Researchers and The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Cooperate to Make Ecosystem Modeling More Practical

This story is part of our “Taking Stock,” series, which shares insights from past research projects supported by the Lenfest Ocean Program. We reflect on which approaches these projects used to make research relevant and useful to decision-makers—and ask how the research has informed marine policy and management. To see the full series, visit the Cross Currents homepage.

In 2018, the Lenfest Ocean Program supported Dr. Andre Buchheister at Humboldt State University to work with technical experts with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASFMC) to tailor an ecosystem model that enabled managers to adopt ecological reference points (ERPs) for Atlantic menhaden. Building on nearly a decade of work, this decision represented a significant shift toward incorporating ecosystem approaches in fisheries management (EAFM). You can read more about that here.

Buchheister and collaborators developed a novel quantitative modeling approach that accounts for dietary needs of predators to set reference points for a major fishery. In this “Taking Stock” piece, we reflect on the collaboration between Buchheister and the ASMFC, which made what was a comprehensive – and by extension overwhelming – ecosystem model more practical. The ASMFC had long been working to establish ERPs. Pairing Buchheister with technical experts already engaged in the effort sparked the kind of mutual dialogue and learning that allowed the scientists to address managers’ needs in real-time and build confidence in the accuracy and utility of their method.

Focusing on the Information Needed

Menhaden is an abundant, schooling fish that is an important food source for striped bass, bluefish, and several other species. It is also the target of the largest fishery on the U.S. East Coast. Managers had struggled with how best to balance the delicate ecological and economic considerations, making menhaden a prime candidate for testing ecosystem approaches to management of the fishery.

Ecosystem modeling can help with such a challenge. However, given the sheer complexity of ecosystems, understanding what information fisheries managers need and how they can use new data is essential for linking modeling efforts with decisions. In this case, the ASMFC wanted to start with taking menhaden’s role as prey for multiple species into account when setting catch limits. Other important environmental changes like forecasting ocean warming could be added later.

When Buchheister began, he was working with a model that included a whopping 61 species – all with varying degrees of data availability. For managers, it was unwieldy and thus not entirely practical for management use. Also, the paucity of data for some species introduced enough uncertainty that managers feared outputs could at times be unreliable. 

Tailoring Model Design to Meet Decisionmaker Needs

Buchheister recognized that the model had to be improved. But more than that, he recognized he couldn’t do that successfully without ongoing feedback and input from ASMFC. When he approached us about funding the research, we worked with him to include in the research team key technical experts formally involved in the ASMFC’s management process. One of these collaborators was Dr. David Chagaris, University of South Florida, who went on to lead the development of a simplified version of the ecosystem model that was more tractable for management use.

We believe these actions may have been the most important in convincing managers to give the model a second look. Formalizing the collaboration with the ASMFC not only brought Buchheister into the process but allowed him and his team to do iterations of the model – all in direct response to questions from managers and stakeholders. For example, the team developed multiple models to test a series of “what-if” scenarios exploring what menhaden fishing rates and catch limits would likely have to be to maintain predator populations at certain levels.

Buchheister explained that “this allowed managers to see the potential repercussions of different management choices. And having models of different complexities that used the same datasets helped to show that they’re telling the same story for key species.” As a result, managers and stakeholders came away with a much stronger handle, and greater confidence in how the models were performing, which was important given model outputs can be complex with varying levels of uncertainty. It also laid bare the models’ strengths and weaknesses, allowing technical experts and managers to select the model best suited to address management objectives and needs.

Aligning the Science with the Management Process

Finally, it bears noting that the ASMFC assembled the Ecological Reference Points Working Group (ERP WG), a technical team tasked with evaluating the different models. This venue provided Buchheister, Chagaris, and others with a clear process and timelines. Moreover, the ERP WG fostered a collaborative environment, stimulating cross-pollination and coordination among all researchers studying menhaden management.

In a significant step towards EAFM, the ASMFC in August 2020 adopted ERPs for menhaden based largely on the improved ecosystem model developed by Chagaris, Buchheister, and team. As other regions also struggle with how to operationalize EAFM, we believe use-inspired science like this project can help overcome roadblocks, particularly if a clear process to cooperate on the research is present. In the case of Atlantic menhaden, sustained dialogue and collaboration were essential to articulating the science need and developing the models accordingly. Looking ahead, we will continue to support projects that bring partners from across the science, management, and stakeholder sectors together, but for today, we take a moment to celebrate.