persistence)
K.1
Packet Pg. 284
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Inputs
• Two models: UC Davis and UC Santa Barbara– Structurally similar, but slightly different
approaches to modeling adult movement, overall level of fishing, other details
– Concordance in results inspire confidence that outcomes not sensitive to details of any one model
K.1
Packet Pg. 285
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Inputs
• Updates– Oceanography
• Dispersal matrix is species specific. Parameterized over range of oceanographic conditions (1996-2002)
– Fishing fleet model• Fleet model – responds to spatial abundance of fish• Data compiled by Ecotrust, parameterization of fleet
model is underway (distance, congestion, weather, etc.)– Validation
• Preliminary model outputs evaluated by fish experts• Now incorporate north-south gradient in species
abundance
K.1
Packet Pg. 286
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Inputs: Species
• Ocean whitefish• Black surfperch• Opaleye• Kelp bass• Kelp rockfish• Sheephead• Red sea urchin• California halibut
K.1
Packet Pg. 287
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Outputs
• Conservation– Spatial distribution of larval settlement and
biomass– Total settlement and biomass (summed over
study region, weighted sum across species)• Economic
– Spatial distribution of yield– Total yield and profit (summed over study
region, weighted sum across species)
K.1
Packet Pg. 288
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Outputs
• Other Data– Spatial distribution of fishing effort– Larval connectivity patterns
• All outputs are based on long-term equilibria• Each output is calculated for a range of
assumptions about future fishery management outside MPAs1
1For complete list of assumptions, see evaluation methods document, Chapter 8, Appendix C.
K.1
Packet Pg. 289
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results
Spatial Distribution of Larval Settlement
Model: UC Davis
Species: Ocean Whitefish
Assumption: MSY Management
*Also run for “unsuccessful” and “conservative” management
K.1
Packet Pg. 290
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results
Spatial Distribution of Biomass
Model: UC Davis
Species: Ocean Whitefish
Assumption: MSY Management
*Also run for “unsuccessful” and “conservative” management
K.1
Packet Pg. 291
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results
Spatial Distribution of Fishing Effort
Model: UC Santa Barbara
Species: Red Sea Urchin
Assumption: MSY Management
*Also run for “unsuccessful” and “conservative” management
K.1
Packet Pg. 292
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results
Spatial Distribution of Fishery Yield
Model: UC Santa Barbara
Species: Red Sea Urchin
Assumption: MSY Management
*Also run for “unsuccessful” and “conservative” management
K.1
Packet Pg. 293
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results
Region-by-Region Biomass (MSY management, UC Davis model)
0.480.520.490.450.48External COcean Whitefish
0.390.500.450.420.43External BOcean Whitefish
0.390.500.450.420.42External AOcean Whitefish
0.370.490.430.410.41Existing MPAsOcean Whitefish
South Islands
North Islands
North Mainland
South Mainland
TotalMPA Array orProposal
Species
Regions:• Southern mainland: Mexico to Long Beach • Northern mainland: Long Beach to Point Conception • Northern Channel Islands: San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz
and Anacapa• Southern Channel Islands: San Nicolas, Santa Barbara, Santa
Catalina, San Clemente
Range: 0 (no biomass) to 1 (maximum unfished biomass)
K.1
Packet Pg. 294
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results
Region-by-Region Yield (MSY management, UC Davis model)
0.771.320.961.170.91External COcean Whitefish
0.961.060.991.030.99External BOcean Whitefish
0.971.050.981.030.98External AOcean Whitefish
1.001.001.001.001.00Existing MPAsOcean Whitefish
South Islands
North Islands
North Mainland
South Mainland
TotalMPA Array orProposal
Species
Note: Some regions see improvement in yield over existing MPAsRegions:• Southern mainland: Mexico to Long Beach • Northern mainland: Long Beach to Conception • Northern Channel Islands: San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz
and Anacapa• Southern Channel Islands: San Nicolas, Santa Barbara, Santa
Catalina, San Clemente
K.1
Packet Pg. 295
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results
MPA-by-MPA Biomass (MSY management)Biomass (UCSB Model)
00.0050.010.0150.020.0250.03
Sout
h_Sa
n_Di
ego_
Bay_
SMCA
UCSB
_SMR
Malib
u_Ea
st_S
MR
Big_
Syca
mor
e_Ca
nyon
_SMR
Portu
gues
e_Be
nd_S
MCA
Lagu
na_S
MRDe
l_Mar
_SMR
Farn
swor
th_B
ank_
SMR
Rich
ards
on R
ock
Harri
s Poi
ntGu
ll Isla
nd
Carri
ngto
n Po
int
Pain
ted
Cave
MPA Name
Bio
mas
s (%
of u
nfis
hed)
K.1
Packet Pg. 296
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results
MPA-by-MPA Self-Recruitment & Persistence (MSY management)
0.060.00HalibutSanta Catalina Island
0.180.08Red Sea UrchinSanta Catalina Island
0.200.05SheepheadSanta Catalina Island
0.190.06Kelp RockfishSanta Catalina Island
0.230.06Kelp BassSanta Catalina Island
0.320.07OpaleyeSanta Catalina Island
2.601.00Black SurfperchSanta Catalina Island
0.250.11Ocean WhitefishSanta Catalina Island
Self persistence (UCD)Self recruitment (UCD)SpeciesMPA name
Self recruitment: Fraction of settling larvae that were produced locally (Range 0 -1) • Measure of isolation, connectedness (0 = totally isolated)
Self persistence: Measure of whether MPA is self-sufficient • Values less than or equal to 1 are dependent on larvae from elsewhere.• Values greater than 1 are self-sufficient.
K.1
Packet Pg. 297
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Model Results: Proposal Rank
Ranking for conservationvalue (nearly) preservedacross models and fishingscenarios
Unsuccessful Management
00.050.10.150.20.250.30.35
ExtC
TopA
Opa
lB
LapB
ExtB
TopB
LapA
Opa
lA
ExtA
Exis
ting
MPA Array
Con
serv
atio
n Va
lue
ExtC
TopA
Opa
lB
LapB
ExtB
TopB
LapA
Opa
lA
ExtA
Exis
ting
MPA Array
MSY Fishing Scenario
0.50.520.540.560.580.60.620.64
Con
serv
atio
n Va
lue
K.1
Packet Pg. 298
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
UCD Model Results: BiomassConservation Value
Total biomass (relative to unfished)
K.1
Packet Pg. 299
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
UCD Model Results: Fishery YieldConservation Value
Total biomass (relative to unfished)
Economic Value
Total yield (relative to MSY)
K.1
Packet Pg. 300
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
UCD Model Results: Biomass x YieldConservation Value
Total biomass (relative to unfished)
Economic Value
Total yield (relative to MSY)
Total biomass(relative to unfished)
Tota
l yie
ld (r
elat
ive
to M
SY)
K.1
Packet Pg. 301
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
UCSB Model Results: Biomass x YieldConservation Value
Total biomass (relative to unfished)
Economic Value
Total yield (relative to MSY)
Total biomass(relative to unfished)
Tota
l yie
ld (r
elat
ive
to M
SY)
K.1
Packet Pg. 302
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
-
Conclusions
• Models are running smoothly – output available to assist in modifying arrays and proposals
• Ranking of MPA arrays and proposals for conservation value is insensitive to (1) model and (2) assumption about fishery management outside
• Differences in fishery management outside MPAs have strong effect on model results. But given similar placement, larger MPAs lead to higher conservation value.
K.1
Packet Pg. 303
Bri
efin
g D
ocu
men
t K
.1:
Sp
acia
l Bio
eco
no
mic
Mo
del
Eva
luat
ion
s o
f R
ou
nd
1 D
raft
MP
A A
rray
s/P
rop
osa
ls
top related