Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species

Recommendations on how to improve the management and conservation of forage species in the California Current ecosystem

PRBO Conservation Science

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species

Recommendations on how to improve the management and conservation of forage species in the California Current ecosystem

By Jennifer Martin Koepcke PRBO Conservation Science In collaboration with the Forage Fish Steering Committee

January, 2009

Cover: Northern anchovy. NOAA photo library.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 1 Table of Contents

Preface 3

Acknowledgements 4

Executive Summary 5

Introduction 7

Goals and Key Concepts 10

Recommendations 11

Recommendations for Policy and Management 11

Recommendations for Public Health, Safety, and Involvement 15

Recommendations for Scientific Research, Monitoring, and Adaptive Management 17

Conclusion 21

Appendix A: Glossary 22

Appendix B: Additional Problem Statements 24

Appendix C: Steering Committee Charter 25

Appendix D: Resources for More Information 30

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 2 Preface

This report is based on the views, interests, concerns, and ideas of stakeholders involved in the study, use, conservation, and management of forage species in the California Current Large Marine Ecosystem (see Acknowledgements). It captures some of the ideas stakeholders have today about how ecosystem-based management of forage species may be enhanced and expanded. Our hope is that this report will further the dialogue and provide a springboard for action on marine ecosystem-based management, and bring attention to the crucial role forage species play in the marine food web.

To develop this report, PRBO Conservation Science (PRBO) interviewed over 60 individuals, convened a one-day scientific symposium, organized 3 workshops with the Steering Committee, and hosted 4 conference calls to which over 100 people were invited to participate, between June 2007 and January 2009 (see Appendix C). There is considerable agreement among stakeholders on the benefits of maintaining sustainable fisheries and healthy marine ecosystems. Stakeholders agree that more information is needed, both for improving current management techniques and for applying an ecosystem-based approach to management. Stakeholders also generally agree that taking a holistic look at the system is important – including all types of forage, predators and people. There is disagreement among stakeholders on several key issues, such as the urgency of potential threats and the status of some species’ populations. Stakeholders have differing views on the extent to which ecosystem-based management is already being applied, which is brought about in part by an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of current management tools and practices.

We have attempted to capture the areas where consensus lies among stakeholders about ecosystem-based management of forage species. While we had tremendous participation in the drafting of the report, as we move ahead we will need to bring in a larger body of stakeholders, particularly from the forage species fishing communities. For many of the recommendations, more work is needed to flesh out details, prioritize implementation activities, and identify funding sources. The report’s recommendations are intended for a broad audience, including federal, state and local natural resource managers, members of the environmental and fishing communities, philanthropic and educational organizations, elected-officials, and interested members of the public.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 3 Acknowledgements

This report could not have been written without the help of many people.

We are grateful to the California Coastal Conservancy, California Ocean Protection Council, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment, and the Marine Fish Conservation Network for their generous support of this project.

We extend our deepest appreciation to the members of the Steering Committee, who contributed significant time and expertise to the creation of this report. The Steering Committee was comprised of individuals with extensive and wide-ranging knowledge of marine biology and ecology, state and federal fisheries management, recreational and commercial fishing, and ecosystem conservation (from July 2008 – January 2009: Greg Bargmann, Robert Emmett, Ben Enticknap, Nate Grader, Pam Lyons Gromen, Alec MacCall, Bob Osborn, Cyreis Schmitt, Julie Sherman, Dale Sweetnam). The report truly could not have been written without them.

Elkhorn Slough, CA It is important to note that Steering Committee members were not asked to seek approval of or agreement on this report by the agencies or organizations they work for, and information contained in this report should not be perceived to be the policies, recommendations, or opinions of the individual Steering Committee members or their respective agencies or organizations.

In addition to the Steering Committee, many other stakeholders provided their knowledge and opinions that added depth to the report, and we are especially thankful for their contributions. This list includes: Jennifer Boldt, Pam Botnen, Mike Burner, Elizabeth Clarke, David Crabbe, Tony DeFalco, Zeke Grader, Roger Hewitt, Ken Hinman, Jennifer Kassakain, Mike Okoniewski, Jonathan Phinney, Diane Pleschner-Steele, Matt Rand, Santi Roberts, Paul Smith, Kristin Stahl- Johnson, Ken Stump, William Sydeman, Valerie Termini, Darrell Ticehurst, Dan Wolford, and Jeannette Zamon.

Two of the workshops included presentations and field trips to facilitate learning and understanding of key issues. We are grateful to the people who presented information at these workshops, which added enormous value to the Steering Committee discussions. With thanks, we acknowledge Dr. Kerim Aydin, Dr. John Field, Dr. Pete Granger, Dr. James Harvey, Dr. Richard Parrish, Dr. Carrie Pomeroy, and Dr. Michael Rust for their contributions.

Finally, PRBO staff contributions to the report and this project have been outstanding. In particular: Julie Howar, John Baker, Ellie Cohen, Jaime Jahncke, and Melissa Pitkin. And, a special thank you goes to Julie Sherman at the Marine Fish Conservation Network for the many additional hours and extraordinary contributions she gave to this project.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 4 Executive Summary

This Ecosystem-based Management of Forage Species report has been developed to advance conservation and management actions for forage species in the California Current ecosystem. The report identifies challenges to implementing ecosystem-based management and offers recommendations on how to address those challenges. It is based on the views and opinions of a diverse group of stakeholders involved in the study, use, conservation, and management of forage species from across the region. Implementation of the recommendations will provide information, tools, and policies necessary to carry out ecosystem-based management of forage species. This, in turn, will help sustain productive marine food webs and the wildlife and human communities that depend upon them.

Ecosystem-based management (EBM) 1 is a conceptual framework that takes a holistic and integrated view of resource management. An intrinsic goal of ecosystem-based management is to sustain ecosystems in a healthy, productive, and resilient condition so that they can continue to provide social, spiritual, environmental, and economic benefits to society well into the future. Federal and state governments with jurisdiction in the California Current ecosystem (CCE) are committed to pursuing ecosystem-based management. 2 Utilizing an ecosystem-based approach to management is challenging, and stakeholder support for the scientific foundation and added complexity of implementation of EBM is essential for its success.

Understanding key food web interactions is an integral part of ecosystem-based management. The food web of the California Current ecosystem includes a suite of species that provides a critical link between lower trophic levels , such as krill and plankton, and upper trophic levels, which include large fishes, birds, and mammals. These mid-trophic level prey species, or forage species , exert a strong influence on the trophic dynamics and productivity of the ecosystem. They provide essential resources to predators , including endangered and commercially valuable species.

Forage species have been harvested for commercial and recreational purposes for generations. Fishing industries add social and economic value to coastal communities and society in general. Forage species commercially harvested in the California Current are part of a global market place. Global demand for forage species is high and is expected to increase as human populations and commercial uses for fishmeal and fish oil made from forage species, such as aquaculture and pet feeds, are steadily growing.

Effective management of forage species requires that we understand, among other things, the reproductive patterns of these species. The reproductive and recruitment success of forage species is believed to be closely linked to conditions in the physical environment. The CCE is a highly variable environment, and some forage species are known to experience dramatic fluctuations in abundance and distribution over time. Global climate change is expected to increase ocean variability; the impacts of which may have dramatic effects on the long-term

1 Terms in bold type are defined in the Glossary (Appendix A). 2 West Coast Governors’ Agreement on Ocean Health, 2006. New priorities for the 21 st Century – NOAA’s Strategic Plan Updated for FY 2006-2011. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 5 health of forage species’ populations. Reductions in forage species biomass or a loss of forage species diversity caused by global climate change, when superimposed on natural cycles, may severely impact the marine food web and our ability to ensure sustainable harvests.

Ecosystem-based management is an appropriate, and perhaps model, approach to conserve and manage forage species given their critical role in the food web, their responsiveness to physical ocean conditions, and their economic and social value. Since the collapse of the sardine fishery in California in the 1950s, some forage species on the U.S. West coast have been monitored and managed with caution. However, with rising global market pressures and increased variability likely to be brought about by climate change, a more complete understanding of forage species and food web interactions, and the application of that knowledge to resource assessment analyses and harvest decisions, may be critical to ensuring optimal management of our activities so that healthy and productive ecosystems are sustained over the long term.

This report was developed to provide a source of information to people interested in ecosystem- based management, including the research and policies that accompany it, for forage species along the Pacific coast of the continental United States. The report identifies problems and makes recommendations to address challenges associated with:

1. Natural variability of the ecosystem 2. Ecosystem-based fishery management plans 3. Fishery sustainability 4. Ocean habitat 5. Global market demand 6. Contaminants 7. Public awareness and involvement 8. Forage species ecology and biology Northern anchovy. OAR/National 9. Predator requirements Undersea Research Program, NOAA 10. Global climate change 11. Ecosystem models

The recommendations can be implemented by federal, state, and local natural resource managers, members of the environmental and fishing communities, philanthropic and educational organizations, and members of the public. Ideally, stakeholders will continue to collaborate, as they have in the development of this report, on its implementation. Concerned stakeholders not only bring expertise necessary to the pursuit of ecosystem-based management, they create pathways for implementation and the political will to move ahead.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 6 Introduction

Background

The California Current Large Marine Ecosystem (California Current ecosystem or CCE) is a globally significant natural resource. Upwelling of nutrient-rich waters associated with Eastern boundary currents, such as the California Current, drives ocean ecosystem productivity. These ecosystems are incredibly diverse biologically, they support substantial economic activities, and they provide invaluable benefits to society.

For generations, people have viewed the ocean as an infinite resource whose ability to provide for our needs was boundless. Scientists, managers, resource users, and a growing number of the public now recognize that not only are the ocean’s resources limited, they’re in peril. Ensuring that future generations will enjoy the many benefits provided by the ocean’s ecosystems requires that we change our practices. Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary. NOAA There is significant agreement that our current governance and communication structures are insufficient to support the most effective management of the CCE. Cooperation across political boundaries and among diverse cultures needs to increase, and we need to examine and respond to problems at the ecosystem scale. Recognizing these issues and others, both the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy and the Pew Oceans Commission have recommended the United States improve collaboration and cooperation at the regional scale to facilitate ecosystem-based management (EBM). 3

Why Forage Species?

Everything is food to something in the ocean. In fact, the diversity and complexity of foraging interactions in the ocean is best described as a food web, rather than a food chain. In the California Current ecosystem, the food web includes a suite of species that provide a critical link between lower and upper trophic levels. These mid-trophic level prey species, or forage species, exert a strong influence on the trophic dynamics of the ecosystem, and are primary food sources for many marine mammals, sea birds, sharks, and piscivorous fishes (predators), including endangered and commercially valuable species such as brown pelicans, blue whales, salmon, and tunas.

Forage species inhabiting the California Current ecosystem are harvested for recreational and commercial purposes in Mexico, the U.S., and Canada. Common terms for groups of forage species are: coastal pelagic species, wetfish, and bait fish. Forage finfish species, such as anchovy, sardine, herring, sandlance and mackerel, are used to make fishmeal and fish oil, are canned or frozen for human consumption, and are used as live and dead bait. Pacific whiting, a groundfish species, is forage early in its life cycle and is a valuable fishery product used for

3 Pew Oceans Commission, America's Living Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change , 2003. U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century , 2004.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 7 human consumption. Market squid are consumed by people and used as bait. Together, these species comprise an important part of the west coast’s fishing industry.

The growing human population and the expansion of tuna, salmon, and other finfish aquaculture industries globally are likely to increase demand for forage species. Fishmeal and fish oil that is used to produce animal and aquaculture feeds and nutritional supplements may be increasing competition for forage species that would otherwise be consumed directly by humans. This competition may raise prices, potentially making what is currently a low-cost, nutritious protein source less affordable. Rising demand also creates pressure to increase harvest levels, potentially impacting marine wildlife and the integrity of the food web.

Why ecosystem-based management?

The California Current ecosystem is a highly variable oceanographic environment, which is influenced by numerous physical processes in the North Pacific. Open ocean habitats, which are home to many forage species, shift in time and space with variations in major ocean flow patterns. These shifts occur seasonally, annually, and over multiple-year timescales. Biological communities will change significantly with shifts in the physical ocean environment. The reproductive success of some (and perhaps many) forage species is closely tied to conditions in the physical environment, such as ocean temperature and nutrient availability. As conditions favor reproductive success, these species will experience a boom in population growth and range expansion. Likewise, reproductive success drops with unfavorable conditions. Pacific sardine, probably the best studied forage fish species on the west coast, cycle through low and high abundance periods, reflecting the variability of the California Current ecosystem.

Given this variability, and its effect on reproduction, it is difficult to accurately predict forage species’ population Chinook salmon numbers (or biomass). This challenge is likely to grow if greater variability in ocean conditions occurs in the future as a result of climate change, as many have predicted. How global climate change will impact forage species over the long-term is an important question for resource managers and communities that rely on the goods and services provided by the marine ecosystem.

Predators have developed mechanisms to withstand the natural variation in forage species populations, including changing diet, delaying or interrupting breeding, and migration. However, predator populations that are already low in numbers or living on the margins of their habitats may be stressed beyond points of recovery when prey are inaccessible or significantly reduced in quality, quantity, or density. Reductions in forage species biomass or a loss of species diversity caused by global climate change and/or unsustainable harvest practices, when superimposed on natural cycles, may severely impact the availability of prey and result in declining productivity of predators. At some point, reduced biomass and/or species diversity may lead to long-term declines in predator populations.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 8 In the U.S., fishery management is presently largely based on a single-species approach that does not take into account ecological variables, such as predator needs and competition. However, managers, fishermen, and others have recognized the importance of forage species to the ecosystem and the link between forage species abundance and ocean conditions for years. Current management of some forage species in the CCE includes measures to protect coastal habitats and reduce harvest pressure when populations are declining. For example, the federal harvest guideline for sardine has a relatively low harvest volume (5-15%) that is determined annually and based in part on a proxy for ecosystem conditions (sea surface temperature). Federal harvest guidelines do not include safeguards to protect against localized depletion that may negatively impact predators at critical life stages.

Ecosystem-based management is an appropriate and fitting approach to conserve and manage forage species. For forage fisheries in the California Current, an EBM approach must take into consideration the constantly changing climate-driven physical and biological interactions in the ecosystem, the trophic relationships Harbor at Moss Landing, CA between fished and unfished elements of the food web, the adaptation potential of life history diversity, and the role of humans as both predators and competitors. 4

A Collaborative Approach

Ecosystem-based management is not a new concept; however, the practical implementation of EBM is challenging for many reasons. An ecosystem-based approach to management seeks to better inform decisions with knowledge of ecosystem structure, processes, and functions. This can require more data about the status and inter-relationships of species, communities, and the physical environment than single-species management. Ecosystem-based management also includes the people who live in and work with the natural resources, requiring data on the economic and social factors relevant to resource management. Information must be collected from a variety of sources and integrated into comprehensive and useful tools – a truly multi- disciplinary approach.

Many stakeholders support the concept of ecosystem-based management and are putting it into practice along the U.S. west coast. The active participation of a broad spectrum of the ocean community can reduce the challenges associated with the complexity and uncertainty that comes with an EBM approach. When stakeholders understand the scientific underpinnings for EBM, and how the use of this approach is incorporated with existing management frameworks, they can participate and collaborate in meaningful and useful ways, greatly facilitating EBM implementation.

4 Field, J.C. & Francis, R.C. Considering ecosystem-based fisheries management in the California Current. Marine Policy 30, 552-569 (2006).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 9 Goals and Key Concepts

Goals

This report was produced to accomplish two goals that aid in the progress of EBM in the CCE:

• To advance ecosystem-based management, and the research and policies that accompany it, for forage species in the California Current ecosystem.

• To facilitate collaboration and cooperation among stakeholders within the California Current ecoregion to achieve common goals.

Key Concepts

The key concepts that underlie the recommendations in this report are:

• The California Current ecosystem is a highly variable environment.

• Forage species’ reproductive success is closely tied to the physical ocean environment.

• Some forage species populations experience long- term, episodic or cyclical patterns of growth and decline in abundance and distribution.

• Long-term planning horizons are necessary for optimal fishery management.

• Food web integrity significantly influences ecosystem

health and productivity. Foraging California sea lions and Brandt’s cormorants. D. Ticehurst • Global climate change probably will alter forage species abundance and distribution.

• Increased demand for forage species may be economically and ecologically unsustainable.

• Making informed forage species management decisions in an ecosystem context requires ample data, a wide spectrum of information, and reliable modeling tools.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 10 Recommendations

The problem statements and recommendations that follow are not in any specific order. They are numbered only to facilitate discussion – numbers do not indicate priority or importance. The recommendations are divided into categories – Policy and Management; Public Health, Safety, and Involvement; and Scientific Research, Monitoring, and Adaptive Management – for ease of reading. However, recommendations in each category are connected, and there are information needs, policy implications, and outreach suggestions in each category. For example, recommendations on ocean habitat in the policy section include research needs, and recommendations on predator needs and climate change are in the research section but include policy components as well.

Finally, it is easy, when discussing forage species, to focus on those with the highest economic value – sardine and market squid. However, it is important to keep in mind that there are many forage species, and all have important ecosystem roles.

Pigeon guillemot with prey Recommendations for Policy and Management

The Policy and Management recommendations address problems associated with undertaking long-term resource management in a highly variable ecosystem, identifying how ecosystem- based management can be further brought into the existing management framework, enhancing the stability and sustainability of fisheries given the known ecological variability, and better incorporating habitat information into management measures. The recommendations are largely relevant to fisheries management. However, other factors, such as coastal development and pollution, should also be considered in ecosystem-based management. These areas warrant exploration and analysis in the future.

While our influence on the ocean ecosystem is limited to what we take out and put in, our ability to impact biological and chemical processes in the ocean is not insignificant. If we manage human activities so that healthy and productive ocean ecosystems are sustained over the long term, the role of forage species in the food web, ecosystem considerations (such as predation and competition), and individual species population abundance patterns will be important to consider in resource assessment analyses and harvest decisions.

Forage species populations appear to increase in number when oceanic conditions are favorable, with different species having varying optimal reproductive conditions. This diversity and productivity suggests that different forage species will have a high level of abundance when ocean conditions change. Given the cyclical nature of some forage species populations and the challenge of predicting future states, it is important to maintain species diversity and take a long- term approach to resource management planning and decision-making. A long-term approach is also important for supporting a sustainable fishing industry.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 11 Species and biological community habitat needs are always an important factor in natural resource management. Because many forage species tend to be migratory and/or live in the open water, habitat protection is challenging. However, forage species’ habitat needs, and how forage species habitat reflects predator habitat, must be considered when making management decisions.

1. Natural Variability of the Ecosystem

Problem: The California Current ecosystem is a highly variable environment, due to large physical changes in the North Pacific that occur at various time scales (e.g., the Pacific Decadal Oscillation). Reliable long-term forecasting of future trends of forage species in this ecosystem is difficult, and trends may rapidly change without warning, creating unique management challenges.

Recommendations: 1.1 Establish or ensure management policies that result in a sufficient quantity and diversity of forage species available to maintain ecosystem function and productivity in a highly variable ecosystem. These policies should establish: • A process for identifying which forage species will be included in the policies. • An ecosystem-based approach to sustaining healthy populations of forage species while assuring the integrity of the ecosystem and habitat upon which marine resources and fishing economies depend. Fishery management plans should establish ecological reference points that maintain adequate prey availability to meet predator dietary needs. 5 • A risk-averse approach to forage species management if insufficient information exists to determine the likely impact of resource use on the demographics, ecosystem relationships, or the effects of environmental change on the forage species population. Management objectives should give priority to conserving the productive capacity of the resource until sustainable use thresholds can be determined. • A long-term approach to forage species management to address the natural population fluctuations, and the lag time (or delay) between when population declines are occurring and when evidence of the decline is likely to appear. 1.2 Take steps to support species diversity and food web integrity, such as minimizing bycatch and providing protections to forage species that are not targeted for fishing or are economically insignificant. 1.3 Manage forage species population age structure and fishery selectivity (or the pattern of age structure that a fishery takes) to sustain ecosystem function and productivity. In doing so, account for age class and size diversity, both for recruitment of forage populations and for meeting predator needs.

5 For example, see proposed guidelines for the Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions, Annual Catch Limits, National Standard Guidelines. 73 Federal Register 111 (June, 2008).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 12 2. Ecosystem-based Fishery Management Plans

Problem: The fishery management framework in the U.S. includes the use of instruments and concepts, such as a focus on single species management, that do not align well with the nature of forage species populations and ecosystem interactions. This mismatch may result in unintended and undesirable consequences, such as reduced productivity of the ecosystem or the fisheries.

Recommendations: 2.1 Expand appropriate ecosystem information content in fishery management plans and stock assessment reports to inform fishery management decisions. Include ecosystem information such as: • A formal framework for incorporating ecosystem analyses • Ecosystem assessment, including information on key species and physical processes • Food web analyses 6 • Ecosystem status indicators, including: a. Physical environment b. Habitat c. Nutrients, plankton, and productivity d. Major fish, bird, and marine mammal predators e. Biological community and species indicators • Ecosystem-based management indices and information 7 2.2 Develop a demonstration ecosystem-based fishery management plan that recognizes the role of forage species and promotes the long-term health and viability of forage species in order to provide for the viability, resilience, biodiversity, and general health of food webs in the California Current. • Support the National Marine Fisheries Service proposal to lead a deliberative and inclusive (of a broad range of interests and expertise) process to prepare guidelines for an Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management Plan. 8

6 Information generated through Recommendation 9.1 can contribute to food web analyses. 7 See the Ecosystem Considerations Chapter for 2008 in the North Pacific Fishery Management Council’s groundfish stock assessment for an example. http://access.afsc.noaa.gov/reem/ecoweb/index.cfm 8 See the 1998 report to Congress from the Ecosystem Principles Advisory Panel – Ecosystem Based Fishery Management.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 13 3. Fishery Sustainability

Problem: Fishing communities, seafood suppliers, and other related industries rely on a certain volume and steady delivery of products for economic stability. Large, rapid fluctuations in forage species abundance are known to occur. For fishing businesses, responding to species population changes can be time consuming and expensive, especially if new permits and/or gear are required. This may become a problem in the future, even if not a problem presently.

Recommendations: 3.1 Encourage policies that enable forage species fishery participants to withstand the natural fluctuations inherent in the species populations. Expansion of existing fisheries and related infrastructure during years of high abundance must be temporary. 3.2 Explore options under permitting systems for fishery participants to improve harvest flexibility (such as in gear type and species landed) in a manner that protects habitat and ecosystem function, and reduces bycatch, so that fishermen can make changes when populations are abundant. 3.3 Evaluate current and proposed management strategies to extrapolate the economic consequences (intended and unintended) to inform long-term management decisions. 9

4. Ocean Habitat

Problem: Forage species management (with some important exceptions) does not address the habitat needs of forage species or their predators for foraging, spawning, rearing, and other life history requirements.

Recommendations: 4.1 Identify important predator foraging areas and prey congregation areas (at large scales, temporally and spatially), identify threats to the productivity of those areas, and design appropriate management measures, such as seasonal gear/area closures, to remove or mitigate the threats. These analyses should consider: • Defining oceanic habitat needs for forage species, for each life history stage; • Impacts of fixed offshore infrastructure (such as wave and tidal energy, oil and gas extraction, or aquaculture infrastructure) on forage species; • Seasonal, annual, and decadal climate variability, and future climate change; • Land-sea connections and the impacts of land use decisions; • Adaptable spatial and/or temporal ocean habitat protection measures.

9 Management strategy evaluation tools that can aid ecosystem-based management are being developed and used in a number of places. See Appendix D for illustrative references.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 14 Recommendations for Public Health, Safety, and Involvement

The Public Health, Safety, and Involvement recommendations address concerns associated with global market growth in aquaculture, contaminant build-up in oil-rich forage species, and public awareness of the value of forage species. These recommendations, while still relevant to fishery management, have implications for a broader segment of society.

Forage finfish species (such as anchovy and mackerel) presently provide a large, economically accessible protein source for people around the world. Forage finfish species are also processed to make fishmeal and fish oil for use in pet and livestock feeds, aquaculture feeds, and nutritional supplements. Demand for aquaculture products is expected to continue to increase as other sources of fish products decline and human populations continue to rise.

Although the high oil content in some forage species makes contaminant accumulation a concern, forage species are generally a nutritious source of essential fatty acids. Forage species are consumed by people around the world, but much less so in the U.S. than other countries. Matching local consumers to local food sources reduces the overall costs and environmental footprint of food production industries, and helps to keep local dollars in the community. Angler on the beach. NOAA

The ecological importance of forage species is relatively unknown to the public compared to the nutritional benefits. People in Washington, Oregon, California and around the country have demonstrated their interest in protecting ocean health and predator species. However, this support has not translated into the funding needed for the best possible management and study of forage species or food web interactions.

5. Global Market Demand

Problem: Globally, many forage fish fisheries are fully exploited, and fishing pressure is projected to intensify as the aquaculture industry, which relies on forage fish reduction products (fishmeal and fish oil), grows by an average of 9% annually. According to the FAO, demand for fishmeal and oil is projected to surpass global supplies by the years 2020 and 2010, respectively. 10 The limited supply and increasing demand for reduction fish products will result in increased competition with human food needs, which are also on the rise.

Recommendation: 5.1 Fishery managers should consider how and where forage species are consumed by people at the global scale and make reasonable projections of demand over the next 10, 20, and 60 years. They should also consider how this demand and harvest will affect food webs, fisheries, and markets in the California Current ecosystem and the maintenance of long-term ecosystem productivity. 11

10 The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture - 2006. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, 2007. 11 This may also support implementation of recommendation 3.1.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 15 5.2 Support investigations of the potential impacts of reduced forage species availability on human health and nutrition, particularly in developing nations, and recommend options for managing global stocks and/or the aquaculture industry so that future needs for human consumption and reduction products can be met in a sustainable manner. 5.3 Support research and development of alternative, sustainable aquafeeds to limit use of wild-caught fish in aquaculture to exclusively fish trimmings that otherwise would be thrown away.

6. Contaminants

Problem: Many forage species are high in oil content which may increase the likelihood of contaminants being elevated in these species, and passed on up through the food web to other wildlife and people.

Recommendations: 6.1 Support a comprehensive testing program to measure levels of contaminants in the whole body (not just a portion) of forage species. Testing the whole fish is important because forage species are often ground up or eaten whole by humans and wildlife predators, and organ meat tends to have higher levels of contaminants than muscle. 6.2 Reduce the potential for future contaminant problems by investigating and addressing sources of contaminants in marine sediments and waters, and the pathways in which contaminants travel through the food web. 6.3 Support comprehensive testing and processing standards for forage species reduction products such as fish oil health supplements.

7. Public Awareness and Involvement

Problem: There is presently limited public awareness and understanding of the ecological and economic significance and nutritional value of forage species and their fisheries. This results in inadequate public and political support for funding forage species and food web research and management activities.

Recommendation: 7.1 Pursue public education, targeted outreach, and increased marketing on the ecological and nutritional value of forage species. This outreach needs to reach consumers, restaurants, and local governments in communities located in or near ports where forage species are landed.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 16 Recommendations for Scientific Research, Monitoring, and Adaptive Management

The following recommendations address issues associated with generating the information on forage species, predator-prey interactions, and global climate change that supports implementation of ecosystem-based management.

One of the largest challenges to ecosystem-based management is the need to better understand marine ecosystems. Data on a few forage species, particularly sardines, and their habitats and predators are already available, and can be applied to an ecosystem-based management approach while additional research is undertaken. Data collection and analysis is essential to making informed decisions involving complex ecosystems; however, it is recognized that management

resources are limited and decisions must be made with imperfect information.

Understanding predator diet, consumption patterns, and food web interactions is essential for ecosystem-based management. Quantification of predator needs may help identify whether, when, and where competition between fisheries and predators occurs, and what steps can be taken to avoid increasing the recovery time for predators or prey when forage population abundances are low.

Forage species and ecological communities already strained or in crisis may, or may not, experience added stress under Market squid spawning. future global climate change scenarios. By better Roger Hanlon, NOAA understanding how climate change will impact the CCE, we can try to make choices now that will not compound negative impacts of climate change in the future. If there are significant and abrupt impacts of climate change, we will need to have a better understanding of the biological and physical mechanisms at work to make accurate projections.

Ecosystem models are one of many resources available to managers for understanding ecosystem interactions and for evaluating tradeoffs of management choices. Like all models, ecosystem models do not predict the future. When using models, it is important to understand the assumptions that have gone into their creation, what kinds of information they can provide, and what information they cannot provide.

8. Forage Species Ecology and Biology

Problem: There are significant gaps in data and understanding of forage species ecology and biology from larval to adult stage. These gaps hinder informed decision making and evaluation of ecosystem risks.

Recommendations: 8.1 Bring the scientific community together to develop a cost-effective forage species research and monitoring program for the California Current ecosystem. The program should:

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 17 • Be CCE wide; • Be multi-disciplinary and include scientists and stakeholders with diverse expertise; • Evaluate existing data and monitoring programs and identify gaps; • Include opportunities to partner with fishing industries and communities; • Include examination of the larger North Pacific region influences on the CCE; and, • Advance the use of ecosystem-based management practices. 8.2 Conduct consistent, region-wide analyses of multiple forage species to determine abundance, distribution, inter-annual variability, migration patterns, and habitat needs. • Include species from each component of the forage base (nearshore, coastal, pelagic), and prioritize those species with populations large enough to detect change in the ecosystem and food web linkages. • Survey the juvenile stage (after the larval and before recruit stage) of important prey species, including juveniles from species not typically thought of as forage but which are important prey to wildlife (e.g., rockfish and hake). • Diversify survey methods to increase effectiveness and efficiency, including the use of acoustic, aerial, lidar, and on-the-water adult and egg sampling methods, as appropriate. • Identify and map habitat needs of forage species. • Utilize piggy-backing and cooperative arrangements to optimize cost effectiveness. 8.3 Increase research collaborations between physical oceanographers and fisheries scientists within resource agencies; and better utilize the opportunity to do so through the west coast Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) programs. 8.4 Invest in advanced technology to improve remote sensing data; and increase scientific capacity to interpret that data. Improve the use of satellite technology, and ensure access to key data, such as ocean color, is maintained. 12

9. Predator Requirements

Problem: Predator requirements for forage species, such as diversity, density, and spatial- temporal availability, are not well quantified or understood across the region.

Recommendations: 9.1 Form a west coast food habits working group to project regional predator dietary needs, and effects of predation on forage species populations. Identify priority

12 Ocean color satellite data shows the presence of chlorophyll and is used as a proxy for primary production. For more information, see: http://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 18 predator-prey linkages for monitoring. Data needs on a temporal and geographic basis include: • Stomach or scat contents; • Spatial and temporal distribution of predator foraging ranges; • Predator and prey breeding ranges; • Seasonal, annual, and decadal spatial aspects (patchiness) of prey abundance and distribution; • Effects of prey switching on reproduction and survival; and, • Predator-prey-fisheries interactions. 9.2 Evaluate existing data sets on forage species populations and predator consumption to identify and prioritize data gaps, and utilize these data in models and fishery management plans and other decision making tools. • Recognize the historical range of ecosystem states; patterns in the existing data may not be consistent across decades. 9.3 Conduct outreach to resource managers and the public on the value of maintaining high quality, diverse prey sources for predators, particularly those predators at risk and for which recovery plans exist. • Utilize web-based programs to increase accessibility of data to members of the scientific community, fishery managers and the general public.

10. Global Climate Change

Problem: Forage species have demonstrated high sensitivity to changes in their environment. However, while they may be adapted to historical variability, global climate change and ocean acidification from anthropogenic activities may increase the variability of ocean conditions, positively and negatively impacting future productivity, distribution, and abundance patterns of forage species.

Recommendations: 10.1 Expand research that helps us understand, anticipate, and respond to the effects of global climate change, with a focus on: • Understanding the underlying ecological mechanisms or causal relationships that shape forage species population demographics (rather than statistical correlations); and, • Anticipating how extreme and abrupt changes in forage species availability will impact marine ecosystems, especially food web interactions. 10.2 Improve the accuracy and confidence level of future forage species population abundance estimates, including identification of indicators and thresholds of significant changes in trends of population abundance. 10.3 Conduct research on how water quality concerns, such as pollution, water diversions, and ocean acidification, will affect forage species and their habitat.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 19 11. Ecosystem Models

Problem: Ecosystem models are useful tools for enhancing our understanding of ecosystem characteristics and properties, and how they change over time; and for making better management choices. Future ecosystem models of the California Current can be used to evaluate trade-offs of management decisions. Existing models need further development to maximize their effectiveness.

Recommendations: 11.1 Integrate ecosystem models into the scientific research and review process to inform policies for management of forage species, and to identify ecological indicators that point to significant changes in the present and likely future status (e.g., abundance, distribution and demographics) of forage species or dependent predator populations. 11.2 Use single species, multiple-species, and ecosystem models to estimate population size, influence of physical environmental parameters on reproduction and survival, and energy and nutrient flow within the food web. 11.3 While recognizing their limitations, utilize existing ecosystem models now, even as new and improved models are under development. For example, make ecosystem model information more available to stock assessment teams, planning teams, and advisory panels. 11.4 Conduct outreach to resource managers, other decision-makers, and the public on the nature, best use, and challenges of natural resource models (both single species and ecosystem). Test and publish (with peer review) the predictive capabilities of ecosystem models in order to increase the understanding of, and build confidence in, model outputs. 11.5 Invest in data collection to better estimate natural mortality and recruitment in order to improve both ecosystem and single species models.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 20 Conclusion

Ecosystem-based management of marine resources is particularly important for forage species in the highly variable California Current ecosystem. While this approach is challenging, there are many actions that can and should be taken, including regulatory, voluntary and market-based measures, as well as research, data collection and outreach. Long-term, sustainable management of forage species is essential to the ecological health of the California Current food web, and to the wildlife and human communities that depend upon its productivity.

Global demand for forage species may already be surpassing available supplies. In the California Current ecosystem, there is not currently an obvious crisis for forage species, although there is much debate over the status of a few key species. Continued growth in the aquaculture industry, demand for other forage species products, and an apparent depletion of forage species in other parts of the world are likely to put pressure on local fishery resources. We can increase the odds of avoiding a crisis for forage species in the California Current ecosystem by applying an ecosystem-based approach to help ensure these species are managed sustainably.

Federal and state ocean resource managers have begun to adopt plans to implement ecosystem- based management; and have taken steps to protect forage species’ habitats and limit harvest pressure. More can be done to incorporate ecosystem considerations into the existing management framework while efforts to create any necessary new policies are undertaken. Management measures aimed at protecting ocean habitat, species diversity and abundance, and food web integrity in order to achieve long-term ecological sustainability will promote the long- term stability and sustainability of fishery yields as well.

An ecosystem-based approach to forage species management should utilize information about forage species and their communities, predator-prey interactions, and the potential effects of global climate change. The research needs described in this report are ambitious, but not unattainable. Much information is already available for some forage species, and opportunities to partner with academic and stakeholder groups are available. Informed decision-making is critical, however it is important to recognize that perfect knowledge of marine ecosystems is not achievable. When incomplete information prohibits our ability to recognize and avoid serious long-term damage to forage species’ populations from our activities, management choices should err on the conservative side of protection and stewardship.

A key element of successful implementation of ecosystem-based management is collaboration among stakeholders. Collaboration among scientists, managers, and fishery and environmental community members from across the region will increase the effectiveness and efficiency of ecosystem-based management. Stakeholders with diverse interests and backgrounds need to take part in developing information so that they understand and support the conclusions and decisions that are based upon it. There are a number of forums where people are collaborating that may provide useful opportunities (see Appendix D).

Forage species are a critical part of the marine food web, and bring tremendous value to our economy and society. We hope that this report will bring greater attention and investment to advancing ecosystem-based management of forage species to improve the health and productivity of all marine life in the California Current ecosystem in the future.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 21 Appendix A: Glossary

California Current Ecosystem – The California Current Large Marine Ecosystem is a region that runs from southern British Columbia to southern Baja California. The predominant physical feature is the California Current, a large Eastern boundary current that moves south along the eastern side of the Pacific Ocean, and is part of the North Pacific Gyre. The ecosystem is characterized by its temperate climate and strong coastal upwelling. Natural environmental change is the primary force driving the ecosystem. For more information, see: http://www.lme.noaa.gov/Portal/.

Ecosystem-based management – The use of a strategy or plan to manage ecosystems to provide for all associated organisms – as opposed to a strategy or plan for managing individual species – to sustain diverse, healthy, and productive ecosystems. Ecosystem management is applied at various scales to blend long-term societal and environmental values in a dynamic manner that may be adapted as more knowledge is gained through research and experience. See: http://www.reo.gov/general/definitions_a-m.htm#E.

Forage species – A suite of species that provide a critical link between lower and upper trophic levels. These species generally exhibit one or more of the following characteristics: • Fish and invertebrates that are important prey for upper trophic levels (e.g., small schooling pelagic fish); • Prey throughout much of their life-cycle; • Their abundance highly influences productivity of predators; • Are key forage species at the juvenile stage (small size, location nearshore).

For example, forage species include anchovy, sardine, euphausiids, and mackerel (managed under the federal Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan), market squid (managed under the California Market Squid Fishery Management Plan and the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan), shortbelly rockfish and Pacific whiting (managed under the federal West Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan), and species such as sandlance, eulachon, and Pacific herring that are under state management.

Predator – Upper trophic level species, such as marine mammals (for example: blue whale, California grey whale, common dolphin, Guadalupe fur seal, harbor seal, northern elephant seal, Pacific white-sided dolphin, Steller sea lion), marine birds (for example: ashy storm-petrel, bald eagle, Brandt’s cormorant, brown pelican, California gull, elegant tern, least tern, marbled murrelet, pelagic cormorant, pigeon guillemot, tufted puffin), and fishes (for example: albacore, bluefin tuna, bonito shark, giant seabass, Chinook salmon, coho salmon, lingcod, Pacific whiting, rockfish (many species), steelhead, striped bass, swordfish, white seabass).

Stakeholder – Anyone who may be affected by a decision. Someone who has a stake in the outcome of a decision.

Sustainable – In the context of the California Current ecosystem, a process or state capable of being continued at a certain level for an indefinite amount of time in a highly variable environment. Sustainable management practices will:

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 22 • Recognize the ecosystem is not constant (constancy of value and statistical properties), and anticipate and prepare for its variability and associated shifts in productivity; • Provide for resiliency and maintenance of ecosystem structure and function; • Manage the risk of long-term loss of productivity through use of a stabilizing action to maintain ecosystem function and economic yield before adverse ecosystem changes become irreversible; and • Minimize the length of adverse ecological periods (forage droughts) and economic periods (no fishing).

Trophic level – A group of organisms that occupy the same position in a food chain (or food web). Primary producers harvest an energy source such as sunlight and turn it into biomass. This biomass is consumed by other organisms (primary consumers), which are in turn consumed by others. Each link in this chain of consumption is termed a trophic level. See Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophic_level.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 23 Appendix B: Additional Problem Statements

The following issues were also identified through this process, but recommendations to address them specifically were not discussed, due to time and resource limitations.

• More work is needed to ensure that reliable ecosystem indicators that show when forage species are declining, along with thresholds for those indicators that identify when points of concern are being approached, are available and trusted by stakeholders.

• Impacts to forage species and their habitat from non-fishery human-caused threats, such as pollution and coastal development, are not well understood or quantified.

• The inter-relationship between fishery stocks being actively rebuilt and forage species that are being actively harvested is not fully understood; and the forage needs of those recovering populations should be better quantified for optimal management.

• Decision-making tools that can identify and weigh trade-offs in ecosystem and economic benefits (and risks) of specific management choices are inadequate or unavailable.

• Fishing gear has evolved to be highly effective, raising concerns among stakeholders about the potential for problems associated with localized depletion and bycatch; more information is needed.

• To stakeholders and the public, natural resource management tools and scientific review processes can seem inflexible, complicated, and difficult to understand or change.

• Forage species populations in some parts of the world are highly contaminated, and may be creating international economic pressure for new fisheries to develop in less polluted areas.

• There is uncertainty as to whether the criteria used by companies that provide sustainable fisheries certification will ensure a forage species fishery is operating in a manner that does not impact the critical ecological role that these species play in the ecosystem.

• Scientific precision is difficult to achieve in complex biological systems and requires significant amounts of data. Stakeholders seeking information can be frustrated by perceptions of both continual change and not enough change in scientific information used in management decisions, however justified the changes (or lack thereof) may be.

• Public involvement in fishery management is limited by the complexity of some management systems, and information is not always readily available to or understood by the public.

• Forage species are sold on an international market and in some parts of the world a direct connection between where these species are caught and where they are consumed may be lacking, reducing potential health and environmental benefits of consumption of fresh, local products.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 24 Appendix C: Forage Fish Steering Committee Charter

This Charter describes the work of the Forage Fish Steering Committee and the preparation of Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species: Recommendations on how to improve the management and conservation of forage species in the California Current ecosystem ; including the roles and responsibilities of the Steering Committee, and important processes and outcomes. 13

Background

PRBO Conservation Science (PRBO) initiated the California Current Joint Venture (CCJV) program to form a voluntary stakeholder coalition that will bridge cultural and cross- jurisdictional barriers and provide a critical link between scientific research and resource management to achieve common conservation goals in the California Current Large Marine Ecosystem.

The CCJV long-term vision is to protect marine wildlife, promote biodiversity conservation, sustain healthy fisheries and human health, support the marine economy, and foster public stewardship of the rich marine environments of the California Current. To achieve our vision, we seek to advance the development and utilization of ecosystem- based management tools, practices, and policies – including the understanding and use of information about food web

interactions. Steering Committee Members and Observers

Our pilot project for the CCJV, the West Coast Forage Fish Project, focuses on advancing ecosystem-based management of forage species in the California Current. In the California Current ecosystem, forage species – or mid-trophic level prey species – occupy a critical role in the food web, providing essential resources to populations of top predators (marine birds, mammals, and other fish such as salmon and tuna), including endangered and commercially valuable species.

To better protect the integrity of marine ecosystems, ensure adequate availability of food resources for top predators, and appropriately respond to rising demand for forage species products, federal and state management policies and practices need to incorporate innovative scientific methods and an ecosystem-based approach. However, the scientific and management issues surrounding ecosystem-based forage species management are complex. Successful improvements will require active collaboration among scientists and community leaders with forage species and ecosystem expertise, knowledge of state and federal management policies, and an understanding of harvest practices and fishery economics.

13 Adapted from charters developed for the state of California. See: http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/. PRBO gratefully acknowledges the examples and inspiration found at the web site for the Center for Collaborative Policy at California State University, Sacramento. See: http://www.csus.edu/ccp/.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 25 Mission

The mission of the West Coast Forage Fish Project is to advance ecosystem-based management research, policies, and practices for forage species along the Pacific coast of the continental United States; and to better incorporate the consideration of food web interactions into management and conservation activities in order to ensure adequate availability of food resources for wildlife.

Geographic Scope

The Geographic scope for the California Current Joint Venture is the California Current Large Marine Ecosystem. For the purposes of the Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species report (Report), policy recommendations are geared towards the United States; however, other recommendations may encompass the entire ecoregion.

Methodology

Implementation of the West Coast Forage Fish Project will be accomplished through collaborations with stakeholders and partners throughout the region. PRBO will lead the effort to assemble stakeholders and prepare a plan for action. PRBO and partners will coordinate implementation of the Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species report.

The Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species report will identify issue areas and make recommendations to advance ecosystem-based management of forage species. PRBO will make the Report available to all interested parties, including federal and state resource managers, marine scientists, philanthropic organizations, non-governmental organizations, commercial forage species fishery participants, and others. The Report is being prepared with advice and guidance from stakeholders interested in the study, management, harvest, and conservation of forage species and marine ecosystems. Stakeholders can participate in the development of the Report as (1) a member of the Steering Committee, or (2) an Observer.

The Forage Fish Steering Committee is composed of a diverse group of scientists, resource managers, and fishery and environmental community leaders with relevant expertise and who are committed to actively participate in the development of the Report. Through a series of workshops to be held between July and December, 2008, the Steering Committee will provide advice to PRBO regarding important goals for forage species management and conservation, specific issues or problem areas where improvements can be made, recommendations for research needs, policy changes, commercial activities, voluntary measures, and/or outreach necessary to achieve the goals and address the issues.

In addition to the Steering Committee, PRBO will seek the advice and expertise of a larger group of stakeholders, termed Observers, through periodic conference calls, one-on-one conversations, and electronic mail. All of these discussions will assist PRBO in preparing the Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species report. The Report will be completed by the end of December, 2008, and the implementation phase will begin.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 26 Membership

Membership on the Steering Committee is limited to a maximum of 13 people. Representation on the Steering Committee is balanced in terms of interests and geography. Representatives are selected based on their expertise and ability to represent their community or agency. Composition of the Steering Committee may change for the implementation phase. Allocation for seats is as follows:

Interest/Expertise Total Number State resource managers 3 Commercial and recreational fishing organizations 3 Environmental conservation organizations 3 Agency scientists 2 Academic scientist 1 Federal resource manager 1

Anyone may participate in the project as an Observer. Observers will be kept appraised of significant progress in the project, and have opportunities to review and comment on drafts of the Report. Everyone’s comments and concerns will be heard and considered for inclusion in the Report. When space allows, Observers may attend Steering Committee workshops at their own expense.

Roles and Responsibilities

PRBO Conservation Science – PRBO is the project manager and host of the meetings and workshops organized to develop and implement the Report. PRBO’s role is to: foster participation, facilitate meetings, arrange meeting logistics and agenda and educational presentations, ensure all points of view are heard, and prepare and release written documents and the final report.

Marine Fish Conservation Network (MFCN) – MFCN is a partner organization working with PRBO on the pilot project for the CCJV. MFCN brings expertise and financial resources, including in-kind support, to the project. MFCN assists with meeting logistics and educational presentations. MFCN is also a member of the Steering Committee, and therefore is not preparing written documents or the final report outside of their role on the Steering Committee.

Steering Committee Members – Members are advisors to PRBO and are asked to: provide their unique perspective, review documents and provide recommendations, fully participate in workshops, review and critique assumptions and analyses, communicate to public and individual constituencies and communities they represent, negotiate in good faith, seek consensus, and serve as experts.

Steering Committee Members are asked to consult with, and keep advised, other people in the community they represent, so that they can effectively bring concerns of the community into workshop discussions and share information about the project with others whom may be interested.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 27 Steering Committee Members are not asked to seek approval or agreement of the Report by the agencies or organizations they work for, and information contained in the Report should not be perceived to be the policies, recommendations, or opinions of the individual Steering Committee Members or their respective agencies or organizations.

It is understood that all parties must continue to operate under their own guidelines and timetables. As such, some Steering Committee Members may need to take action related to those requirements that could have a negative impact on the discussions taking place. Even so, Members agree to work in good faith within the process, and to negotiate satisfactory and realistic recommendations.

Given the volume of information and the short time frame, regular attendance at workshops by the Member is essential. If the Member is unable to attend, an alternate may attend who is fully briefed and able to represent the Member during the meeting, including in any negotiations.

Observers – Observers are all other participants, whether they are participating by e-mail, phone, web, or in person, and are asked to: provide their unique perspective, review documents and provide recommendations, review and critique assumptions and analyses, and communicate ideas and/or concerns to PRBO or the Steering Committee Members in a timely manner.

Decision Making

PRBO will strive to reach consensus amongst the Steering Committee Members on all recommendations in the Report; however, ultimate decision-making authority resides with PRBO, and PRBO is responsible for the content of the Report. PRBO will attempt to capture and convey significant non-consensus opinions in the Report and other documents prepared for the pilot project.

Communications

When discussing the recommendations or negotiations with anyone outside of the Steering Committee, including the media, Members may discuss specific aspects of the recommendations or negotiations, but shall be careful to present only their own views and not characterize the views, motivations or values of any other Member or group. Members shall avoid quoting other Members, attributing comments to other Members, or discussing other Members statements or positions. Members and Member organizations shall not imply other Members’ or their organizations’ endorsement of the Report to the media or others without that organization’s express consent. This policy is valid both during and after negotiation concludes on the Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species report, and throughout implementation of the project.

Outcomes

The product of the workshops, meetings, and discussions will be the Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species report. Through the development and implementation of the Report, the project will bring much needed attention and financial resources to the study of these species and food web interactions, and to advancing ecosystem-

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 28 based management in the marine environment. Additionally, the project will result in a better informed constituency, expanded relationships among stakeholders, and a platform upon which a lasting coalition can be built.

Implementation of the Report will help protect and improve the long-term health and productivity of the California Current ecosystem. The Report will serve as a resource for anyone wishing to pursue the project mission. PRBO, project partners, the Steering Committee, and Observers may continue to collaborate to keep the Report fresh and up-to-date, in addition to voluntary collaborations on implementation activities. These activities may include outreach and education, fundraising, and research.

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 29 Appendix D: Resources for More Information

Web Links

California Current Joint Venture http://www.prbo.org/ccjv West Coast Forage Fish Project http://www.prbo.org/forage

Government Agencies California Coastal Conservancy http://www.scc.ca.gov/ California Department of Fish and Game http://www.dfg.ca.gov/ California Ocean Protection Council http://resources.ca.gov/copc/ Fisheries and Oceans Canada http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/index-eng.htm Instituto Nacional de la Pesca http://www.inp.sagarpa.gob.mx/ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) http://www.noaa.gov/index.html NOAA Fisheries Service Alaska Fisheries Science Center http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/ NOAA Fisheries Service Northwest Fisheries Science Center http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/ NOAA Fisheries Service Southwest Fisheries Science Center http://swfsc.noaa.gov/ NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ NOAA National Marine Sanctuaries http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/ Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ Pacific Fisheries Management Council http://www.pcouncil.org/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service http://www.fws.gov/ Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife http://wdfw.wa.gov/home.htm West Coast Governors’ Agreement on Ocean Health http://westcoastoceans.gov/

Non-governmental Organizations California Wetfish Producers Association http://californiawetfish.org/ Coastside Fishing Club http://www.coastsidefishingclub.com/index.php Greenpeace http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/ Marine Fish Conservation Network http://www.conservefish.org/site/ National Coalition for Marine Conservation http://www.savethefish.org/ Ocean Conservancy http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/PageServer?pagename=home Oceana http://www.oceana.org/north-america/home/ Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations http://pcffa.org/ The Institute for Fisheries Resources http://www.ifrfish.org/ United Anglers of Southern California http://www.unitedanglers.com/news.php

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 30 Science and Research Entities California Current Ecosystem LTER http://cce.lternet.edu/ Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada, BC http://www.cicese.edu.mx/ Communication Partnership for Science and the Sea http://compassonline.org/ Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute http://www.mbari.org/ Moss Landing Marine Laboratories http://www.mlml.calstate.edu/ National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/ Pacific Coast Ocean Observing System http://www.pacoos.org/ Pacific Seabird Group http://www.pacificseabirdgroup.org/index.php?f=index&t=Home&s=1 Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans http://www.piscoweb.org/ Pew Institute for Ocean Science http://www.pewoceanscience.org/ PRBO Conservation Science http://www.prbo.org/cms/index.php Scripps Institution of Oceanography http://sio.ucsd.edu/ University of British Columbia Fisheries Centre http://www.fisheries.ubc.ca/

Literature

Agostini, V.N., Bakun, A. & Francis, R.C. Larval stage controls on Pacific sardine recruitment variability: high zooplankton abundance linked to poor reproductive success. Marine Ecology Progress Series 345, 237-244(2007). Aguero, J. & Rodriguez, F.J.G. Morphometric stock structure of the Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax ) off Baja California, Mexico. Morphometrics: Applications In Biology And Paleontology (2004). Alexander, M. et al. Decadal variability in the northeast Pacific in a physical-ecosystem model: Role of mixed layer depth and trophic interactions. J. Geophys. Res 113 (2008). Anderson, C.N.K. et al. Why fishing magnifies fluctuations in fish abundance. Nature 452, 835- 839 (2008). Anderson, D.W.; Gress, F.; Mais, K.F.; Kelly, P.R. Brown pelicans as anchovy stock indicators and their relationships to commercial fishing. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 21 : 54-61 (1980). Auster, P.J., Watling, L., & Rieser, A. Comment: The Interface Between Fisheries Research and Habitat Management. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17: 591-595 (1997). Aydin, K.Y. et al. Linking oceanic food webs to coastal production and growth rates of Pacific salmon ( Oncorhynchus spp .), using models on three scales. Deep-Sea Research Part II 52, 757- 780 (2005). Bailey, K.M., Hollowed, A.B. & Wooster, W.S. Complexity of marine fisheries dynamics and climate interactions in the northeast Pacific Ocean. Marine Ecosystems and Climate Variation: The North Atlantic: a Comparative Perspective (2004).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 31 Bakun, A. & Parrish, R. Turbulence, transport, and pelagic fish in the California and Peru Current systems. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 23 (1982) Bakun, A. & Parrish, R.H. Comparative studies of coastal pelagic fish reproductive habitats: the anchovy ( Engraulis anchoita ) of the southwestern Atlantic. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 48, 343-361 (1991). Bakun, A. School-mix feedback: a different way to think about low frequency variability in large mobile fish populations. Progress in Oceanography 49, 485-511 (2001). Bakun, A. The California Current, Benguela Current, and Southwestern Atlantic Shelf Ecosystems: a comparative approach to identifying factors regulating biomass yields. Large Marine Ecosystems: Patterns, Processes, and Yields (1992). Bakun, A. Wasp-waist populations and marine ecosystem dynamics: Navigating the “predator pit” topographies. Progress in Oceanography 68, 271-288 (2006). Barnes, J.T. et al. Recent population trends and abundance estimates for the Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax ). Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 33, 60-75 (1992). Barth, J.A. et al. Delayed upwelling alters nearshore coastal ocean ecosystems in the northern California current. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 104, 3719–3724 (2007). Baumgartner, T.R. et al. Effects of Ocean Climate on Transboundary Movement of Coastal Pelagic Resources Between the EEZs of Mexico and the United States. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union 88 (2007). Baumgartner, T.R., Auad, G. & Miller, A.J. Effects of Climate Change on Sardine Productivity in the California Current System. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union 88 (2007). Beamish, R.J., McFarlane, G.A. & King, J.R. Migratory patterns of pelagic fishes and possible linkages between open ocean and coastal ecosystems off the Pacific coast of North America. Deep-Sea Research Part II 52, 739-755 (2005). Bentley, P.J. et al. Egg production of Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax ) off Oregon in 1994. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 37, 193-200 (1994). Botsford, L.W., Castilla, J.C. & Peterson, C.H. The management of fisheries and marine ecosystems. Science 277, 509 (1997). Brodeur, R.D. et al. Sardines in the ecosystem of the Pacific Northwest. Proc. Sardine 2000 Symposium 90–102 (2000). Brodeur, R.D. et al. Spatial overlap and trophic interactions between pelagic fish and large jellyfish in the northern California Current. Marine Biology 154, 649-659 (2008). Brodeur, R.D. et al. Species composition and community structure of pelagic nekton off Oregon and Washington under variable oceanographic conditions. Marine Ecology Progress Series 298, 41-57 (2005). Cury, P. et al. Moderate is better: exploring nonlinear climatic effects on the Californian northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax). Climate Change and Northern Fish Populations (1995). Cury, P. et al. Small pelagics in upwelling systems: patterns of interaction and structural changes in" wasp-waist" ecosystems. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57, 603 (2000).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 32 Dalton, M.G. El Nino, expectations, and fishing effort in Monterey Bay, California. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 42, 336-359 (2001). Dayton, P.K. Reversal of the Burden of Proof in Fisheries Management. Science 6 Vol. 279. no. 5352, pp. 821 – 822 (1998). de Mutsert, K., Cowan Jr., J.H., Essington, T.E., Hilborn, R. Reanalyses of Gulf of Mexico fisheries data: Landings can be misleading in assessments of fisheries and fisheries ecosystems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences . 105, 7 2740-2744 (2008). deYoung, B. et al. Regime shifts in marine ecosystems: detection, prediction and management. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23, 402-409 (2008). Dower, J.F. & Brodeur, R.D. The role of biophysical coupling in concentrating marine organisms around shallow topographies. Journal of Marine Systems 50, 1-2 (2004). Emmett, R., Bentley, P. & Krutzikowsky, G. The Recent Northwest Baitfish Boom and Increased Salmon Ocean Survival. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union, Ocean Sciences Meeting Supplemental Abstract 83 (2002). Emmett, R.L. & Krutzikowsky, G.K. Nocturnal Feeding of Pacific Hake and Jack Mackerel off the Mouth of the Columbia River, 1998–2004: Implications for Juvenile Salmon Predation. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 137, 657-676 (2008). Emmett, R.L. & Sampson, D.B. The Relationships Between Predatory Fish, Forage Fishes, and Juvenile Salmonid Marine Survival off the Columbia River: A Simple Trophic Model Analysis. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 48, 92-105 (2007). Emmett, R.L. et al. Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax ) abundance, distribution, and ecological relationships in the Pacific Northwest. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 46, 122-143 (2005). Emmett, R.L. Recent changes in the abundance of northern anchovy ( Engraulis mordax ) off the Pacific Northwest, tracking a regime shift. PICES Press 11, 20-21 (2003). Emmett, R.L. The relationships between fluctuations in oceanographic conditions, forage fishes, predatory fishes, predator food habits, and juvenile salmonid marine survival off the Columbia River (2006). Emmett, R.L., Brodeur, R.D. & Orton, P.M. The vertical distribution of juvenile salmon (Oncorhynchus spp. ) and associated fishes in the Columbia River plume. Fisheries Oceanography 13, 392-402 (2004). Emmett, R.L., Krutzikowsky, G.K. & Bentley, P. Abundance and distribution of pelagic piscivorous fishes in the Columbia River plume during spring/early summer 1998–2003: Relationship to oceanographic conditions, forage fishes, and juvenile salmonids. Progress in Oceanography 68, 1-26 (2006). Essington, T.E., Beaudreau, A.H. & Wiedenmann, J. Fishing through marine food webs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103, (2006). Félix-Uraga, R. et al. On the existence of Pacific sardine groups off the west coast of Baja California and Southern California. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 45, 146-151 (2004). Ferrero, R.C. & Fritz, L.W.. Steller Sea Lion Research and Coordination: A Brief History and Summary of Recent Progress. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-AFSC-129 . (2002).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 33 Fiedler, P.C. Some effects of El Niño 1983 on the northern anchovy. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 25, 53-58 (1984). Field, J.C. & Francis, R.C. Considering ecosystem-based fisheries management in the California Current. Marine Policy 30, 552-569 (2006). Field, J.C., Francis, R.C. & Aydin, K. Top-down modeling and bottom-up dynamics: Linking a fisheries-based ecosystem model with climate hypotheses in the Northern California Current. Progress in Oceanography 68, 238-270 (2006). Francis, R. C. et al. Ten commandments for ecosystem-based fisheries scientists. Fisheries 32:217-233 (2007). Freon, P. et al. Sustainable Exploitation of Small Pelagic Fish Stocks Challenged by Environmental and Ecosystem Changes: A Review. Bulletin of Marine Science 76, 385-462 (2005). Garcia, S.M. The precautionary principle: its implications in capture fisheries management. Ocean and Coastal Management 22, 99-125 (1994). Gaughan, D.J. et al. A sudden collapse in distribution of Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax ) off southwestern Australia enables an objective re-assessment of biomass estimates. Fishery Bulletin 102, 617-633 (2004). Hannesson, R., Herrick Jr, S.F. & Barange, M. On the consequences of climate change in pelagic fish populations: aconclusion. Climate Change And the Economics of the World's Fisheries: Examples Of Small Pelagic Stocks (2006). Hauser, L. & Ward, R.D. Population identification in pelagic fish: the limits of molecular markers. Advances in Molecular Ecology 306, 191-224 (1998). Herrick Jr, S.F., Hill, K. & Reiss. An optimal harvest policy for the recently renewed United States Pacific sardine fishery. Climate Change And the Economics of the World's Fisheries: Examples Of Small Pelagic Stocks (2006). Herrick, S.F. et al. Management application of an empirical model of sardine–climate regime shifts. Marine Policy 31, 71-80 (2007). Hilborn, R. et al. The precautionary approach and risk management: can they increase the probability of successes in fishery management? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58, 99-107 (2001). Hill, K.T. et al. Assessment of the Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax caerulea ) population for US management in 2006. Pacific Fishery Management Council, Agenda Item D 1. (2005). Hinke, J.T. et al. Visualizing the food-web effects of fishing for tunas in the Pacific Ocean. Ecology and Society 9, 10 (2004). Hites, R.A. et al. Global assessment of organic contaminants in farmed salmon. Science 303, 226-229 (2004). Hollowed, A.B., Hare, S.R. & Wooster, W.S. Pacific Basin climate variability and patterns of Northeast Pacific marine fish production. Progress in Oceanography 49, 257-282 (2001).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 34 Hsieh, C. et al. A comparison of long-term trends and variability in populations of larvae of exploited and unexploited fishes in the Southern California region: A community approach. Progress in Oceanography 67, 160-185 (2005). Hunt, G.L., & Butler, J.L. Reproductive ecology of western gulls and Xantus’ murrelets with respect to food resources in the Southern California Bight. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 21 (1980). Huppert, D.D. et al. California's northern anchovy fishery: biological and economic basis for fishery management. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Center (1980). Jacobson, L.D., and A.D. MacCall. Stock-recruitment models for Pacific sardine. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 52:566-577 (1995). Jacobson, L.D. et al. An ecosystem-based hypothesis for climatic effects on surplus production in California sardine( Sardinops sagax ) and environmentally dependent surplus production models. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 62, 1782-1796 (2005). Jarvis, E. et al. Chlorinated hydrocarbons in pelagic forage fishes and squid of the Southern California Bight. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 26, 2290-2298 (2007). King, J.R. Report of the study group on fisheries and ecosystem responses to recent regime shifts. PICES Scientific Report 28, 168 (2005). Krutzikowsky, G.K. & Emmett, R.L. Diel differences in surface trawl fish catches off Oregon and Washington. Fisheries Research 71, 365-371 (2005). Kuhnert, P.M. et al. Estimating abundance of pelagic fishes using gillnet catch data in data- limited fisheries: a Bayesian approach. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 64, 1019-1033 (2007). Lessard, R.B. et al. Should ecosystem management involve active control of species abundances? Ecology and Society 10 (2005). Lluch-Belda, D. et al. Long-term trends of interannual variability in the California Current system. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 42, 129-144 (2001). Lo, N.C.H., Macewicz, B.J. & Griffith, D.A. Spawning biomass of Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax ) from 1994-2004 off California. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 46, 93-112 (2005). MacCall, A.D. Fishery-management and stock-rebuilding prospects under conditions of low- frequency environmental variability and species interactions. Bulletin of Marine Science 70, 613- 628 (2002). MacCall, A.D. Patterns of low-frequency variability in fish populations of the California Current. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 37:100-110 (1996). MacCall, A.D. Population estimates for the waning years of the Pacific sardine fishery. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 20, 72-82 (1979). MacCall, A.D. Population models of habitat selection, with application to the Northern anchovy. (1983).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 35 MacCall, A.D. The mortality rate of Engraulis mordax in southern California. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 17, 131-135 (1974). MacCall, A.D. Use of decision tables to develop a precautionary approach to problems in behavior, life history and recruitment variability. Proceedings of the 5th NMFS national stock assessment workshop: providing scientific advice to implement the precautionary approach under the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Edited by V. Restrepo. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFS-F/SPO-40 53–64 (1999). MacCall, A.D., & Prager, M. Historical changes in abundance of six fish species off Southern California, based on CalCOFI egg and larva samples. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 24 (1988). MacCall, A.D. & Ralston, S. Is logarithmic transformation really the best procedure for estimating stock-recruitment relationships? North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22, 339-350 (2002). MacCall, A.D., Klingbeil, R.A. & Methot, R.D. Recent increased abundance and potential productivity of Pacific mackerel ( Scomber japonicus ). Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 26, 119-129 (1985). Mace, P.M., Bartoo, N.W., Hollowed, A.B., Kleiber, P., et al. Marine Fisheries Stock Assessment Improvement Plan. Report of the National Marine Fisheries Service National Task Force for Improving Fish Stock Assessments, U.S. DOC/NOAA/NMFS (2001). McFarlane, G.A. et al. Distribution and biology of Pacific sardines ( Sardinops sagax ) off British Columbia, Canada. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 46, 144 (2005). Mendelssohn, R. & Cury, P. Fluctuations of a fortnightly abundance index of the lvoirian coastal pelagic species and associated environmental conditions. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci 44, 408-421 (1987). Million, C. & Freon, P. 10. Prototype of an integrated model of the worldwide system of small pelagic fisheries. Climate Change And the Economics of the World's Fisheries: Examples Of Small Pelagic Stocks (2006). Morales-Bojórquez, E. et al. Relation between recruitment, sea surface temperature, and the density-independent mortality of the Pacific sardine ( Sardinops caeruleus ) off the southwest coast of the Baja California Peninsula, Mexico. Scientia Marina 67 (2003). Morgan, C.A., Peterson, W.T. & Emmett, R.L. Onshore offshore variations in copepod community structure off the Oregon coast during the summer upwelling season. Marine Ecology Progress Series 249, 223-236 (2003). Okada, T. & Morrissey, M.T. Seasonal changes in intrinsic characteristics of Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax ). Journal of Aquatic Food Product Technology 16, 51-71 (2007). Parrish, R.H. & Mallicoate, D.L. Variation in the condition factors of California pelagic fishes and associated environmental factors. Fisheries Oceanography 4, 171-190 (1995). Phillips, A.J. et al. Recent pre-recruit Pacific hake ( Merluccius productus ) occurrences in the Northern California Current suggest a northward expansion of their spawning area. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 48, 215-229 (2007). Picquelle, S.J. & Hewitt, R.P. The northern anchovy spawning biomass for the 1982-83 California fishing season. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 24, 16-28 (1983).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 36 Polovina, J.J. Climate variation, regime shifts, and implications for sustainable fisheries. Bulletin of Marine Science 76, 233-244 (2005). Pomeroy, C. & Fitzsimmons, M. information needs for effective management of the California market squid Fishery: The role of social science research. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 108-116 (1998). Pomeroy, C. & FitzSimmons, M. Socio-economic organization of the California market squid fishery: Assessment for optimal resource management. California Sea Grant Project Report (2001). Postal, A.C.A. The recovery of the California sardine as related to global change. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. (1992). Prager, M.H. & MacCall, A.D. Revised estimates of historical spawning biomass of the Pacific mackerel (Scomber japonicus ). Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 29, 81-90 (1988). Punt, A. E., F. Pribac, B. L. Taylor, and T. I. Walker. Harvest Strategy Evaluation for School and Gummy Shark . J. Northw. Atl. Fish. Sci. , 35 : 387-406 (2005). Radovich, J. & MacCall, A.D. A management model for the central stock of the northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax ). Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 20, 83-88 (1979). Rönnbäck, P. The ecological basis for economic value of seafood production supported by mangrove ecosystems. Ecological Economics 29, 235-252 (1999). Rykaczewski, R.R. & Checkley Jr, D.M. Influence of ocean winds on the pelagic ecosystem in upwelling regions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105, 1965 (2008). Sainsbury, K. J., Punt, A. E., and Smith, A. D. M. Design of operational management strategies for achieving fishery ecosystem objectives. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 731–741 (2000). Schaffner, F.C. Trends in elegant tern and northern anchovy populations in California. Condor 88, 347-354 (1986). Schnute, J.T., & Richards, L.J. Use and abuse of fishery models. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci . 58: 10- 17 (2001). Schwartzlose, R.A. et al. Worldwide large-scale fluctuations of sardine and anchovy populations. South African Journal of Marine Science 21, 289-347 (1999). Shin, Y.J. & Cury, P. Exploring fish community dynamics through size-dependent trophic interactions using a spatialized individual-based model. Aquatic Living Resources 14, 65-80 (2001). Smith, A.D.M. et al. Scientific tools to support the practical implementation of ecosystem-based fisheries management. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 64, 633-639 (2007). Smith, P. An Inverse Egg Production Method for Determining the Relative Magnitude of Pacific Sardine Spawning Biomass Off California. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. (1985). Smith, P.E. & Moser, H.G. Long-term trends and variability in the larvae of Pacific sardine and associated fish species of the California Current region. Deep-Sea Research Part II 50, 2519- 2536 (2003). Smith, P.E. Monitoring interannual changes in spawning area of Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax ). Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 31, 145-151 (1990).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 37 Smith, P.E. Precision of sonar mapping for pelagic fish assessment in the California Current. Journal du Conseil 38, 33 (1978). Smith, P.E. The recovering Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax ) population as an indicator of linkage between the Southern California Bight and the North Pacific Transition Zone. Bulletin- Southern California Academy of Sciences 106, 35 (2007). Stauffer, G.D. Estimate of the spawning biomass of the northern anchovy central subpopulation for the 1979-80 fishing season. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 21, 17-22 (1980). Sumida, B. & Moser, H. Food and feeding of Pacific hake larvae ( Merluccius productus ) off Southern California and Northern Baja California. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 21 (1980). Sydeman, W.J. et al. Climate change, reproductive performance and diet composition of marine birds in the southern California Current system, 1969–1997. Progress in Oceanography 49, 309- 329 (2001). Sydeman, W.J. et al. Marine habitat “hotspots” and their use by migratory species and top predators in the North Pacific Ocean: Introduction. Deep-Sea Research Part II 53, 247-249 (2006). Takasuka, A. et al. Contrasting spawning temperature optima: Why are anchovy and sardine regime shifts synchronous across the North Pacific? Progress in Oceanography (2008). Takasuka, A., Oozeki, Y. & Aoki, I. Optimal growth temperature hypothesis: Why do anchovy flourish and sardine collapse or vice versa under the same ocean regime? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 64, 768-776 (2007). Thayer, J.A. et al. Forage fish of the Pacific Rim as revealed by diet of a piscivorous seabird: synchrony and relationships with sea surface temperature. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 65, 1610-1622 (2008). Tidwell, J.H. & Allan, G.L. Fish as food: aquaculture’s contribution: Ecological and economic impacts and contributions of fish farming and capture fisheries. EMBO Reports 2, 958 (2001). Tourre, Y.M., Lluch-Cota, S.E. & White, W.B. Global multi-decadal ocean climate and small- pelagic fish population. Environmental Research Letters 2, 034005 (2007). Ueber, E. & MacCall, A. The rise and fall of the California sardine empire. Climate Variability, Climate Change and Fisheries 31-48 (1992). Velarde, E. et al. Seabird ecology, El Nino anomalies, and prediction of sardine fisheries in the Gulf of California. Ecological Applications 14, 607-615 (2004). Watters, G.M. et al. Physical forcing and the dynamics of the pelagic ecosystem in the eastern Tropical Pacific: Simulations with ENSO-scale and global-warming climate drivers. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 60, 1161-1175 (2003). Wells, B.K. et al. Untangling the relationships among climate, prey and top predators in an ocean ecosystem. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 364, 15-29 (2008). Wolf, P. Recovery of the Pacific sardine and the California sardine fishery. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 33, 76-86 (1992).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 38 Worm, B. et al. Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem Services. Science 314, 787- 790 (2006). Zamon, J.E. Mixed species aggregations feeding upon herring and sandlance schools in a nearshore archipelago depend on flooding tidal currents. Marine Ecology Progress Series 261, 243-255 (2003). Zamon, J.E. Seal predation on salmon and forage fish schools as a function of tidal currents in the San Juan Islands, Washington, USA. Fisheries Oceanography 10, 353-366 (2001).

Ecosystem-based Management of West Coast Forage Species 39