Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

G. Scott Boomer USFWS Harvest Management Working Group Meeting Buda, TX 29 November 2012.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "G. Scott Boomer USFWS Harvest Management Working Group Meeting Buda, TX 29 November 2012."— Presentation transcript:

1 G. Scott Boomer USFWS Harvest Management Working Group Meeting Buda, TX 29 November 2012

2 DMBM Mark Koneff, Bob Blohm, Paul Padding, Jim Kelley, Dave Sharp, Jim Dubovsky, Bob Trost, Bob Raftovich, Khristi Wilkins, Todd Sanders, and Ken Richkus USGS Fred Johnson Mike Runge Andy Royle Flyway Technical Sections Joe Fuller Steve Cordts Spencer Vaa Don Kraege 2

3 Brief History Annual Performance Status and Parameter Estimates Policy Harvest Results Revisiting Regulatory Alternatives? Process Methods 3

4 Bonus Bags Special Seasons SL: 20 - 40 Bag: 2 - 4 4 Points System Bonus Bags Special Seasons SL: 40 - 50 Bag: 4 - 10 SL : 30 Bag: 3 - 4 SL: 50 - 60 95-96 Bag: 5 97-98 Bag: 6 99-04 Bag: 3 05-07 Bag: 2 Past Harvest Regulations (e.g., Mississippi Flyway) 2008 R (Hybrid) 2009 M 60 & 2 2010 M 60 & 2 2011 M 60 & 2 2012 L: 60 & 4 1969 thru 1987 Bonus Season: not to exceed 16 consecutive days (Oct 1 - Jan 31), bag limit of 5; OR, Bonus Bag: 2 bonus scaup in regular season

5 5

6 6 Year Mean2.50%Median97.50% 2008 0.1010.0230.0890.240 2009 0.1060.0300.0970.233 2010 0.1220.0400.1130.256 2011 0.1240.0440.1140.252 2012 0.1250.0460.1160.250

7 7 Year Mean2.50%Median97.50% 2008 8.3385.7867.98212.220 2009 8.4435.8688.12612.360 2010 8.1725.7847.81212.110 2011 8.2745.9047.93812.050 2012 8.4025.9488.05012.210

8 8 Year Mean2.50%Median97.50% 2008 0.5370.4640.5360.620 2009 0.5520.4790.5510.634 2010 0.5560.4840.5550.634 2011 0.5800.5100.5790.657 2012 0.5910.5190.5900.671

9 9 Year Mean2.50%Median97.50% 2008 0.3640.1000.3500.702 2009 0.3800.1260.3690.687 2010 0.4230.1640.4140.737 2011 0.4180.1810.4080.701 2012 0.4200.1880.4150.685

10 10

11 11 BPOP20082009201020112012 ≤ 3.2RRRRR 3.4RRRRR 3.6RRMMM 3.8RHRH MMMM 4.0MMMMM 4.2MMMMM 4.4MMMMM 4.6MMMMM 4.8MMMMM 5.0MMLMM 5.2MMLLL ≥ 5.4LLLLL

12 12

13 13 Target (M) Predicted (M) Target (R)

14 Annual updates of population parameter estimates track changes in scaup status, suggesting modest increases in harvest potential Model predictions are consistent with observed population increases Scaup harvest policies have become more liberal as scaup status has improved Observed harvest levels were similar to Flyway specific harvest predictions (at least under the moderate alternatives), and on average, have remained under allowable harvest thresholds 14

15 Given that the Flyways have not voiced concern over current packages (although the Pacific Flyway may be an exception…), how do we begin this conversation? Are there triggers that we should consider for pursuing changes to scaup regulatory packages? Important to recognize that regulatory alternatives ultimately have to be specified (i.e., they represent policy decisions - that may be informed with technical information). 15

16 1) Update technical information in 2007 scoping document Update all Flyway harvest models with recent information M: 3 years; R: 1 year; L: pending Reset thresholds for regulatory change based on updated simulation Re-calculate allowable harvest Define appropriate allocation? Work with individual Flyways to specify alternatives (e.g. 2008-2009 criteria…) 16

17 2) Reconsider how we account for partial controllability of harvest: Specify the regulatory package (R, M, L) as the decision variable in the optimization (rather than harvest) We then have to specify a distribution of harvest expected under each regulatory alternative (R, M, L) based on past experience Consider closure rules? From a technical perspective, this may be a more efficient and practical method to updating packages. 3) Others? 17

18 Change in decision variable? Change in model set? Monitoring Needs? BPOP Banding needs recommendations What are the implications of SEIS preferred alternative? What is the relationships of scaup AHM to future changes in mallard AHM decision frameworks? When should we consider “double-looping” for scaup AHM? 18

19 19

20 20 Population Thresholds PackageHarvest20082009201020112012 RH < 0.253.8 3.4 M0.25 ≤ H < 0.53.9 - 5.24.0 - 5.23.6 - 4.83.6 - 5.0 LH ≥ 0.55.4 55.2 BPOP3.744.174.244.325.24 RegRHRH MMML

21 21 Year BPOP2.50%Median97.50% 2008 3.743.4292.8063.4074.183 2009 4.173.6312.9603.6054.427 2010 4.244.0843.3454.0495.019 2011 4.324.1103.3434.0825.028 2012 5.244.2473.4594.2235.147


Download ppt "G. Scott Boomer USFWS Harvest Management Working Group Meeting Buda, TX 29 November 2012."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google