About this document
This is a prototype of an automatic report that documents how the user specified the operating model and their various justifications.
Introduction
(from DFO website: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/cod-morue/cod-morue-2018-eng.htm) “Historically, the 4X5Y Cod stock traditionally supported a significant directed fishery. Currently, as a result of substantial declines in stock biomass and consequent low quota levels, only a very small amount of directed fishing takes place, mainly conducted by the inshore fixed gear fleet using longlines, gillnets and handlines. The majority of Atlantic cod in Divisions 4X5Y are caught as part of a mixed species fishery that includes haddock, pollock, winter flounder, redfish and other species (DFO 2017) (See Table 1 for fleet shares). Several other fisheries catch cod as bycatch in 4X5Y, but may or may not be permitted to land cod (DFO 2011). There are also recreational and Aboriginal food, social and ceremonial components to the 4X5Y cod fishery.”
(from DFO website: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/cod-morue/cod-morue-2018-eng.htm) “Atlantic cod is a bottom dwelling North Atlantic fish that ranges from Georges Bank to Northern Labrador in the Canadian Atlantic, including the southern Scotian Shelf and Bay of Fundy management unit (4X5Y) (Figure 1)”.
DFO website: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/cod-morue/cod-morue-2018-eng.htm.
DFO. 2009. Cod on the Southern Scotian Shelf and in the Bay of Fundy (Div. 4X/5Y). DFO. Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2009/015.
DFO. 2011. Recovery Potential Assessment (RPA) for the Southern Designatable Unit (NAFO Divs. 4X5Yb and 5Zjm) of Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua). DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Advis. Rep. 2011/034.
DFO. 2015. 2014 4X5Yb Atlantic Cod Stock Status Update. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Resp. 2015/010.
DFO. 2017. 2016 4X5Yb Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua) Stock Status Update. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Resp. 2017/024.
Fishery Characteristics
Longevity
Answered
|
Very short-lived (5 < maximum age < 7)
|
Short-lived (7 < maximum age < 10)
|
Moderate life span (10 < maximum age < 20)
|
Moderately long-lived (20 < maximum age < 40)
|
Long-lived (40 < maximum age < 80)
|
Very long-lived (80 < maximum age < 160)
|
Justification
|
(from DFO website: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/cod-morue/cod-morue-2018-eng.htm) Based on the natural mortality for all ages. But the website also states: “The 2009 stock assessment, using a virtual population analysis (VPA) model, estimated the natural mortality (M) for Atlantic cod at 0.76 for ages 4+ (from 1996-2008). This value is much higher than the 0.2 estimate historically used for M at all ages for Atlantic cod. Natural mortality may be caused by predation, disease, poor conditions, discards in a recreational or commercial fishery, and/or unreported landings.”
|
Stock depletion
Answered
|
Crashed (D < 0.05)
|
Very depleted (0.05 < D < 0.1)
|
Depleted (0.1 < D < 0.15)
|
Moderately depleted (0.15 < D < 0.3)
|
Healthy (0.3 < D < 0.5)
|
Underexploited (0.5 < D)
|
Justification
|
Based on the assessment report (https://waves-vagues.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/Library/40625230.pdf), which states: “The survey biomass index remains at very low level since 2010. The recruitment index for this stock has also remained very low in recent years, with the 2013 value being the second lowest on record.”
I did not find an explicit range of the SSB relative to unfished levels for this stock.
|
Resilence
Answered
|
Not resilient (steepness < 0.3)
|
Low resilience (0.3 < steepness < 0.5)
|
Moderate resilence (0.5 < steepness < 0.7)
|
Resilient (0.7 < steepness < 0.9)
|
Very Resilient (0.9 < steepness)
|
Justification
|
No information provided about steepness
|
Historical effort pattern
Answered
|
Stable
|
Two-phase
|
Boom-bust
|
Gradual increases
|
Stable, recent increases
|
Stable, recent declines
|
Justification
|
I did not find any information on the temporal changes of fishing effort for this stock.
|
Inter-annual variability in historical effort
Answered
|
Not variable (less than 20% inter-annual change (IAC))
|
Variable (maximum IAC between 20% to 50%)
|
Highly variable (maximum IAC between 50% and 100%)
|
Justification
|
No justification was provided
|
Historical fishing efficiency changes
Answered
|
Declining by 2-3% pa (halves every 25-35 years)
|
Declining by 1-2% pa (halves every 35-70 years)
|
Stable -1% to 1% pa (may halve/double every 70 years)
|
Increasing by 1-2% pa (doubles every 35-70 years)
|
Increasing by 2-3% pa (doubles every 25-35 years)
|
Justification
|
Assessment report (https://waves-vagues.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/Library/341064.pdf) indicates: " Recent q estimated from the q-change model increase with age and are >1 for most ages and peak at over 2. This would indicate a several fold increase in the catching efficiency of the net. While in the 1980s, fewer than half the cod in the path of the net were caught, now the net catches more cod than are in the path of the net. This would mean a change in behaviour that led cod to be herded into the path of the net, rather than avoiding the net."
|
Future fishing efficiency changes
Answered
|
Declining by 2-3% pa (halves every 25-35 years)
|
Declining by 1-2% pa (halves every 35-70 years)
|
Stable -1% to 1% pa (may halve/double every 70 years)
|
Increasing by 1-2% pa (doubles every 35-70 years)
|
Increasing by 2-3% pa (doubles every 25-35 years)
|
Justification
|
No information was provided about future catchability
|
Length at maturity
Answered
|
Very small (0.4 < LM < 0.5)
|
Small (0.5 < LM < 0.6)
|
Moderate (0.6 < LM < 0.7)
|
Moderate to large (0.7 < LM < 0.8)
|
Large (0.8 < LM < 0.9)
|
Selectivity of small fish
Answered
|
Very small (0.1 < S < 0.2)
|
Small (0.2 < S < 0.4)
|
Half asymptotic length (0.4 < S < 0.6)
|
Large (0.6 < S < 0.8)
|
Very large (0.8 < S < 0.9)
|
Justification
|
No information was provided on the selectivity of small fish for this species.
|
Selectivity of large fish
Answered
|
Asymptotic selectivity (SL = 1)
|
Declining selectivity with length (0.75 < SL < 1)
|
Dome-shaped selectivity (0.25 < SL < 0.75)
|
Strong dome-shaped selectivity (SL < 0.25)
|
Discard rate
Answered
|
Low (DR < 1%)
|
Low - moderate (1% < DR < 10%)
|
Moderate (10% < DR < 30%)
|
Moderate - high (30% < DR < 50%)
|
High (50% < DR < 70%)
|
Post-release mortality rate
Answered
|
Low (PRM < 5%)
|
Low - moderate (5% < PRM < 25%)
|
Moderate (25% < PRM < 50%)
|
Moderate - high (50% < PRM < 75%)
|
High (75% < PRM < 95%)
|
Almost all die (95% < PRM < 100%)
|
Justification
|
(from http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/cod-morue/cod-morue-2018-eng.htm) “DFO will also ensure that all significant sources of fishing mortality can be estimated and accounted for. For groundfish fisheries, unreported (and illegal) discards would be the main source of unaccounted fishing mortality. DFO will develop a strategy to estimate illegal discards, which might require increasing at-sea observer coverage or exploring other forms of catch monitoring such as electronic video monitoring.
For LFAs 33-38, Atlantic cod fishing mortality would need to be estimated based on rates of capture estimated from at-sea sampling and quantification or reliable estimation of post-release survival. In some areas, estimates of mortality as a result of illegal retention may also need to be considered. Once estimates are available, reference points and limits will need to be established for the fishery, and the performance of the fishery will need to be monitored against these.”
|
Recruitment variability
Answered
|
Very low (less than 10% inter-annual changes (IAC))
|
Low (max IAC of between 20% and 60%)
|
Moderate (max IAC of between 60% and 120%)
|
High (max IAC of between 120% and 180%)
|
Very high (max IAC greater than 180%)
|
Size of an existing MPA
Answered
|
None
|
Small (A < 5%)
|
Small-moderate (5% < A < 10%)
|
Moderate (10% < A < 20%)
|
Large (20% < A < 30%)
|
Very large (30% < A < 40%)
|
Huge (40% < A < 50%)
|
Spatial mixing (movement) in/out of existing MPA
Answered
|
Very low (P < 1%)
|
Low (1% < P < 5%)
|
Moderate (5% < P < 10%)
|
High (10% < P < 20%)
|
Fully mixed
|
Justification
|
No justification was provided
|
Size of a future potential MPA
Answered
|
None
|
Small (A < 5%)
|
Small-moderate (5% < A < 10%)
|
Moderate (10% < A < 20%)
|
Large (20% < A < 30%)
|
Very large (30% < A < 40%)
|
Huge (40% < A < 50%)
|
Justification
|
No justification was provided
|
Spatial mixing (movement) in/out of future potential MPA
Answered
|
Very low (P < 1%)
|
Low (1% < P < 5%)
|
Moderate (5% < P < 10%)
|
High (10% < P < 20%)
|
Fully mixed
|
Justification
|
No justification was provided
|
Initial stock depletion
Answered
|
Very low (0.1 < D1 < 0.15)
|
Low (0.15 < D1 < 0.3)
|
Moderate (0.3 < D < 0.5)
|
High (0.5 < D1)
|
Asymptotic unfished levels (D1 = 1)
|
Management Characteristics
Types of fishery management that are possible
Answered
|
TAC (Total Allowable Catch): a catch limit
|
TAE (Total Allowable Effort): an effort limit
|
Size limit
|
Time-area closures (a marine reserve)
|
TAC offset: consistent overages/underages
Answered
|
Large underages (40% - 70% of recommended)
|
Underages (70% - 90% of recommended)
|
Slight underages (90% - 100% of recommended)
|
Taken exactly (95% - 105% of recommended)
|
Slight overages (100% - 110% of recommended)
|
Overages (110% - 150% of recommended)
|
Large overages (150% - 200% of recommended)
|
TAC implementation variability
Answered
|
Constant (V < 1%)
|
Not variable (1% < V < 5%)
|
Low variability (5% < V < 10%)
|
Variable (10% < V < 20%)
|
Highly variable (20% < V < 40%)
|
Justification
|
No justification was provided
|
TAE offset: consistent overages/underages
Answered
|
Large underages (40% - 70% of recommended)
|
Underages (70% - 90% of recommended)
|
Slight underages (90% - 100% of recommended)
|
Taken exactly (95% - 105% of recommended)
|
Slight overages (100% - 110% of recommended)
|
Overages (110% - 150% of recommended)
|
Large overages (150% - 200% of recommended)
|
Justification
|
No TAE implemented on this fishery
|
TAE implementation variability
Answered
|
Constant (V < 1%)
|
Not variable (1% < V < 5%)
|
Low variability (5% < V < 10%)
|
Variable (10% < V < 20%)
|
Highly variable (20% < V < 40%)
|
Justification
|
No TAE implemented on this fishery
|
Size limit offset: consistent overages/underages
Answered
|
Much smaller (40% - 70% of recommended)
|
Smaller (70% - 90% of recommended)
|
Slightly smaller (90% - 100% of recommended)
|
Taken exactly (95% - 105% of recommended)
|
Slightly larger (100% - 110% of recommended)
|
Larger (110% - 150% of recommended)
|
Much larger (150% - 200% of recommended)
|
Size limit implementation variability
Answered
|
Constant (V < 1%)
|
Not variable (1% < V < 5%)
|
Low variability (5% < V < 10%)
|
Variable (10% < V < 20%)
|
Highly variable (20% < V < 40%)
|
Justification
|
here is no such information provided in the assessment reports for this species
|
Data Characteristics
Available data types
Answered
|
Historical annual catches (from unfished)
|
Recent annual catches (at least 5 recent years)
|
Historical relative abundance index (from unfished)
|
Recent relative abundance index (at least 5 recent years)
|
Fishing effort
|
Size composition (length samples)
|
Age composition (age samples)
|
Growth (growth parameters)
|
Absolute biomass survey
|
Justification
|
1. Provide the time series (specify years, if possible) that exist for catch, effort, and CPUE/abundance indices. Catches and abundance index can be found here: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/cod-morue/cod-morue-2018-eng.htm
2. Describe how these data collected (e.g., log books, dealer reporting, observers). A combination of dockside monitoring of landings, at-sea observer coverage, surveys, and logbooks.
3. Describe what types of sampling programs and methodologies exist for data collection, including the time-series of available sampling data and quality. The research design for groundfish fishery in the north Atlantic is described in (http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/groundfish-poisson-fond/groundfish-poisson-fond-4vwx5-eng.htm#toc2) as follows: “DFO has conducted the summer research vessel (RV) survey in the Maritimes Region, NAFO Divisions 4VWX and a small portion of 5Y, using a standardized protocol since 1970. Since 2011, DFO has also been including some coverage of 5Z in the summer RV survey and plans to continue and expand this in the future. The Georges Bank (5Z) Winter RV survey has been conducted annually using a standard stratification since 1987. Results of these surveys provide information on trends in abundance for most groundfish species in the Maritimes Region. Historically, there have sometimes been other RV surveys carried out at different times of year in some areas.
The summer RV survey includes both hydrographic sampling and sampling of fish and invertebrates using a bottom otter trawl. These survey data are the primary data source for monitoring trends in species distribution, abundance and biological condition within the region, and also provide data to the Atlantic Zonal Monitoring Program for monitoring hydrographic variability.
The summer RV survey was originally planned to provide biomass and abundance trends for groundfish residing at depths from about 50 m to 400 m; it was later extended to cover depths down to 750 m in 1996. Survey indices are expected to be proportional to biomass and abundance for most species. The distribution of some species, however, such as cusk and Turbot, may not be fully covered by the survey. Biomass and abundance trends for these species may only provide indication of direction of change over time. For all these species, other biological information, such as length and weight, are still relevant.
The net used in the survey and vessel conducting the survey were changed in 1982 and 1983, along with some changes in data collection protocols. Collection of data on invertebrates caught in the survey was increased in 2007; before that date many invertebrates were not recorded. Conversion factors were derived for some species. For other species, these changes may affect the comparability of biomass trends before and after these changes in an unknown manner.”
4. Describe all sources of uncertainty in the status, biology, life history and data sources of the fishery. Include links to documentation, reports. Major uncertainty sources include seal predation, bycatch and discards (http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/cod-morue/cod-morue-2018-eng.htm)
|
Catch reporting bias
Answered
|
Strong under-reporting (30% - 50%)
|
Under-reporting (10% - 30%)
|
Slight under-reporting (less than 10%)
|
Reported accurately (+/- 5%)
|
Slight over-reporting (less than 10%)
|
Justification
|
Assessment reports do not provide such information.
|
Hyperstability in indices
Answered
|
Strong hyperdepletion (2 < Beta < 3)
|
Hyperdepletion (1.25 < Beta < 2)
|
Proportional (0.8 < Beta < 1.25)
|
Hyperstability (0.5 < Beta < 0.8)
|
Strong hyperstability (0.33 < Beta < 0.5)
|
Justification
|
Likely proportional since most of the reports estimated biomass by fitting an assessment model to an index of abundance obtained through scientific surveys.
|
Available data types
Answered
|
Perfect
|
Good (accurate and precise)
|
Data moderate (some what inaccurate and imprecise)
|
Data poor (inaccurate and imprecise)
|
Justification
|
No justification was provided
|
Version Notes
The package is subject to ongoing testing. If you find a bug or a problem please send a report to t.carruthers@oceans.ubc.ca so that it can be fixed!
shiny-2019-05-02-00:28:09
Open Source, GPL-2 2019