Case Studies of Harvest Strategies in Global Fisheries

Management Objectives:

• Convention objective: “Ensure, through appropriate management, the conservation and optimum utilization of southern bluefin tuna”
• Harvest strategy objectives: See target reference points below

Reference Points:

• Limit Reference Point: 24% SSB₀
• Target Reference Point (long-term): 30% SSB₀ by 2035, with a 50% chance of success

^{*SSB0 = spawning stock size that would exist in the absence of fishing}

Harvest Strategy:

Fully-specified ‘Cape Town Procedure’ adopted in 2019 was tested through comprehensive MSE process.

Specifications:

• Type:Empirical
• Management cycle: 3 years
• Data inputs: Longline catch per unit effort index, gene tagging, close-kin genetics
• Management output: Quota
• Harvest control rule: Hybrid rule that increases or decreases quota using model-based log-linear trend in adult biomass inferred by an age-structured model using genetic data and an empirical-based-staged response to CPUE.
• Other:
  Maximum quota change = 3000 t (~15-20%)
  Minimum quota change = 100 t

Outcome:

Quotas have increased each management cycle since the harvest strategy was adopted (an 87% increase between 2011 and 2020). The number of adult fish increased from 5% SSB₀ in 2010 to 20% SSB₀ in 2020.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Management Procedure: Overview and history of the harvest strategy
• A scientific alternative to moratoria for rebuilding depleted international tuna stocks

Management Objectives:

• Maintain stock in green quadrant of Kobe plot with at least 60% probability while maximizing long-term yield
• Rebuild to or above SSB_MSY with at least 60% probability within as short a time as possible, while maximizing average catch and minimizing TAC changes

Reference Points:

• B-Threshold Reference Point (interim): B_MSY
• B-Limit Reference Point (interim): 40% B_MSY
• F-Target Reference Point (interim): 80% F_MSY
• F- Minimum Reference Point (interim): 10% F_MSY

Harvest Strategy:

Adopted in 2021, ICCAT successfully converted the HCR into a full harvest strategy through the addition of an exceptional circumstances protocol and the specification of the data collection and assessment methods needed to apply the HCR.

Specifications:

• Type: Model-based
• Management cycle: 3 years
• Data inputs: Stock assessment estimates of current stock biomass (B_curr) with respect to B_MSY, stock biomass at maximum sustainable yield (B_MSY), fishing mortality at MSY (F_MSY)
• Management output: Quota
• Harvest control rule:
  If B>B_THRESHOLD (B_MSY), fish at F_TARGET (80%F_MSY)
  If B_LIM<B<B_THRESHOLD, reduce F linearly as specified in HCR
  If B<B_LIM, suspend fishery and initiate scientific monitoring at F_MIN (10% F_MSY)
• Other:
  Maximum catch limit: 50,000t
  Maximum quota change: +25%/-20% if current biomass is above B_THRESHOLD

Outcome:

The stock was declared recovered in 2016, a year before the HCR was adopted. The 2018-20 quota set by the HCR was limited by the 20% maximum change clause included in the original HCR. Using the 2020 stock assessment, the HCR recommended a TAC increase for the 2021-23 management period which was agreed to by all parties without controversy, despite the virtual meeting necessitated by COVID-19.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Recommendation by ICCAT on Conservation and Management Measures, Including a Management Procedure and Exceptional Circumstances Protocol, for North Atlantic Albacore

Management Objectives:

• Restore to within a prescribed period of time or maintain at B_MSY (chance of B₂₀₄₄<B_MSY is ≤ 50%, B₂₀₄₄ <0.8B_MSY is ≤ 25%)
• The risk of failure to meet the B_MSY target and interim biomass targets within a prescribed period of time should be kept moderately low risk (<30% chance) of exceeding F_MSY
• Very low risk (<10%) of going below an established threshold [e.g., B_lim or B_lim proxy]
• Maximize yield in the short, medium, and long term (5,10, 20 years, respectively)
• The risk of steep decline of stock biomass should be kept moderately low (i.e., 10%)

Reference Points:

• Target reference point: B_MSY
• Proxy limit reference point: 30%B_MSY

Harvest Strategy:

The original HCR adopted in 2010 proved unsuccessful and was modified in 2017 and updated again in 2024. The current harvest strategy will be implemented from 2025 until 2034. If circumstances occur outside the ranges tested by the MSE, the exceptional circumstances protocol will be triggered, possibly changing the HCR.

Specifications:

• Type: Empirical
• Management cycle: 1 year
• Data inputs: Five survey-based abundance indices
• Management output: Quota
• Harvest control rule: Combination of a target-based and slope-based rule that increases or decreases quota depending on the current TAC and recent trends in survey biomass

Outcome:

Greenland halibut are considered overfished. The initial HCR adopted in 2010 had to be revised in 2017 as the exceptional circumstance protocol was triggered in 4 out of 6 years, likely due to annual catch estimates far exceeding the TAC. An updated HCR was adopted in 2024. Exceptional Circumstances were occurring in the first year due to recent gaps in the EU Spain 3L series. However, sensitivity analyses indicated that the application of the HCR adopted in 2024 will still be appropriate. The TAC for 2025 derived from the MP is 14,791 t.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Report of the NAFO Joint Commission-Scientific Council Working Group on Risk-Based Management Strategies (WG-RBMS) Meeting: See item 5 on page 5 for harvest strategy specifications
• Report of the NAFO Joint Commission-Scientific Council Working Group on Risk- Based Management Strategies (WG-RBMS) Meeting: See item 4 on page 3 for an update on the harvest strategy
• 2024 Update: https://www.nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/COM-SC/2024/com-scdoc24-03.pdf
• Management Measure: https://www.nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/COM/2025/comdoc25-01.pdf (p. 122-125)
• MSE Results: https://www.nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/sc/2024/scr24-001REV2.pdf

Management Objectives:

• At least 50% probability that the skipjack tuna spawning stock biomass achieves the biomass level of 40% SB0 by 2034-2038.
• The skipjack tuna spawning stock biomass is maintained above the biomass of SBMSY with very high probability.1 .
• The skipjack tuna spawning stock biomass is maintained above the biomass of 20% of SB0 at all times.

• Maintain stock at levels that can produce MSY, as qualified by relevant environmental and economic factors
• Use HCR to maintain stock at or above the target and well above the limit

Reference Points:

• Interim Limit Reference Points: 20% of unfished spawning biomass (i.e. 0.2SB0)
• Interim Target Reference Points: 40% of unfished spawning biomass (i.e. 0.4SB0).

^{*SB0 = spawning stock size that would exist in the absence of fishing}

Harvest Strategy:

IOTC adopted a fully specified harvest strategy in 2024.

• Type: Model-based
• Management cycle: 3 years
• Data inputs: Pole and line and purse seine (log-school) CPUE abundance indices.
• Management output: Total Allowable Catch
• Harvest control rule: The MP-SKJ is empirical and uses two main components to estimate catch limits: (i) the stock status indicator and (ii) the decision algorithm (or harvest control rule, HCR), including tuning parameters (see Table 1 for a complete description of terms and values used).
• The stock status indicator Ut is estimated from the Maldivian pole and line (PL) and EU purse seine (log-school) catch per unit of effort (CPUE) indices.

• The decision algorithm or HCR estimates the recommended catch limit TAC for the period (ty+1:3) using the stock status indicator (UtUy) as follows:

1. If Uy ≥ Uthreshold then 𝑇𝐴𝐶𝑦+1:3=𝐶𝑚𝑎𝑥;
2. If Usafety ≤ Uy ≤ Uthreshold; then 𝑇𝐴𝐶𝑡+1:3=(𝐶𝑚𝑎𝑥−𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛) 𝑥 (𝑈𝑡−𝑈𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦)(𝑈𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑑−𝑈𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦)+𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛;
3. If ay ≤ Usafety; 𝑇𝐴𝐶𝑦+1:3=𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛
4. The value Uy is calculated using the formulas from document IOTC-2024-TCMP08-04_Rev2E.

Outcome:

The maximum change in the TAC shall be a 15% increase and a 10% decrease relative to the previous TAC.

Progress Update & Workplan: The MP was adopted in 2024, and an implementation plan will be developed no later than 2026.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Navigate to Resolution 24/08 to view the management procedure for skipjack in the IOTC area of competence https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-2407-management-procedure-skipjack-tuna-iotc-area-competence

Resolution 15/10 on Target and Limit Reference Points and a Decision Framework (https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-1510-target-and-limit-reference-points-and-decision-framework)

Management Objectives:

Biological

• To maintain stocks at (on average), or return to, a target biomass point B_TARG or equivalent proxy (e.g. F_TARG or CPUE_TARG) equal to the stock size that aims to maximise net economic returns for the fishery as a whole
• To maintain stocks above the limit biomass level, or an appropriate proxy, at least 90% of the time
• A reduced level of fishing if a stock is below B_TARG but above B_LIM (or an appropriate proxy)
• To implement rebuilding strategies, no-targeting and incidental bycatch TACs if a stock moves below B_LIM (or an appropriate proxy)
• To ensure the sustainability of fisheries resources, including consideration of the individual fishery circumstances and individual species or stock characteristics, when developing a management approach

Socio-economic

• To maintain stocks at (on average), or return to, a target biomass point B_TARG equal to the stock size that aims to maximise net economic returns for the fishery as a whole
• To maximise the profitability of the fishing industry and the net economic returns to the Australian community
• To minimise costs to the fishing industry, including consideration of the impacts on the industry of large or small changes in TACs and the appropriateness of multi-year TACs

Ecosystem

• To be consistent with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, including the conservation of biological diversity, and the adoption of a precautionary risk approach

Reference Points:

• Limit Reference Point: 20%B₀
• Trigger Reference Point: 35%B₀
• Target Reference Point: 40%B_{0, *}B_{0 = stock size that would exist in the absence of fishing 0.}

Harvest Strategy:

This fully specified, MSE-tested harvest strategy framework applies to the Southern and Eastern scalefish and shark fishery, with each stock applying one of four different HCRs included in the harvest strategy. Tiger Flathead is considered a Tier 1 species, but with a default Recommended Biological Catch (RBC) calculated using a 20:35:40 reference point strategy.

Data inputs: Catch, CPUE, discards, survey relative abundance, size, and age data

Harvest control rule: If B is below the limit reference point, no targeted fishing is allowed and a rebuilding strategy will be developed; if B is below the trigger reference point, the TAC declines linearly toward the target to allow the stock to rebuild to the target level; if B is above the target reference point, fishing is set at a level of F that produces the target biomass, (i.e., F₄₀).

Outcome:

Link to relevant policy document or update:

According to the most recent 2022 stock assessment, the stock is not overfished nor undergoing overfishing and was projected to be at 43% of unfished spawning stock biomass in 2023, which is above the target reference point (40% B0). The 2022 assessment concluded that steepness (h) should be fixed in future assessment iterations; under these assumptions, the TRP would return to a default Tier 1 harvest strategy form, with a TRP of 48%B₀.

Harvest Strategy Framework for the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery 2009 (Amended 2021)

Stock Assessment for Tiger Flathead (Tier 1) 2022

Overview – Tiger Flathead

Management Objectives:

Maintain both stocks about B_MSY and balance trade-offs between catch, effort and inter-annual variability in TAC

Reference Points:

Target Reference Point: B_MSY

Harvest Strategy:

A fully specified harvest strategy that has been tested via MSE. It includes rules for Exceptional Circumstances for when certain key indices drop below pre-determined threshold values, or when further observations fall outside the range tested within the MSE. Operating models for the MSE continue to be updated, most recently in 2023, to account for new data.

Specifications:

• Type: Empirical
• Management cycle: Annual
• Data inputs: Commercial CPUE and survey abundance indices.
• Management output: Quota
• Harvest Control Rule: TAC recommendations are based on the output of the harvest strategy formula

Outcome:

The 2023 update to the reference case operating models showed both hake stocks
above the B-based target reference points. The TAC trend has been increasing since
2022; although commercial catch rates for hake are down, particularly for M. capensis,
survey abundance indices have been exceptionally high. The low catch rates are not
sufficient to trigger Exceptional Circumstances. The Operation Management Procedure
will be reviewed in 2026, as per the routine 4-year revision cycle.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

The 2022 Operational Management Procedure for the South African Merluccius paradoxus and M. capensis resources

Update to the hake Reference Case Operating Model with the 2022 commercial and 2023 survey data

OMP formula output for the 2025 hake TAC, and the inclusion of the 2023 commercial and 2025 survey data in the OMP projection plots

Management Objectives:

• Maintain female spawning stock biomass above the LRP of 0.4B_MSY in 95% of years measured over two sablefish generations (36 years)
• When in the Cautious Zone (i.e., 0.4B_MSY<B<0.8B_MSY), limit the probability of decline over the next 10 years to very low (5%) at the LRP, increasing linearly to moderate (50%) at the TRP
• Maintain the female spawning biomass above B_MSY, or 0.8B_MSY when rebuilding from the Cautious Zone, in the year 2052 with 50% probability
• Minimize probability that annual TAC levels are below 1,992 tonnes measured over two Sablefish generations
• Maximize the average annual catch over 10 years, subject to meeting the four objectives above

Reference Points:

• Upper Stock Reference Point: 0.8B_MSY
• Limit Reference Point: 0.4B_MSY
• Target Reference Point: B_MSY or 0.8B_MSY (when rebuilding from the Cautious Zone)

Harvest Strategy:

A fully specified harvest strategy that has been tested via MSE. Operating models for the MSE continue to be updated, most recently in 2019, to account for new data.

Specifications:

• Type: Model-based
• Management cycle: Annual
• Data inputs: SSPM assessment model; catch data and three indices of abundance
• Management output: Quota
• Harvest Control Rule: A harvest control rule in which the harvest rate on legal-sized sablefish is reduced linearly from U_MSY (maximum sustainable yield) when the estimated stock is above 0.6B_MSY, to zero when the estimated stock size is less than 0.4B_MSY

Outcome:

The most recent update to the sablefish operating models (OMs) occurred in 2022; at this time, it was determined that the stock was above the target biomass of B_MSY (i.e., not overfished) and below the associated harvest rate, U_MSY (i.e., not undergoing overfishing). Following the rules of the adopted MP, the TAC for the 2024-2045 fishing year remained the same as the previous year (3,029 tonnes) and will be re-evaluated in 2025. The next OM revision will occur between 2026 and 2028.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Integrated fisheries management plan summary: Groundfish – Pacific Region, 2025

Stock Status and Management Procedure Performance for the BC Sablefsh (Anoplopoma fimbria) Fishery for 2022/23

Application of the British Columbia Sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria) management procedure for the 2024-25 fishing year

Management Objectives:

Per New Zealand’s Harvest Strategy Standard:

• Achieve the MSY-compatible target or better with at least 50% likelihood
• Limit the risk of breaching the soft limit to no more than 10%
• Limit the risk of breaching the hard limit to no more than 2%

Reference Points:

CPA 7:

Target reference point: CPUE = 1.75 kg/potlift

Soft limit point: CPUE = 1.0 kg/potlift

Hard limit point (TACC = 0): CPUE = 0.17 kg/potlift

If the CPUE is 0.17 kg/potlift or below, the TACC is zero; the TACC increases linearly with CPUE when CPUE is between 0.17 – 1.0 kg/potlift to a plateau of 80 tonnes, which extends to a CPUE of 1.75 kg/potlift; TACC increases linearly as CPUE increases above 1.75 kg/potlift.

CPA 8:

Target reference point: CPUE = 7.0 kg/potlift

Soft limit point: CPUE = 3.4 kg/potlift

Hard limit point (TACC = 0): CPUE = 0.5 kg/potlift

If the CPUEs between zero and 0.5 kg/potlift the TACC is zero; the TACC increases linearly with CPUE to 1251 tonnes at a CPUE of 3.4 kg/potlift; the TACC remains at 1251 tonnes until CPUE reaches 7.0 kg/potlift, and then increases by 5.5% for each CPUE step of 1.0 kg/potlift

Harvest Strategy:

Type: Empirical

Management Cycle: annual

Data inputs: CPUE

Management outputs: Total Allowable Commercial Catch (TACC)

Harvest control rule: CRA 7: generalized plateau slope rule; CRA 8: generalized plateau step rule

Other: CRA 7 has a 10% minimum change in TACC and a 50% maximum change in TACC; CRA 8 has a 5% minimum change in TACC and no maximum change limit

Outcome:

The commercial fishery for rock lobster in New Zealand is managed for nine Quota Management Areas (QMAs). Five of the QMAs historically had longstanding MPs in place (CRA 3, CRA 4, CRA 5, CRA 7, and CRA 8), but many of these MPs have been suspended due to data availability issues or have had their results rejected by managers within recent years. The CRA 7 QMA MP was reinstated for operation in 2023 for use in setting TACC in future years, and the MP for QMAs CRA 7 and CRA 8 were evaluated in 2024. The 2024 evaluation resulted in an increased total allowable commercial catch (TACC) in area CRA 7 and no change to the TACC in area CRA 8 for the 2025-2026 fishing year. The rock lobster stocks in CRA 7 and CRA 8, previously depleted, are now considered to be rebuilt due to management via MPs. The MP for CRA 7 will be evaluated again in 2026. A re-imagined MP for CRA 3 is potentially in development pending the results of the 2024 stock assessment.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

FAR 2025/19 Operational management procedures for New Zealand rock lobster (Jasus edwardsii) in CRA 7 and CRA 8 for 2025–26

Review of the NSS decision rule for stocks CRA 7 and CRA 8 and development of new operational management procedures

Management Objectives:

• SSB/SSB_MSY = 100%, with an acceptable level as low as 85%;
• Variation in annual yield is <10%, with an acceptable level as high as 25%;
• Probability of overfished 0%, with an acceptable level as high as 25%;
• Probability of herring fishery closure between 0-10%.

Reference Points:

Upper biomass parameter (overfished threshold): 50%SSB_MSY
Lower biomass parameter (closes fishery): 10%SSB_MSY
Maximum fishing mortality: 80%F_MSY

Harvest Strategy:

The measure includes only a harvest control rule as opposed to a full harvest strategy.

Specifications:

• Type: Model-based
• Management cycle: 3 years, but the quota may be different each year
• Data inputs: ASAP assessment model; catch data, research surveys of abundance, weights-at-age, recruitment estimates
• Management output: Quota
• Harvest control rule: When biomass is greater than 50% of SSB/SSB_MSY, the maximum
  fishing mortality allowed is 80% of F_MSY, so 20% of F_MSY is left for herring predators. As biomass declines further, fishing mortality declines linearly, and if biomass falls below 10% of SSB/SSB_MSY, the fishery closes

Outcome:

The MSE-tested HCR was implemented for the first time in 2019 and is still being used to determine the Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) and resulting Acceptable Catch Limit (ACL) for the fishery. The 2024 stock assessment determined SSB2023/SSBMSY to be around 26%, below the upper biomass parameter; the recommended fishing mortality based on the ABC control rule, therefore, remains low for 2025-2027 to promote rebuilding.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan 2025-2027 Specifications – New England Fishery Management Council

Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan Management Strategy Evaluation Debrief Final Report – New England Fishery Management Council

Management Objectives:

Considering the overarching objective of ensuring the sustainability of North Pacific albacore tuna and current fisheries supported by the stock in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, the following management objectives are established:

1. Maintain Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) above the Limit Reference Point (LRP), with a probability of at least 80% over the next 10 years.
2. Maintain depletion of total biomass around the historical (2006-2015) average depletion over the next 10 years.
3. Maintain fishing intensity (F) at or below the target reference point with a probability of at least 50% over the next 10 years.
4. To the extent practicable, management changes (e.g., catch and/or effort) should be relatively gradual between years.

Reference Points:

1. Target reference point (TRP) = F45%, which is the fishing intensity (F) level that results in the stock producing 45% of spawning potential ratio (SPR)
2. Threshold reference point (SSBthreshold) = 30%SSBcurrent, F=0, which is 30% of the dynamic unfished spawning stock biomass
3. Limit reference point (LRP) =14%SSBcurrent, F=0, which is 14% of the dynamic unfished spawning stock biomass.

Harvest Strategy:

A “hockey-stick,” model-based harvest control was adopted that decreases F from Ftarget once the spawning stock biomass drops below SSBthreshold toward the limit reference point, at which point the fishery is maintained at Fmin, a minimum allowed fishing intensity.

Outcome:

Although the management procedure was adopted, the RFMOs still need to adopt measures to relate fishing intensity to catch and/or effort for use in managing fishing activity

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Harvest Strategy for North Pacific Albacore Fishery | WCPFC

C-23-02_North Pacific albacore (iattc.org)

Management Objectives:

WCPFC Interim Management Objective:

• Safety: There should be a less than 20% probability of the stock falling below the limit reference point
• Status: To maintain fishing mortality at or below FTarget with at least 50% probability
• Stability: To limit changes in overall catch limits between management periods to no more than 25%, unless the ISC has assessed that the stock is below the limit reference point
• Yield: Maintain an equitable balance in proportional fishery impact between the WCPO and EPO
• Yield: To maximize yield over the medium (5-10 years) and long (10-30 years) terms, as well as average annual yield from the fishery
• Yield: To increase the average annual catch in all fisheries across WCPO and EPO

Reference Points:

• Candidate Target Reference Points: 20%FSPR, 25%FSPR, 30%FSPR, 40%FSPR
• Candidate Threshold Reference Points: 15%SSBF=0, 20%SSBF=0, 25%SSBF=0
• Candidate Limit Reference Points: 20%SSBF=0, 15%SSBF=0, 10%SSBF=0, 7.7%SSBF=0, Median SSB 1952-2014
• Candidate Fmin: F10%FTarget, F5%FTarget, 70%FSPR, 50%FSPR
• Initial Rebuilding Target: Historical median biomass (equivalent to 6.4%SSB0) by 2024 (Achieved)

Second Rebuilding Target: 20%SSBF=0 by 2034 (Achieved)

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Candidate Harvest Strategies: Model-based, sliding harvest control rules (two shapes) are being explored in the MSE work, with a view to develop a comprehensive harvest strategy. The HCRs are being tested with a limit that constraints changes in TAC between consecutive management periods of no more than 25%. The HCRs also are being tested with allocations tuned to reach the WCPO: EPO fishery impact ratio of 70:30 and 80:20.

Progress Update & Work Plan: Review of MSE results and adoption of management procedure scheduled for 2025.

Progress Update & Workplan:

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Annex G and H of the Chair’s Summary of the 8th Joint IATTC and WCPFC Northern Committee Working Group Meeting on the Management of Pacific Bluefin Tuna. Chairs’ Summary of the 8th Joint IATTC and WCPFC-NC Working Group Meeting on the Management of Pacific Bluefin Tuna | WCPFC Meetings

Management Objectives:

Tuning Objectives (for MSE purposes):

• Pr(B(2029)>=B(MSY) ) = 0.5 (SB in 2029 exceeds SB_MSY in exactly 50% of the simulations)
• Pr(B(2034)>=B(MSY) ) = 0.6 (SB in 2034 exceeds SB_MSY in exactly 60% of the simulations)

Reference Points:

• Interim Limit Reference Point: 40% B_MSY and 140% F_MSY
• Interim Target Reference Point: B_MSY and F_MSY

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Comprehensive harvest strategy proposed by Australia. MSE evaluating model-based HCRs with these candidate constraints:

• Total Allowable Catch (TAC) to be set every 3 years (and held constant between settings)
• A maximum of 15% change to the TAC (increase or decrease) relative to the previous TAC

Progress Update & Workplan:

• On hold pending the 2024 stock assessment to resolve modelling issues.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• IOTC Yellowfin Tuna Management Procedure (MP) Evaluation Update June 2021
• Resolution 15/10 on Target and Limit Reference Points and a Decision Framework
• Proposal on a Management Procedure for Yellowfin Tuna in the IOTC Area of Competence: Proposed by Australia

Management Objectives:

Tuning Objectives (for MSE purposes):

• Pr(mean(SB(2019:2038)>=SB(MSY)) = 0.5. Average SB over the period 2030-2034 exceeds SB_MSYin exactly 50% of the simulations)
• Pr(Kobe green zone 2019:2038) = 0.5. The stock status is in the Kobe green quadrant over the period 2019-2038 exactly 50% of the time (averaged over all simulations)
• Pr(Kobe green zone 2019:2038) = 0.6. The stock status is in the Kobe green quadrant over the period 2019-2038 exactly 60% of the time (averaged over all simulations)
• Pr(Kobe green zone 2019:2038) = 0.7. The stock status is in the Kobe green quadrant over the period 2019-2038 exactly 70% of the time (averaged over all simulations)

Reference Points:

Interim Limit Reference Point: 40% B_MSY and 140% F_MSY
Interim Target Reference Point: B_MSY and F_MSY

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Model-based. Development of ABC approach (Approximate Bayesian Computation) underway. Testing of candidate harvest strategies to being in 2024-2025.

Tested with the following constraints:

• Total Allowable Catch (TAC) to be set every 3 years (and held constant between settings)
• A maximum of 15% change to the TAC (increase or decrease) relative to the previous TAC

Progress Update & Workplan:

Evaluation of candidate harvest strategies underway via MSE.

• 2024-2025: Finalization of ABC Modelling approach
• 2025-2026: Evaluation of candidate harvest strategies underway via MSE. Refine and further develop MSE and candidate harvest strategies. Adopt final harvest strategy.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Conditioning IOTC Albacore OMs using the ABC approach (2024)(https://iotc.org/documents/conditioning-iotc-albacore-oms-using-abc-approach)Updates on development of MSE analyses for Indian Ocean albacore tuna (2023) (https://iotc.org/documents/TCMP/06/10E)
• Resolution 15/10 on Target and Limit Reference Points and a Decision Framework (https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-1510-target-and-limit-reference-points-and-decision-framework)

Management Objectives:

Management Objectives:

• There is a 60 probability that the swordfish spawning stock biomass achieves the target reference point of SBMSY1 the maximum change in the TAC shall be a 15% increase and 10% decrease relative to the previous TAC by 2034-2038;
• the swordfish spawning stock biomass avoids breaching the interim limit reference point specified in Resolution 15/10 with a high probability;

Reference Points:

• Interim Limit Reference Point: 40% B_MSY and 140% F_MSY
• Interim Target Reference Point: B_MSY and F_MSY

Harvest Strategy:

Adopted in 2024, IOTC adopted a fully specified harvest strategy.

Specifications:

• Type: Empirical
• Management cycle: 3 years
• Data Inputs: Japan longline CPUE from 1994 onwards
• Management output: TAC scalar
• Harvest Control Rule: TAC change using the slope of the of the CPUE and the distance to a target CPUE (Figure 1).

If the recent CPUE is above the target CPUE and the CPUE trend is increasing, then the TAC is increased.

If the current CPUE is below the target CPUE and the CPUE trend is decreasing, then the TAC is decreased.

If the current CPUE relative to the target and the CPUE slope are in opposite directions, the TAC change could be in either direction, depending on the magnitude of these indicators, and the associated control parameters.

Formally, the future TAC is calculated as a proportion, 𝑇𝐴𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡, of the current TAC, which is defined as:

𝑇𝐴𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 = 1 + 𝑘𝑎𝑆𝑙 + 𝑘𝑏𝐷

Where 𝑆𝑙 is the slope of the log CPUE over the last 5 years, 𝐷 is the difference between recent CPUE value (average over the last 3 years) and the target CPUE value (i.e. recent CPUE – target CPUE), and 𝑘𝑎 and 𝑘𝑏 are responsiveness parameters, where

𝑘𝑎 = 2.1

𝑘𝑏 = 1.2

Target CPUE = 0.7125

Other: the maximum change in the TAC shall be a 15% increase and 10% decrease relative to the previous TAC.

Outcome:

Progress Update & Workplan: The MP was adopted in 2024, and an implementation plan will be developed in 2025.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Navigate to Resolution 24/08 to view the management procedure for swordfish in the IOTC area of competence https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-2408-management-procedure-swordfish-iotc-area-competence

Management Objectives:

General: Maintain the stock biomass in the green zone of the Kobe plot (not overfished and not subject to overfishing) while maximizing the average catch from the fishery and reducing the variation in the total allowable catch (TAC) between management periods.

• The bigeye tuna spawning stock has a 60% probability of achieving the target reference point of SBMSY by 2034-2038;
• The bigeye tuna spawning stock biomass avoids breaching the interim limit reference point of 50%BMSY with a high probability.

Reference Points:

• Interim Limit Reference Point: 50% B_MSY and 130% F_MSY
• Interim Target Reference Point: B_MSY and F_MSY

Harvest Strategy:

Adopted in 2022, IOTC adopted a fully specified harvest strategy. An exceptional circumstances protocol still needs to be specified.

Specifications:

• Type: Model-based
• Management cycle: 3 years
• Data inputs: Total catches of bigeye tuna, longline CPUE data
• Management output: Quota
• Harvest control rule:
  The MP uses a hockey-stick HCR that constructs a harvest rate based on biomass depletion (measured relative to carrying capacity) from a simple biomass dynamic model. The pivot points are at 40% and 10% of carrying capacity, with the HCR multiplier linearly decreasing from 1 to almost zero between those pivot points.
• Other:
  Maximum quota change: +/- 15%

Outcome:

The harvest strategy-derived TAC will first be implemented in 2024. A mechanism to control catch will be developed in 2025 if an allocation scheme has not yet been agreed.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Conservation and Management Measures Adopted by the IOTC at Its 26th Session: (https://iotc.org/documents/conservation-and-management-measures-adopted-iotc-its-26th-session) Navigate to Resolution 22/03 to view the ‘Management Procedure for Bigeye Tuna in the IOTC Area of Competence’
• Bigeye Tuna Management Procedure for Adoption: (https://iotc.org/documents/bigeye-tuna-management-procedure-adoption) A summary outlining the final two harvest strategies considered for adoption. MP1_Harvest is the one that was eventually adopted.

Management Objectives:

Management Objectives:

• Stock Status – 60% PGK
• Safety – 15% probability of falling below Blim during 30 year period.
• Yield – Maximized
• Stability – TAC changes to be minimized

Reference Points:

• Interim Limit Reference Point: 0.4B_MSY

Harvest Strategy:

MC11

Outcome:

Exceptional circumstances to be adopted in 2025.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

https://www.iccat.int/com2024/ENG/PA4_810B_ENG.pdf

Management Objectives:

• Greater than 60% probability of occurring in the green quadrant of the Kobe matrix
• Less than 15% probability of the stock falling below B_LIM
• Maximize overall catch levels
• Any increase or decrease in TAC between management periods should be less than +20% and -35% respectively*

*An exception will be made during the first application of the harvest strategy, during which changes in TAC shall not exceed a +20% increase or -10% decrease.

Reference Points:

• Interim Target Reference Point: Dynamic SSB_MSY
• Interim Biomass Limit Reference Point: 40% dynamic SSB_MSY

Harvest Strategy:

In 2022, ICCAT successfully adopted a harvest strategy for Atlantic bluefin tuna. The harvest strategy is comprehensive for the West and East & Mediterranean Sea stocks.

Specifications:

• Type: Empirical
• Management cycle: 3 years
• Data inputs: Inputs are 10 fishery-dependent and fishery-independent indices of abundance covering the western and eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea.
• Management output: Quota
• Harvest control rule: The indices are aggregated to produce master abundance indices for West and East and smoothed over years to reduce observation error and variability effects. Quotas are then set based on the concept of taking a fixed proportion of the abundance present, using relative harvest rates compared to a reference year (2017), as indicated by these aggregated and smoothed indices.
• Other:
  Maximum quota change: +20%/-35%

Outcome:

The MSE process began in 2014. The MSE framework was finalized in 2022 and harvest strategy adopted in November 2022. The performance will be evaluated in year 2028.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Harvest Strategy – Official Recommendation: The full recommendation adopted at the ICCAT 2022 commission meeting.
• Atlantic Bluefin Tuna MSE – Background & Structure: Describes core concepts and provides an overview of the MSE
• Atlantic Bluefin Tuna MSE – Results, Decisions, & Next Steps: Includes recent results on candidate harvest strategy performance given MSE updates
• Atlantic Bluefin Tuna MSE Shiny App: Interactive demo where users can select different set of operating models to compare performance among candidate harvest strategies

Management Objectives:

Objective:

1. The objective of the interim Management Procedure (MP) for skipjack tuna, is to ensure that:

a) the spawning potential depletion ratio of skipjack tuna is maintained on average at a level consistent with the target reference point;

b) the spawning potential depletion ratio of skipjack tuna is maintained above the limit reference point with a risk of the limit reference point being breached no greater than 20 percent;

Performance Indicators:

• Maintain SKJ, YFT, BET biomass at or above levels that provide fishery sustainability throughout their range.
• Maximise economic yield from the fishery (average expected catch).
• Maintain acceptable CPUE.
• Catch stability.
• Effort stability: effort variation relative to a reference period.
• Proximity of SB/SB_F=0 to the average SB/SB_F=0 in 2018-21.

Reference Points:

a) Target reference point: Calculated on the basis of two spawning potential depletion values:

• The first value represents the estimated average depletion of the skipjack tuna stock over the period 2018-2021 (SB_2018-2021/SB_F=0).
• The second value represents the long-term median equilibrium stock depletion that would be reached under the agreed baseline fishing conditions for skipjack tuna (purse seine effort at 2012 levels, pole and line effort at average 2001-04 levels, and the domestic fisheries in assessment region 5 at average 2016-18 levels).

Both values are expressed as a percentage of the estimated average spawning potential in the absence of fishing (SB_F=0), calculated as described in paragraph 3. Values are calculated as medians based upon the grid of assessment models as agreed by the WCPFC Scientific Committee.

The target reference point is the average of these two values (weighting of 50/50). This was estimated from the 2022 WCPO skipjack tuna stock assessment at 50 per cent of SBF=0*.

b) Limit reference point: 20 percent of the estimated recent average spawning potential in the absence of fishing, calculated as described in paragraph 3.

*SBF=0 = spawning stock size that would exist in the absence of fishing

Harvest Strategy:

While the harvest strategy was officially adopted in December 2022, it is not yet legally binding. The harvest strategy will guide rather than direct fishing activity for WCPO skipjack tuna during an unspecified trial period.

Specifications:

• Type: Model-based
• Management cycle: 3 years
• Data inputs: Stock assessment estimates of spawning potential depletion ratio for the latest estimation year (SB_latest/SB_{F=0, t1-t2}), Stock assessment estimates of current stock biomass (B_curr) with respect to B_MSY, stock biomass at maximum sustainable yield (B_MSY), fishing mortality at MSY (F_MSY)
• Management output: Effort
• Harvest control rule:
  The HCR is a scalar (multiplier) that adjusts future catch or effort relative to a baseline of 2012 values.
• If SB/SB_F=0>0.8, output multiplier = 1.4 (alt. 1.2)
• If 0.47<SB/SB_F=0<0.8, reduce effort linearly as specified in HCR
• If 0.37<SB/SB_F=0<0.47, output multiplier = 1
• If 0.2<SB/SB_F=0<0.37, reduce effort nonlinearly as specified in HCR
• If SB/SB_F=0<0.2 (the limit), output multiplier 0.2
• Other:Maximum effort change: +/-10% for any 3-year management cycle, relative to catch and effort specified by the HCR for the previous 3-year period.

Outcome:

Adopted in 2022, the performance of the harvest strategy will be reviewed in year 2025.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Conservation and Management Measure on a Management Procedure for WCPO Skipjack Tuna
• Performance Indicators and Management Procedures Explorer (PIMPLE): A shiny app where a user can explore and compare the performance of alternative candidate harvest strategies

Management Objectives:

Interim Objective:

• Achieve an 8% increase in catch per unit of effort (CPUE) for the southern longline fishery as compared to 2013 levels

Draft performance indicators:

• Maintain biomass at or above levels that provide fishery sustainability throughout their range
• Maximise economic yield from the fishery (average expected catch)
• Maintain acceptable CPUE
• Catch stability

Reference Points:

• Interim Limit Reference Point: 20%SB_F=0 and FX%SPR, with X TBD
• Interim Target Reference Point: 56% SB_F=0

_{*SBF=0 = spawning stock size that would exist in the absence of fishing}

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Using MSE to evaluate several harvest strategies with model-based and empirical harvest control rules using CPUE data; HS must have <20% chance of breaching the limit reference point

Progress Update & Workplan:

Evaluation of candidate harvest strategies underway via MSE

• 2020-22: Refine and further develop MSE and candidate harvest strategies
• 2023: Adopt final harvest strategy

South Pacific albacore is also being incorporated in the mixed fishery MSE framework for the Western and Central Pacific in which the harvest strategies for bigeye, skipjack, yellowfin, and South Pacific albacore will overlap.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• WCPFC Harvest Strategies: Navigate to ‘South Pacific albacore tuna in the WCPO’ to read an overview of the current work going towards the harvest strategy
• South Pacific Albacore Management Procedures Explorer (SPAMPLE): A shiny app where a user can compare the relative performance of South Pacific albacore HCRs

Management Objectives:

In development and not officially adopted, but often assumed to be B_MSY based on Article VII(1)c of the Antigua Convention.

Reference Points:

Reference points being developed as part of current MSE process.

• Interim Limit Reference Point: F_0.5R0 and SSB_0.5R0, where steepness = 0.75 (this is equivalent to 8%SSB₀)
• Interim Target Reference Point:F_MSY, SSB_MSY

_{*SSB0 = spawning stock size that would exist in the absence of fishing
*R0 = recruitment (i.e., number of young fish) that would exist in the absence of fishing
*steepness – the fraction of virgin recruitment obtained when a stock is at 20% of its unfished size. A steepness of 0.75 indicates that a stock is productive enough to still produce 75% of its maximum reproductive output, even when it is depleted to just 20% of its initial population size.}

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Candidate model-based harvest strategies are being developed as part of current MSE process.

Current interim HCR developed without MSE testing:

• F should not exceed F_MSY
• If >10% chance that F>F_limit, reduce F to ≤F_MSY with a 50% probability and a <10% chance of F>F_limit
• If >10% chance that SSB<SSB_limit, take action to get SSB≥SSB_MSY with a 50% probability and a <10% chance of SSB<SSB_limit within 2 generations or 5 years, whichever is greater

Progress Update & Workplan:

• 2020-23: MSE framework development and refinement; testing of candidate harvest strategies
• 2024: Finalize MSE; adopt HCR/HS

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Resolution C-16-02: Harvest Control Rules for Tropical Tunas (Yellowfin, Bigeye, and Skipjack)
• 1st Workshop on Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) for tropical tunas report
• 2^ndWorkshop on Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) for tropical tunas report
• Example Toy Management Strategy Evaluation for Bigeye Tuna: A shiny app where users can explore the performance of candidate HCRs

Management Objectives:

• Maintain Pacific halibut, on average, at a target (fixed or dynamic) female spawning biomass equal to the stock size required to produce maximum net economic returns on a spatial and temporal scale relevant to the fishery
• Maintain Pacific halibut, above a female spawning biomass limit where the risk to the stock is regarded as unacceptable (SB_LIM), at least 90% of the time

Reference Points:

• Target Reference Point: 45% SSB₀ and 120%SSB_MSY
• Interim Trigger Reference Point: 30% SSB₀
• Interim Limit Reference Point: 20% SSB₀and 50%SSB_MSY

^{*SSB0 = spawning stock size that would exist in the absence of fishing}

Harvest Strategy:

Using MSE to evaluate several model-based harvest strategies; HS must have ≥ 50% chance of achieving the target and ≤10% chance of breaching the limit

Interim harvest control rule:

• The harvest control rules relies on the spawning potential ratio (SPR) of 46% (F_SPR=46%). The SPR is adjusted to reduce the fishing intensity at low levels of spawning biomass by linearly increasing the SPR (i.e reducing the fishing intensity) if the estimated stock status is less than a trigger at 30% SSB₀, to zero fishing intensity (SPR=100%) when the estimated stock status is less than the limit at 20% SSB₀(i.e., a 30:20 control rule).

^{*SPR = Spawning Potential Ratio, or the lifetime spawning output that a young fish is expected to produce under current fishing mortality compared to what it would produce in the absence of fishing.}

Outcome:

Interim harvest strategy in place since 2020 to set the allowable coastwide catch, but adoption of a final, formal harvest strategy has yet to occur, in part due to ongoing negotiations about how to allocate the catch among Alaska, Canada, and the U.S. West Coast. Final mortality limits are determined based on the previous year’s limits, the interim harvest strategy, and social and economic considerations. MSE development continues and is exploring size limits and stock assessment frequency as part of the harvest strategy.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Interim International Pacific Halibut Commission Harvest Strategy Policy: Includes harvest strategy policies from both 2019 and 2020
• Pacific halibut MSE landing page

Management Objectives:

Aiming at ensuring harvest rates within safe biological limits, and consistent with the precautionary approach* and the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) approach.

^{*ensure with a high probability (95%) that the size of the stock is maintained above Blim}

Reference Points:

• Interim Target Fishing Mortality Reference Point: F_mgt (0.14F) / F_MSY (0.157F)
• Interim Biomass Trigger Reference Points: B_pa/MSY B_trigger (3,184,000 tonnes)
• Interim Limit Reference Points: F_lim (0.291F) and B_lim (2,500,000 tonnes)

^{*Bpa = A stock size above which the stock is considered to have full reproductive capacity. Pa stands for precautionary approach.}

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

A few harvest control rule (HCR) options were explored by ICES (2018). A HCR and Reference Points were adopted that set a total allowable catch (TAC) when biomass is above/below biological reference points (B_pa, B_lim, etc.)

• If SSB≥B_pa, the TAC shall be fixed to a fishing mortality of F_mgt.
• Maximum TAC change: +25%, -20%
• If B_lim<SSB<B_pa, the TAC shall be fixed at a level that is consistent with a fishing mortality given by: Target F = 0.05 + [(SSB – B_lim)*(F_mgt – 0.05) / (B_pa– B_lim)]
• If SSB<B_lim, the TAC will be fixed corresponding to a fishing mortality F=0.05.

Noted Constraints:

• There are mechanisms for banking up to 10% of unutilized quota and borrowing up to 10% beyond the quota allocated subject to stock status.
• Development of only an HCR, as opposed to a full harvest strategy.

Progress Update & Workplan:

• 2022: The HCR based on ICES evaluation (2018) has been in place since 2019 and should be reviewed after 5 years (no later than December 2023).
• 2022: The interim long-term management strategy may no longer be precautionary in the long term. There have been consistent deviations from the HCR (overshooting catch advice) due to an allocation dispute. During the evaluation of the management strategy, the implementation error in the form of a consistent overshoot of the TAC was not included.
• 2023: NEAFC Coastal States to refine and further develop management strategy evaluation (MSE) and candidate harvest control rules in collaboration with ICES
• 2025/2026: Adopt a full harvest strategy or updated harvest control rule.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Agreed record of conclusions of fisheries consultations between Iceland, the European Union, the Faroe Islands, Norway and the Russian Federation on the management of the Norwegian spring-spawning (Atlanto-Scandian) herring stock in the North-East Atlantic in 2019: Long-Term Management Strategy (2018):
• Report of the Workshop on a long-term management strategy for Norwegian Spring-s​pawning herring​ (WKNSSHMSE​): Long-Term Management Strategy Evaluation – ICES (2018):
• NEAFC request concerning long-term management strategy for herring in the Northeast Atlantic (Norwegian spring-spawning herring): Long-Term Management Strategy Evaluation Summary Advice – ICES (2018):

Management Objectives:

Aiming at ensuring harvest rates within safe biological limits, and consistent with the precautionary approach* and the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) approach.

^{*ensure with a high probability (95%) that the size of the stock is maintained above Blim}

Reference Points:

• Interim Target Fishing Mortality Reference Point: F_MSY(0.32F)
• Interim Biomass Trigger Reference Point: B_pa/MSY B_trigger(2,250,000 tonnes)
• Interim Biomass Limit Reference Point: B_lim(1,500,000 tonnes)

^{*Bpa = A stock size above which the stock is considered to have full reproductive capacity. Pa stands for precautionary approach.}

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

An interim harvest control rule (HCR) has previously been explored by ICES that sets a total allowable catch (TAC) when biomass is above/below biological reference points (B_pa,B_lim, etc.)

• If SSB≥B_pa, the TAC shall be fixed to a fishing mortality of F_MSY
• Maximum TAC change: +/- 20%
• If B_lim<SSB<B_pa, the TAC shall be fixed that is consistent with a fishing mortality given by the following formula: Target F = 0.05 + [(SSB – B_lim)*(F_MSY – 0.05) / (B_pa– B_lim)]
• If SSB<B_lim, the TAC will be fixed corresponding to a fishing mortality F=0.05

Noted Constraints:

• There are mechanisms for banking up to 10% of unutilized quota and borrowing up to 10% beyond the quota allocated subject to stock status.
• The HCR since 2017 has an annual TAC change rule different from the one evaluated: Maximum TAC change: +25%, -20%
• Development of only an HCR, as opposed to a full harvest strategy.

Progress Update & Workplan:

• 2021: The HCR based on ICES evaluation (2016) has been in place since 2017 and should have been reviewed after 5 years (no later than December 2021).
• 2021: The interim long-term management strategy may no longer be precautionary in the long term. There have been consistent deviations from the HCR (overshooting catch advice) due to an allocation dispute. During the evaluation of the management strategy, the implementation error in the form of a consistent overshoot of the TAC was not included.
• 2025/2026: Refine and further develop management strategy evaluation (MSE) and candidate harvest control rules in collaboration with ICES.
• 2026/2027: Adopt a full harvest strategy or updated harvest control rule.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Agreed record of conclusions of fisheries consultations between the European Union, the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Norway on the management of blue whiting in the north-east Atlantic in 2017: Long-Term Management Strategy (2016)
• Report of the Workshop on Blue Whiting Long Term Management Strategy Evaluation (WKBWMS): Long-Term Management Strategy Evaluation – ICES (2016)
• NEAFC request to ICES to evaluate a long-term management strategy for the fisheries on the blue whiting stock: Long-Term Management Strategy Evaluation Summary Advice – ICES (2016):

Management Objectives:

Conceptual Management Objectives:

• Stock Status – 60% PGK over mid-term (4-10 years) using 30 year period
• Safety – 10% probability of falling below Blim during 30 year period.
• Yield – Maximized
• Stability – TAC changes should be 25% or less.

Reference Points:

Limit Reference Points: SSB&lt;0.4*SSBMSY

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

To be retuned to 60% PGK in 2025.

Progress Update & Workplan:

In addition to the retuning, the candidate management procedures will also undergo climate robustness tests.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

https://www.iccat.int/com2024/ENG/PA1_511A_ENG.pdf.pdf

Management Objectives:

Initial proposals for the Southern longline, tropical longline, and tropical purse seine fishery include biological, economic, social, and ecosystem objectives.

Reference Points:

• Limit Reference Point: 20%SB_F=0
• Target Reference Point: Pending agreement on a target reference point the spawning biomass depletion ratio (SB/SB_F=0) is to be maintained at or above the average SB/SB_F=0 for 2012-2015

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Evaluating a harvest control rule and harvest strategy through a mixed fishey modelling framework that develops model-based harvest strategies for bigeye, but is set up to achieve objectives across multiple species, including yellowfin, skipjack, and South Pacific albacore.

Progress Update & Workplan:

Initial mixed fishery framework explored via MSE; Next steps include operating model conditioning, the development of candidate management procedures for bigeye for the tropical longline fishery, and the development of mixed fishery, multi-species performance indicators. Input needed from managers on management objectives and target reference points.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• WCPFC Harvest Strategies: Navigate to ‘Bigeye and Yellowfin Tunas in the WCPO’ to read an overview of the current work going towards the harvest strategy
• Indicative Work Plan for the Adoption of Harvest Strategies Under CMM 2022-03
• Candidate performance indicators and monitoring strategies commensurate with candidate management objectives for southern longline fishery and tropical longline fisheries
• Updated WCPO bigeye and yellowfin target reference point evaluations
• Mixed-fishery harvest strategy developments: Updates on mixed fishery modelling framework for South Pacific albacore, bigeye, and skipjack

Management Objectives:

Initial proposals for the Southern longline, tropical longline, and tropical purse seine fishery include biological, economic, social, and ecosystem objectives.

Reference Points:

• Limit reference point: 20%SBF=0.
• Target Reference Point: Pending agreement on a target reference point for the spawning biomass depletion ratio (SB/SBF=0) is to be maintained at or above the average SB/SBF=0 for 2012-2015.

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Evaluating a harvest control rule and harvest strategy through a mixed fishery modelling framework. Under this framework, fisheries are managed through single stock management procedures for skipjack, South Pacific albacore and bigeye. Under this approach, there is no single stock management procedure for yellowfin. The impact of the skipjack, South Pacific albacore, and bigeye management procedures on yellowfin would then be evaluated using a combined evaluation framework to identify whether the mixed fishery framework can simultaneously achieve management objectives for the stocks.

Progress Update & Workplan:

Initial mixed fishery framework explored via MSE; The next steps include operating model conditioning, the candidate management procedures for the tropical longline fishery, and the development of multi-species performance indicators. Input is needed from managers on management objectives and target reference points.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• WCPFC Harvest Strategies: Navigate to ‘Bigeye and Yellowfin Tunas in the WCPO’ to read an overview of the current work going towards the harvest strategy
• Indicative Work Plan for the Adoption of Harvest Strategies Under CMM 2022-03

• Candidate performance indicators and monitoring strategies commensurate with candidate management objectives for southern longline fishery and tropical longline fisheries
• Updated WCPO bigeye and yellowfin target reference point evaluations
• Mixed fishery harvest strategy update | WCPFC

Management Objectives:

Interim Management Objectives:

1). Recovery of the stock (prioritized objective):

1. The stock biomass is rebuilt to Btar within 5 years with 50% probability;
2. The stock biomass is maintained above the Btar level in each of years 6-10 with 50% probability

2). Avoiding the unsustainable state of the stock (secondary objective):

1. The annual probability in each of years 6-10 that the stock drops below Blim should not exceed 10%;
2. The annual probability in each of years 6-10 that fishing mortality is above Flim should not exceed 10%

3). Achieving high and stable catch (tertiary objective):

1. The average catch over the years 6-10 is as high as possible;
2. Catch in each of years 6-10 is as stable as possible.

Reference Points:

Interim Biological Reference Points:

Btar = B_MSY

Blim = 0.35B_MSY

Ftar = F_MSY

Flim = 1.35 FMSY

Harvest Strategy:

A “hockey stick” harvest control rule reduces fishing intensity as the stock declines below the target reference point at BMSY. Maximum allowable change of the annual catch level in the entire area is restricted to 10%.

Outcome:

Objectives and components of an MSE-tested Management Procedure are to be developed. CMM 2024-08 states: “The SWG MSE PS shall endeavor to consider the establishment of a management procedure to be formulated through an MSE process by the 11th Commission Meeting in 2027.”

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Conservation and Management Measure (2024-08) For Pacific Saury: CMM 2024-08 For Pacific Saury (Effective date: 15 May 2024) | NPFC

Management Objectives:

• Maximum long-term yield
• A maximum annual probability of SSB falling below the limit reference point is less than 5% for all years.

Reference Points:

• Fishing mortality target = F_MSY(0.26F)
• Bpa (MSY Biomass trigger value) = 2.58 metric tons
• Biomass limit reference point = 2.00 metric tons

^{*Bpa: biomass below which action should be taken, (pa= precautionary approach)}

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Explored 5 harvest control rules that derive a target fishing mortality based on spawning stock biomass, including combinations of limitations on interannual variability in total allowable catch (aka stability), and various catch banking and borrowing schemes (e.g 10% banking of total allowable catch and 10% borrowing applied in alternate years, suspended when SSB is below the biomass trigger value)

Progress Update & Workplan:

Full MSE completed by ICES in 2020, but no decision taken by Coastal States of NEAFC on a final management strategy. Coastal States of NEAFC are considering an updated to the MSE in 2025.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

• Workshop on Management Strategy Evaluation of Mackerel (WKMSEMAC): Long-Term Management Strategy Evaluation – ICES (2020):
• EU, Norway, and the Faroe Islands request on the long-term management strategies for Northeast Atlantic mackerel (full feedback approach): Long-Term Management Strategy Evaluation Summary Advice – ICES (2020)

Management Objectives:

TBD

Reference Points:

TBD

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

TBD

Progress Update & Workplan:

2025: SCRS to determine feasibility and costs of an MSE framework. The Commission to discuss operational management objectives and performance indicators.

2026: Test candidate management procedures (CMPs) in consultation with SCRS and the Commission

2027: Adopt MP

2028: Exceptional Circumstances Protocol

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Proposed Roadmap for the ICCAT Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) for Blue Shark

Management Objectives:

TBD

Reference Points:

TBD

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

TBD

Progress Update & Workplan:

2025: SCRS to determine feasibility and costs of an MSE framework. The Commission to discuss operational management objectives and performance indicators.

2026: Test candidate management procedures (CMPs) in consultation with SCRS and the Commission

2027: Adopt MP

2028: Exceptional Circumstances Protocol

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Proposed Roadmap for the ICCAT Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) for Blue Shark

Management Objectives:

• Stock Status – 50% PGK
• Safety – 15% probability of falling below Blim
• Yield – Maximized
• Stability – TAC changes should be 25% or less.

Reference Points:

Limit Reference Points: 0.4*BMSY

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

Candidate Harvest Strategy: TBD

Progress Update & Workplan:

Progress Update & Work Plan:

2025- Stock assessment for BET and further develop MSE

2026 – Test candidate management procedures and adopt an MP

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Draft Resolution by ICCAT on interim operational management objectives for Atlantic bigeye tuna, yellowfin tuna, and the eastern stock of skipjack tuna

Management Objectives:

• Stock Status – 60% PGK over 30 year period
• Safety – 15% probability of falling below Blim during 30 year period.
• Yield – Maximized
• Stability – TAC changes should be 20% or less.

Reference Points:

Limit Reference Points: The SCRS should use 40% of the spawning stock biomass at Maximum Sustainable Yield as the interim BLIM for southern Atlantic albacore tuna, or advise on a different value, if appropriate.

Candidate Harvest Strategies:

TBD

Progress Update & Workplan:

Progress Update & Work Plan: Draft South Albacore MSE Roadmap

2025 – 2026: Stock assessment and MSE framework development

2027: Test candidate management procedures (CMPs)

2028: Finalize CMPS

2029: Adopt MP and the exceptional circumstances protocol.

Link to relevant policy document or update:

Draft Resolution by ICCAT on the development of initial operational management objectives for southern Atlantic albacore