1. Presentation to the 2nd MSFD Descriptor 3+ Meeting
Links to ... (Target 4)
Presentation to the 2nd MSFD Descriptor 3+ Meeting
9th – 10th April 2013
Brussels, Belgium
Dr Carl O’Brien
Co-chair WKLIFE

2. Previous presentations
With a starting point on D3, focused on the work being undertaken by ICES which has an impact and can support the implementation of the related descriptors:
Biological diversity (D1)
Marine foodwebs (D4)
Seabed integrity (D6)
Risk-based approach linking 4 descriptors which are relevant for fisheries
Work in progress and exploratory ideas (ICES, Cefas, Seafish, ...)

3. Relevance to yesterday
Leonhard Maier’s presentation
Target 4 – sustainable fisheries
Integration of ecosystem considerations into fisheries management
Han Lindeboom’s presentation
ICES’ CSG MSFD
Integration across descriptors
Integrated Ecosystem Assessments and Advice
Simon Greenstreet’s presentation
ICES’ WGECO (Descriptors 1, 3, 4 and 6)

4. Scale, intensity and consequence
analysis (SICA)

5. Purpose
SICA:
a prioritisation system for an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management
a systematic review of all possible effects of fishing designed to flag the issues of highest priority
Hobday, A.J. et al. (2011). Ecological risk assessment for the effects of fishing. Fisheries Research: 108, pp

6. E.g. South-west ecosystem

7. E.g. Principles and goals
To leave for future generations the same or better opportunities to benefit from the marine environment around the SW peninsula as the present generation enjoys
Goals (pursuant to the Principle)
1.       To maintain an economically viable and regionally diverse fishing industry in the SW
2.       To maintain and protect essential ecological processes and food webs
3.       To avoid taking more fish from a stock than can naturally be replenished
4.       To protect biodiversity including vulnerable marine species and special types of habitat not specifically covered by legislation
5.       To minimise pollution as a consequence of fishing so far as practical and economical
6.       To comply with all legislation applicable to SW fisheries and fish products

8. severity of hazard * probability of occurrence
SICA terminology (1)
Risk:
In engineering, health & safety:
severity of hazard * probability of occurrence
In ecosystems:
strength of effect * (area of occurrence * duration)

9. SICA terminology (2)
Agent of change: A fishery, waste discharges, shipping, etc.
Activity: Something an agent does; e.g. towing a trawl
Effect ≡ ‘hazard’: Possible consequence of an activity
Ecosystem components: A grouping of species, habitats, etc.
Unit of analysis: A species, habitat or other member of a component
Attribute: Feature of a unit; e.g. abundance, presence
Operational objective: SMART control on an effect (<= Goals)
Indicator: Measure for monitoring progress towards OO.

10. E.g. SICA risk scoring (0-5)
Geometric mean of (Spatial scale of activity relative to total area occupied by unit  Temporal scale of activity relative to time spent in SW by unit Intensity of effect given that interactions with the activity occurs)
Consequence for unit
Score
Description
None
Minimal 1
Moderate 2
Probably within OO
Significant 3
Probably not within OO; reversible 1 to 3 years
Major 4
Not within OO, contravenes goal; several years to repair
Catastrophic 5
Widespread, permanent loss of unit; contravenes goals

11. E.g. OO and I

12. Advantages of SICA
Looks at whole ecosystem
Can utilise all available knowledge
Defines bad effects of fishing as those posing highest risk for non-achievement of management’s goals
Inclusive of all skills; e.g. fishers, scientists, NGOs, etcetera

16. What can ICES deliver?
Science and advisory framework to underpin a risk-based approach.
Systematic review of possible effects of fishing designed to flag the issues of highest priority.
Examination of the utility of PSA/SICA in the context of stocks for which advice is provided and critique the susceptibility criteria in order to make PSA/SICA operational.

17. Questions for the workshop:
Is it sufficient to focus on fishing activity and rely upon inference, possibly qualitative, for biodiversity, food-web and seabed integrity?
SICA provides a prioritization system for EAFM. Should such an approach be explored further as a means of integrating indicators across descriptors?
Are there new tasks for ICES’ WKLIFE III?