Slides to illustrate relative value of various criteria in DSF MAREFRAME TEAM

Note on Co-creation and the Criteria, Scenarios and models used here. You, the stakeholders are a vital part of the MAREFRAME Project. Today is mostly about demonstrating and understanding how the Decision Support Framework works and the sort of inputs and agreements you would need to make to make it operational. Nothing will be set in stone after this meeting! As it is currently framed following our Den Haag meetings with PELAC and NSAC we have adopted a series of Criteria for Pelagics, Demersals and for Ecosystem Health and rated them against various Scenarios. You have been asked individually to tentatively weight these criteria within the three sub groups of Pelagics, Demersals and Ecosystem Health. Ultimately it will also be necessary to get weightings between these subgroups. If ultimately you can agree these you will have a stronger chance of influencing any final choice made by the managers! The values the criteria have for each of the scenarios you suggested come from the green model. This is a simplified front end to one multispecies model (SMS). Ultimately we would like it to front up a series of different models so that differences and uncertainties in model outcomes are apparent and become part of the decision process. In the light of todays discussions you may want to suggest different criteria or new scenarios and we are more than happy to help with this dialog. That is what Co-creation is all about.

Note on tradeoffs All the trade offs we are looking at today are for the long term. The short term is of course vitally important as well but they change from year to year and in any case single species models could usually show these adequately. The figure shows how the different criteria trade off for a very simple fishery In a multispecies system like the North Sea life is far more complex but less fishing on a species is likely for associated species and fleets to improve profitability though not necessarily total profit, SSB and conservation status but to decrease employment afloat and ashore.

Demersal CFP Compliant criteria Note These are all compared to the existing single species reference points. It is possible that some future CFP might use Multispecies reference points.

Demersal Social Criteria Note at sea labour is given as labour costs in million € while processing jobs are given as estimates of FTE

Demersal Economic Criteria Note that Profit and Landings value (left hand axis) are in million € while Equity (right hand axis) is the % range of how profit or landed value of demersal gears differed from BAU under each other scenario. E.g. if one demersal gears profit was reduced by 40% and another increased by 40% as the result of a scenario change from BAU then the profit equity measure would be 80%. It thus indicates how benefits are shared. A low value suggests even sharing while a high value winners and losers. However, it would be wise to look further into these figures to see if they are plausible or if they might be mitigated.

Pelagic CFP Compliance Criteria Note These are all compared to the existing single species reference points. It is possible that some future CFP might use Multispecies reference points.

Pelagic Social Criteria Note at sea labour is given as labour costs in million € while processing jobs are given as estimates of FTE

Pelagic Economic Criteria Note Profit and Landings value are in million € combined for the Pelagic trawl, Pelagic siene and the industrial TR3 and Otter gears. Stability of Portfolio is a combination of the likely year to year Coefficient of Variation of Combined Herring and Mackerel catches for the North Sea. Since for all scenarios stock levels remain sufficiently high to keep these in the 15% and 20% annual variation there is little contrast. But if stock level fell below limit reference points year to year variation would increase due to recruitment variation and assessment and management rule variations. Pelagic Economic Criteria The MSC certification criteria for Herring and Mackerel are based on how many of the Fmsy, and Biomass target and limit reference points are satisfied (0 would be bad, 4 is good) since these are the only stock factors the scenarios distinguish though of course MSC certification has wider concerns than these.

Ecosystem Health Criteria Notes Biodiversity: It is difficult to give a biodiversity measure from the green model that only contains 12 species. The measure given here is of the proportion of the all species SSB that is composed of pelagic species. A higher figure suggests some fishing down the food web. However there is little contrast between the scenarios shown. Size Structure: This is taken as a proxy for the Large Fish Index, the proportion of survey catch >40cm. The predictions here based upon extrapolated regression results from the CSM seem high. However, they are based upon a plausible formulae that gives a reduced figure when fishing is reduced on small species and a higher figure when fishing is reduced upon larger species and probably give a reasonable relative measure. It is also likely that all scenarios considered would exceed the 0.3 target. Bottom Disturbance is a weighted sum of demersal Fs relative to BAU. It gives a heavier weight to beam trawlers. Charismatic by-catch an unweighted sum of all Fs on the assumption that all gears might cause such by-catches