BERING SEA INTEGRATED ECOSYSTEM RESEARCH PROGRAM Progress Report on the development of an Implementation Plan Francis K. Wiese

September 2006 Board meeting Adopt 6 questions as suggested by SP, expanded to climate change –$1.2M for 1-2 year modeling and retrospective studies Set aside funds for Bering Sea IERP planning Establish and Ecosystem Modeling Committee (EMC) Develop an Implementation Plan for the BSIERP by August 2006 for incorporation into 2007 RFP

Predict of future ecosystem states in response to natural variability and human activities Determine the limits of ecosystem predictability Develop information useful to resource managers and decision makers GOALS

BSIERP efforts Bering Sea Interagency Working Group (BIAW) BSIERP workshop Project 502: Integration of Ecological Indicators for the North Pacific with emphasis on the Bering Sea: workshop will be held in Seattle on June 1-2 Project 516: Seabirds as indicators of marine ecosystems: workshop was held in Girdwood on February 16-18

Related efforts Loss of Sea Ice (HEPR) Implementation Plan Bering Sea Ecosystem Study (BEST)

Implementation Plan Project components (common) IERP Committee Series of 5-6 year modules: –1-synthesis –2-4 field work –5-6 integration and write-up ~$2.3M/yr ($11-12M): –1 st year: $250K –2-4 year: $3.5M/yr –5-6 year: $500K

Project components Assessment of current programs and activities Synthesis and identification of research and funding gaps Model framework : integrate with the EMC, and include evidence of linkages between the scientific question and management needs Interdisciplinary research teams : Co-investigators from both scientific (university) and management (agency) entities to ensure a clear application to resource management issues Project management: University and agency scientists; management structure with a Team Leader, lead Principle Investigator, or Project Manager, Data Manager, post docs and graduate students (see Gulf of Alaska IERP) Research Topics Local Traditional Knowledge (LTK): Links to local research priorities and outline community involvement if possible. NPRB can recommending local expertise to assist in the LTK program development Data capture, quality control, and transfer : Data management plan, including the storage of data and any collections, transfer of all metadata and data to the AOOS/NPRB data archive at UAF

Process –Scientific Steering Committee –Public Input (July 2006) –Pre-Proposals (Oct-Nov 2006) –Start with synthesis-define gaps (BIAW) –Integrate modeling –Teams are multi-disciplinary and multi- institutional –Projects relevant to resource management

Apr-Aug 2006: Development of Implementation Plan - BSIERP SSC - July BIAW/BEST meeting in Seattle Sep 2006: Develop 2007 RFP Oct 2006: Launch 2007 RFP Spring/Summer 2007: start BSIERP Timing

Table 1. Timelines for IERP and regular proposals in the 2007 RFP Action IERP proposalsRegular Proposals Release of 2007 RFP6 October 2006 IERP Pre-Proposals due10 November 2006 Regular Proposals due8 December 2006 Invite full IERP proposals8 December 2006 Full IERP proposals due2 March 2007 Decision on regular proposals End March 2007 Decisions on IERP proposals End May 2007

1.Are the distributions (range, spawning and breeding locations) and abundances of species in the Bering Sea ecosystem changing in response to climate change? If so, how? 2.Are the physical and chemical attributes of the ecosystem changing in response to climate change? If so, how? 3.Is lower trophic level production (quantity and form) changing in response to climate change? If so, how? 4.What are the principal processes controlling energy pathways in the Bering Sea? What is the role of climate change in these processes? 5.What are the linkages between climate change and vital rates of living marine resources in the Bering Sea? 6.What are the economic and sociological impacts of a changing ecosystem on the coastal communities and resource users of the Bering Sea? Six broad questions

Research Topics (initial ideas) Use of indicators (ecological, economic) –Short/long term, small/large scale, process Complement existing programs in time, space or organisms (e.g. BEST – spring, AFSC – commercial fish) High stress areas: e.g. Northern BS Range shifts and temp effects on ecotones/ecoregions

John Piatt et al. 2005

Research Topics (initial ideas) Anticipatory sampling Hotspots Broad scale sampling Functional realms Multi-forcing mechanisms (ecological analogues between LME’s) Process studies and prediction Temperature effects across eco-components Benthic-pelagic coupling Key processes for upper level productivity and variability

Overall goal of IERP GOAL: Increase predictability of fluctuations in fish stocks over a 3-5 year period by x% NEED: Current accuracy and predictability of models

EMC input General model design criteria (p.147 GOA)

EMC input General model design criteria Define who will use the model and for what Define the questions the model is supposed to answer and directly link those questions to the key questions and hypotheses for research Argue convincingly that the model structure is adequate for the purpose, and that no better (cheaper, faster, more comprehensive, more direct) way exists to answer these questions Show a schematic (flowchart) that is clear, complete and concise Explain how uncertainty and variability will be represented and analyzed Describe the system characteristics that will be left out or simplified and how the analysis will evaluate the impacts Define data needs and show how the modeling effort will be coordinated with data assimilation and data management efforts Define validation approach Define how the modeling efforts will be communicated to other scientists, managers, and the public Describe how the model will assimilate data from lower trophic level models and in turn how the outputs from this model will feed into other models Describe how model outputs can be compared to other model outputs

EMC input General model design criteria (p.147 GOA) Overall framework that links modeling, field work and decision making –Determine data sets and data gaps Identify specific needs for predictability, spatio- temporal resolution, error at each model level, model diversity, links among models –Measures of success Interaction with current modeling efforts

NPRB modeling studies 305: Monitoring and modeling predator-prey relationships (complete) 313:Effects of prey availability and predation risk on the foraging ecology and demography of harbor seals in PWS: development and test of a dynamic state variable model (complete) 419: Modeling of multispecies groundfish interactions in the eastern Bering Sea (complete-525) 505: EBS walleye pollock: a spatially explicit model (30 APR 06) 508: Female reproductive output of snow crab in eastern Bering Sea (30 June 06) 509: Retrospective analysis of Kodiak Red King Crab (30 June 06) 523: Pollock recruitment and stock structure (30 June 06) 524: Productivity of capelin and pollock (30 June 06) 525: Modeling multispecies groundfish interactions (33 Dec 07) 531: Seabird-fish models (30 Oct 06)

2006 RFP modeling 605: Modeling Growth and Survival of Early Life-Stages of Pacific Cod in Response to Climate-Related Changes in Sea Ice Conditions in the Bering Sea 606: Modeling Climate Effects on Interdecadal Variation in Southeastern Bering Sea Jellyfish Populations 607: Modeling study on the response of lower trophic level production to climate change (link to 613) 608: Response of the Bering Sea Integrated Circulation-Ice-Ecosystem to Past ( ) and Future ( ) Forcing by Climate and the Adjacent North Pacific and Arctic Oceans 613: Bering Sea Lower Trophic Level Responses to Climate Change (link to 607) 614: Optimization of a nutrient-phytoplankton-zooplankton ecological model for quantifying physical and biological interactions on the Gulf of Alaska shelf. 624: Modeling transport and survival of larval crab: Investigating the contraction and variability in snow crab stocks in the Eastern Bering Sea using Individual- Based Models