UBC Faculty Research and Publications

Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings : Extended Abstracts Steenbeek, Jeroen; Piroddi, Chiara; Coll, Marta; Heymans, Johanna J.; Villasante, Sebastian; Christensen, Villy 2014

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
52383-Steenbeek_J_et_al_Ecopath_30_years_conference.pdf [ 6.61MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 52383-1.0354312.json
JSON-LD: 52383-1.0354312-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 52383-1.0354312-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 52383-1.0354312-rdf.json
Turtle: 52383-1.0354312-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 52383-1.0354312-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 52383-1.0354312-source.json
Full Text
52383-1.0354312-fulltext.txt
Citation
52383-1.0354312.ris

Full Text

ISSN 1198-6727  ECOPATH 30 YEARS EXTENDED ABSTRACTS       Fisheries Centre Research Reports 2014 Volume 22 Number 3        ISSN 1198-6727  Fisheries Centre Research Reports    2014 Volume 22 Number 3     Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts      Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Canada   Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts     Edited by Jeroen Steenbeek Chiara Piroddi Marta Coll Johanna J. Heymans Sebastian Villasante Villy Christensen                 Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3) 235 pages © published 2014 by The Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia  2202 Main Mall Vancouver, B.C., Canada, V6T 1Z4       ISSN 1198-6727   Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3) 2014   ECOPATH 30 YEARS CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS: EXTENDED ABSTRACTS   edited by  Jeroen Steenbeek  Chiara Piroddi Marta Coll Johanna. J. Heymans Sebastian Villasante Villy Christensen    CONTENTS   Page  FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 WELCOME NOTE ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 THE ORGANIZING AND SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEES ...................................................................................................... 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................................................................. 4 ON BEING GREEN ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 VENUE AND INSTRUCTIONS .............................................................................................................................. 6 PROGRAM .............................................................................................................................................................. 7 KEYNOTE SPEAKERS ................................................................................................................................................ 12 SCIENTIFIC ADVICE FOR MANAGEMENT: ORAL PRESENTATIONS.............................................................................. 14 A european perspective on modelling to support  an ecosystem approach to management ..................... 14 Mackinson S ................................................................................................................................................. 14 Reducing Anthropogenic Impacts on Nigerian Costal Fisheries Resources ............................................... 15 Adebola TM, De Mutsert K ......................................................................................................................... 15 Dynamic Simulation Model of Illegal Fishing Gear Removals in the Danajon Bank, Central Philippines ........................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Bacalso RTM ................................................................................................................................................ 17 Wolff M ......................................................................................................................................................... 17 The impacts of changes in prawn trawling effort on trophic structure after establishment of a Marine Park ................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Fondo EN ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 Skilleter GA .................................................................................................................................................. 19 Chaloupka M ................................................................................................................................................ 19 Analyzing recovery in the main demersal stocks from southern chile in a multispecies context ............. 21 Giacaman-Smith J ....................................................................................................................................... 21 Neira S .......................................................................................................................................................... 21 Arancibia H .................................................................................................................................................. 21 Just a FAD? Potential ecological impacts of tuna purse seine fishing on Fish Attracting Devices in the western Pacific Ocean? .................................................................................................................................... 23 Griffiths SP ................................................................................................................................................... 23 Allain V, Nicol S, Hoyle S, Lawson T ......................................................................................................... 23   Diagnosis of the ecosystem impact of fishing and trophic interactions between fleets: a Mauritanian application ........................................................................................................................................................ 26 Meissa B ....................................................................................................................................................... 26 Gascuel D ..................................................................................................................................................... 26 Guénette S .................................................................................................................................................... 26 Towards ecosystem based management of the Azores marine resources ...................................................28 Morato T, Lemey E ......................................................................................................................................28 Heymans JJ .................................................................................................................................................28 Pitcher TJ .....................................................................................................................................................28 Potatoes of opportunity for fishing in the southern North Sea .................................................................... 29 Staebler M .................................................................................................................................................... 29 Kempf A ........................................................................................................................................................ 29 Temming A ................................................................................................................................................... 29 SCIENTIFIC ADVICE FOR MANAGEMENT: POSTER PRESENTATIONS .......................................................................... 31 Comparing the maximum sustainable yield of commercial stocks with the ecosystem sustainability of fishing................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Coll M ........................................................................................................................................................... 31 Steenbeek J .................................................................................................................................................. 31 Libralato S .................................................................................................................................................... 31 Loosening the corset: how real are wasp-waist ecosystems?  ...................................................................... 33 Bundy A ........................................................................................................................................................ 33 Guénette S .................................................................................................................................................... 33 How Fishing impacts Mediterranean marine ecosystems? An EcoTroph modeling approach ................. 35 Halouani G ................................................................................................................................................... 35 Gascuel D ..................................................................................................................................................... 35 Hattab T ....................................................................................................................................................... 35 Ben Rais Lasram F....................................................................................................................................... 35 Coll M ........................................................................................................................................................... 35 Tsagarakis K ................................................................................................................................................. 35 Piroddi C ...................................................................................................................................................... 35 Romdhane MS ............................................................................................................................................. 35 Le Loc’h F ..................................................................................................................................................... 36 Carrying capacity simulations as a tool for ecosystem-based management of a scallop aquaculture system ............................................................................................................................................................... 38 Kluger LC, Wolff M, Taylor MH ................................................................................................................. 38 A food web analysis of the Río de la Plata estuary and adjacent shelf ecosystem: trophic structure, biomass flows and the role of fisheries.......................................................................................................... 40 Lercari D ...................................................................................................................................................... 40 Horta S, Martínez G ................................................................................................................................... 40 Calliari D ..................................................................................................................................................... 40 Bergamino L ................................................................................................................................................ 40 Ecosystem model of the santos basin marine ecosystem, se brazil ............................................................. 42 Gasalla MA, Rodrigues AR, Pincinato RBM.............................................................................................. 42 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................... 42 Impact of commercial fisheries on the marine ecosystem within the German EEZ of the Western Baltic Sea ..................................................................................................................................................................... 44 Opitz S, Garilao C ........................................................................................................................................ 44 The A-lex project: Environmental effects of increased shipping in the Arctic- a case study for the Pechora Sea ...................................................................................................................................................... 46 Ramsvatn S, Larsen LH, Sagerup K ........................................................................................................... 46 Fisher’s consulting and biological evidence to probe loss of fish diversity in a tropical coastal lagoon ...48 Carvalho AR .................................................................................................................................................48 Angelini R .....................................................................................................................................................48 INFORMING AND PLANNING MARINE CONSERVATION: ORAL PRESENTATIONS....................................................... 50 Marine Protected Areas in the Haida Gwaii Ecosystem: Modelling and Policy Issues .............................. 50 Pitcher TJ, Kumar R, Varkey DA, Surma S, Lam ME .............................................................................. 50 Simulating the combined effect of El Nino and the ban of the industrial fishery on the Galapagos Marine Reserve – an exploratory analysis using EwE ............................................................................................... 51 Gascuel D ..................................................................................................................................................... 52   Guidetti P ..................................................................................................................................................... 52 Cappanera V ................................................................................................................................................. 52 Cattaneao-Vietti R ....................................................................................................................................... 52 Mangialajo L, Francour P ........................................................................................................................... 52 Keystone species: a restored and operational concept to inform marine biodiversity conservation ........ 54 Valls A ........................................................................................................................................................... 54 Coll M ........................................................................................................................................................... 54 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................... 54 Trade-offs between invertebrate fisheries catches and ecosystem impacts in coastal new zealand ......... 56 Eddy TD ........................................................................................................................................................ 56 Coll M ........................................................................................................................................................... 56 Fulton EA ..................................................................................................................................................... 56 Lotze HK ....................................................................................................................................................... 56 Modelling the Multispecies Fishery of Chwaka Bay, Zanzibar – Basis for Exploration of Use and Conservation Scenarios ................................................................................................................................... 58 Rehren J, Wolff M ....................................................................................................................................... 58 Modelling spatial effects of illegal fishing in the North Caspian Sea ecosystem ....................................... 60 Daskalov GM ............................................................................................................................................... 60 Abdoli A ....................................................................................................................................................... 60 Akhundov M................................................................................................................................................ 60 Annachariyeva J ......................................................................................................................................... 60 Isbekov K ..................................................................................................................................................... 60 Khodorevskaya R ........................................................................................................................................ 60 Kim Y ........................................................................................................................................................... 60 Mammadli T ................................................................................................................................................ 60 Morozov B ................................................................................................................................................... 60 Muradov O ................................................................................................................................................... 61 Shahifar R..................................................................................................................................................... 61 Deep-sea ecosystem model of the condor seamount .................................................................................... 63 Morato T, Giacomello E, Bon-de-Sousa J ................................................................................................. 63 Heymans JJ.................................................................................................................................................. 63 Menezes GM................................................................................................................................................. 63 Pitcher TJ ..................................................................................................................................................... 63 Implementing the Habitats Directive in Germany: case conventions versus Ecopath, Ecosim & Ecospace ...........................................................................................................................................................................64 Fretzer S .......................................................................................................................................................64 Effects of Marine Protected Areas and Fishing on Population Biomass of five species of Serranidae in La Paz Bay, Mexico: An Ecospace Study .............................................................................................................66 Gruner N ......................................................................................................................................................66 INFORMING AND PLANNING MARINE CONSERVATION: POSTER PRESENTATIONS .................................................. 68 New software plug-in to calculate biodiversity and conservation-based indicators from EwE food web models .............................................................................................................................................................. 68 Steenbeek J ................................................................................................................................................. 68 Towards a balance between complexity and feasibility in food-web models of Mediterranean coastal ecosystem: addressing uncertainty while accounting for data collection constraints................................ 70 Prato G .......................................................................................................................................................... 70 Gascuel D ..................................................................................................................................................... 70 Valls A ........................................................................................................................................................... 70 Francour P .................................................................................................................................................... 70 Using models to assess ecosystem indicators and define targets of the good environmental status ........ 72 Bourdaud P .................................................................................................................................................. 72 Gascuel D(2), Bentorcha A ........................................................................................................................... 72 Brin d’Amour A ............................................................................................................................................ 72 Analyzing the collapse and lack of recovery of two nototheniid stocks in the Antarctic Peninsula (Sub Area 48.1) .......................................................................................................................................................... 73 Arriagada A .................................................................................................................................................. 73 Neira S .......................................................................................................................................................... 73 Trophic models in the Southwestern Atlantic Ocean: evaluating structure and functioning of coastal ecosystem .......................................................................................................................................................... 75   Lercari D ....................................................................................................................................................... 75 Vögler R ........................................................................................................................................................ 75 Milessi AC, Jaureguizar A( .......................................................................................................................... 75 Velasco G ...................................................................................................................................................... 75 ECOSYSTEM EVOLUTION AND CHALLENGES FOR MANAGEMENT: ORAL PRESENTATIONS ......................................... 78 Conflicting objectives for ecosystem based fisheries management ............................................................. 78 Andersen KH................................................................................................................................................ 78 Beyond anecdotal information: the use of fishers´ knowledge to model fisheries.................................... 80 Bevilacqua AHV .......................................................................................................................................... 80 Carvalho AR, Lopes PFM ........................................................................................................................... 80 Ronaldo A .................................................................................................................................................... 80 The importance of locally specific data in Ecopath models .......................................................................... 83 Hernandez-Milian G ................................................................................................................................... 83 Reid D ........................................................................................................................................................... 83 Rogan E ........................................................................................................................................................ 83 A dynamic version of EcoTroph to assess changes in marine ecosystems - Application to the Bay of Biscay and Celtic sea case study ......................................................................................................................84 Bentorcha A, Gascuel D ..............................................................................................................................84 Colléter M .....................................................................................................................................................84 Gatty P ..........................................................................................................................................................84 Guénette S ....................................................................................................................................................84 Simulation of zebra mussel invasion and evaluation of impacts on the mille lacs lake, minnesota: an ecosystem model ..............................................................................................................................................86 Kumar R, Varkey D, Pitcher TJ ..................................................................................................................86 Whaling, primary productivity and the changing structure of the Southern Ocean food web  ................. 87 Surma S ........................................................................................................................................................ 87 Pakhomov EA .............................................................................................................................................. 87 Pitcher TJ ..................................................................................................................................................... 87 Regime shifts in the Northern Benguela, challenges for management .......................................................89 Heymans JJ .................................................................................................................................................89 Tomczak MT ................................................................................................................................................89 Niche construction theory and ecosystem stanza modelling: Northern BC Fisheries ............................... 91 Lam ME, Pitcher TJ .................................................................................................................................... 91 The relevance of cohesive structures in the self-organization of marine ecosystems ................................ 92 Zetina-Rejón MJ .......................................................................................................................................... 92 Abascal-Monroy IM, Hernández-Padilla JC, Del Monte-Luna P, López-Ibarra G, Arreguín-Sánchez F....................................................................................................................................................................... 92 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................... 92 A meta-analysis of ecosystems’ trophic functioning: identification of typical trophic behavior and associated responses to fishing impact .......................................................................................................... 94 Colléter M ..................................................................................................................................................... 94 Gascuel D ..................................................................................................................................................... 94 Pauly D ......................................................................................................................................................... 94 ECOSYSTEM EVOLUTION AND CHALLENGES FOR MANAGEMENT: POSTER PRESENTATIONS ..................................... 96 The use of Ecospace model as a simulation tool for fisheries management plans: case of the Gulf of Gabes ................................................................................................................................................................. 96 Abdou K ........................................................................................................................................................ 96 Halouani G ................................................................................................................................................... 96 Hattab T ....................................................................................................................................................... 96 Ben Rais Lasram F....................................................................................................................................... 96 Romdhane MS ............................................................................................................................................. 96 Le Loc’h F ..................................................................................................................................................... 96 Developing scientific capacities through international collaboration for ecosystem-based management of marine resources facing climate change: Mexico, Uruguay and Colombia ............................................ 99 Arreguín-Sánchez F ..................................................................................................................................... 99 Lercari-Bernier D ........................................................................................................................................ 99 Duarte LO ..................................................................................................................................................... 99 Zetina-Rejón MJ, Del Monte-Luna P ........................................................................................................ 99 Vögler-Santos RE, Calliari-Cuadro D ........................................................................................................ 99   Galván-Magaña F ........................................................................................................................................99 Nieto-Navarro JT( ........................................................................................................................................99 Escobar-Toledo FD ......................................................................................................................................99 Ecosystem changes and “ecosystem limit reference level” for sustainable fisheries: the Campeche Bank Mexico as study case ...................................................................................................................................... 102 Arreguín-Sánchez F, Del Monte-Luna P, Zetina-Rejón MJ ................................................................... 102 An ecosystem approach to the role of fish farming in coastal areas .......................................................... 104 Bayle-Sempere JT, Izquierdo-Gómez D .................................................................................................. 104 Arreguín-Sánchez F ................................................................................................................................... 104 Sánchez-Jerez P ......................................................................................................................................... 104 Wasp-waist control on food web of a tropical freshwater reservoir .......................................................... 106 Bezerra LAV, Sánchez-Botero JI .............................................................................................................. 106 Angelini R ................................................................................................................................................... 106 A comparative analysis on the ecosystem structure and functioning of four regional seas of Turkey (Black Sea, Marmara, Aegean and the Mediterranean) .............................................................................. 108 Gazihan Akoğlu A ...................................................................................................................................... 108 Salihoğlu B ................................................................................................................................................. 108 Akoğlu E ..................................................................................................................................................... 108 Oğuz T......................................................................................................................................................... 108 Management of aquatic ecosystems exploited by adaptability and sustainability: the case of fisheries in sinaloa, mexico ............................................................................................................................................... 110 Hernández-Padilla JC, Zetina-Rejón MJ, Arreguín-Sánchez F, Escobar-Toledo FD .......................... 110 Salas S ......................................................................................................................................................... 110 Seijo-Gutierrez JC ..................................................................................................................................... 110 Using the ecopath to simulate impacts on rivers......................................................................................... 112 Lima MAL .................................................................................................................................................. 112 Doria CRC .................................................................................................................................................. 112 Angelini R ................................................................................................................................................... 112 Structural vs Functional approaches. A first comparison between Water Framework Directive indicators and Ecological Network Analysis indices on European estuaries .............................................................. 114 Lobry J, Guesnet V, Lassalle G ................................................................................................................. 114 Chaalali A ................................................................................................................................................... 114 Selleslagh J ................................................................................................................................................. 114 Lepage M .................................................................................................................................................... 114 Niquil N ...................................................................................................................................................... 114 Analyzing the ecological role of Falkland sprat  (Sprattus fueguensis) in the inner sea of southern Chile  ......................................................................................................................................................................... 116 Neira S, Arancibia H, Giacaman-Smith J ................................................................................................ 116 Modelling the Mediterranean marine ecosystem as a whole: addressing the challenge of complexity .. 118 Piroddi C..................................................................................................................................................... 118 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 118 Steenbeek J ................................................................................................................................................ 118 Macias Moy D ............................................................................................................................................ 118 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................. 118 Modelling impacts of fishing on trophic energy flow in mersin bay, north-Eastern Mediterranean ..... 121 Saygu İ ........................................................................................................................................................ 121 Eryaşar AR ................................................................................................................................................. 121 Akoğlu AG(3), Akoğlu E( ............................................................................................................................. 121 Heymans JJ................................................................................................................................................ 121 Modelling the Ecosystem Uptake and Transfer of Sellafield-derived radiocarbon (14C) in the Marine Environment ................................................................................................................................................... 123 Tierney KM, Muir GKP ............................................................................................................................. 123 Heymans JJ................................................................................................................................................ 123 Cook GT, MacKenzie AB, MacKinnon G, Xu S ....................................................................................... 123 Howe JA ..................................................................................................................................................... 123 A Trophic Model for Mamanguape Mangrove Estuary  (Northeastern Brazil) confirms the prominence of detritus role ................................................................................................................................................ 125 Xavier JHA ................................................................................................................................................. 125 Angelini R ................................................................................................................................................... 125   Medeiros APM, Souza LA, Rosa IL .......................................................................................................... 125 MODELLING CUMULATIVE ECOSYSTEM DYNAMICS: ORAL PRESENTATIONS ........................................................... 128 Modelling cumulative ecosystem dynamics: progress and challenges ...................................................... 128 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 128 Heymans JJ ............................................................................................................................................... 128 Ecopath modelling of a subarctic Norwegian fjord after a decline in the coastal cod (Gadus morhua) stock and invasion of red king crab (Paralithodes camtschaticus) ............................................................ 129 Pedersen T .................................................................................................................................................. 129 Fuhrmann MM, Lindstrøm U................................................................................................................... 129 Nilssen EM, Ivarjord T .............................................................................................................................. 129 Ramasco V, Jørgensen LL, Sundet J ........................................................................................................ 129 Sivertsen K, Källgren E, Michaelsen C ..................................................................................................... 129 Systad G, Svenning M ............................................................................................................................... 129 Ecotrophic modeling of anthropogenic cumulative impacts on the sustainability of fisheries productions: comparison of Lake Erie and Great Slave Lake ecosystems ................................................ 132 Zhu X .......................................................................................................................................................... 132 Johnson T ................................................................................................................................................... 132 Leonard D .................................................................................................................................................. 132 Howland K, Podemski C ........................................................................................................................... 132 Evans M ...................................................................................................................................................... 132 Tallman R ................................................................................................................................................... 132 Evaluating the ecosystem effects of variation in recruitment and fishing effort in the western rock lobster fishery ................................................................................................................................................. 135 Lozano-Montes H ...................................................................................................................................... 135 Loneragan NR ............................................................................................................................................ 135 Babcock R( .................................................................................................................................................. 135 Caputi N ..................................................................................................................................................... 135 Comparative ecological analysis of Mediterranean deep-sea ecosystems and simulations of global change ............................................................................................................................................................. 136 Tecchio S .................................................................................................................................................... 136 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 136 Sardà F ....................................................................................................................................................... 136 Marine food webs and warming scenarios: modelling a thermophilic species invasion ......................... 138 Caccin A, Anelli Monti M .......................................................................................................................... 138 Libralato S .................................................................................................................................................. 138 Pranovi F .................................................................................................................................................... 138 Representing variable habitat quality in a spatial food web model ............................................................141 Christensen V ..............................................................................................................................................141 Coll M ..........................................................................................................................................................141 Steenbeek J, Buszowski J ..........................................................................................................................141 Chagaris D ...................................................................................................................................................141 Walters C .....................................................................................................................................................141 Advances on modelling spatial-temporal ecosystem dynamics in the Mediterranean Sea ..................... 143 Piroddi C .................................................................................................................................................... 143 Steenbeek J ................................................................................................................................................ 143 Liquete C .................................................................................................................................................... 143 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 143 Macias Moy D ............................................................................................................................................ 143 Giannoulaki M ........................................................................................................................................... 143 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................. 143 Biochemical tracer techniques and their utilization in ecosystem models ............................................... 145 Pethybridge HR ......................................................................................................................................... 145 Choy CA ...................................................................................................................................................... 145 Fulton EA ................................................................................................................................................... 145 MODELLING CUMULATIVE ECOSYSTEM DYNAMICS: POSTER PRESENTATIONS ....................................................... 147 Trophic functioning of sandy beaches with different degrees of human disturbance ............................. 147 Reyes-Martínez MJ ................................................................................................................................... 147 Lercari D ..................................................................................................................................................... 147 Ruiz-Delgado MC( ..................................................................................................................................... 147   Sánchez-Moyano JE( ................................................................................................................................. 147 Jiménez- Rodríguez A ............................................................................................................................... 147 Pérez-Hurtado A ........................................................................................................................................ 147 García-García FJ ........................................................................................................................................ 147 temporal and spatial variability in overfished Coastal Ecosystems: A Case Study from Tango bay, Japan ......................................................................................................................................................................... 150 Inoue H ....................................................................................................................................................... 150 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................. 150 Yamashita Y ............................................................................................................................................... 150 Ecosystem structure and fishing impacts in the NW Mediterranean Sea using a food-web model within a comparative approach ................................................................................................................................ 152 Corrales X ................................................................................................................................................... 152 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 152 Tecchio S .................................................................................................................................................... 152 Bellido JM .................................................................................................................................................. 152 Fernández AM............................................................................................................................................ 152 Palomera I .................................................................................................................................................. 152 Modeling the alien species impacts in marine ecosystems ......................................................................... 154 Corrales X ................................................................................................................................................... 154 Gal G ........................................................................................................................................................... 154 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 154 DESSIM: A Decision Support system for the management of Israel’s Mediterranean Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) .................................................................................................................................... 156 Gal G ........................................................................................................................................................... 156 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 156 Corrales X ................................................................................................................................................... 156 DiSgeni DM ................................................................................................................................................ 156 Goren M...................................................................................................................................................... 156 Heymans JJ................................................................................................................................................ 156 Ofir E .......................................................................................................................................................... 156 Steenbeek J ................................................................................................................................................ 156 Ecological network indicators of ecosystem status and change in the Baltic Sea ..................................... 159 Tomczak MT .............................................................................................................................................. 159 Heymans JJ................................................................................................................................................ 159 Yletyinen J .................................................................................................................................................. 159 Niiranen S, Otto SA, Blenckner T ............................................................................................................. 159 Modelling trophic flows in the Seine estuary: comparison between habitats with contrasting impact . 160 Tecchio S, Tous Rius A .............................................................................................................................. 160 Lobry J ........................................................................................................................................................ 160 Dauvin JC ................................................................................................................................................... 160 Morin J ....................................................................................................................................................... 160 Niquil N ...................................................................................................................................................... 160 Shifting states of a Mediterranean food web evidenced by ecological network analysis ......................... 162 Astorg L, Tecchio S, Chaalali A ................................................................................................................. 162 Piroddi C..................................................................................................................................................... 162 Lynam C ..................................................................................................................................................... 162 Patricio J .................................................................................................................................................... 162 Niquil N ...................................................................................................................................................... 162 Potential impacts of Global changes on Brazilian continental shelf and slope communities.................. 165 Nascimento MC ......................................................................................................................................... 165 Okey TA ...................................................................................................................................................... 165 Velasco G .................................................................................................................................................... 165 Assessing the impact of hydroelectric dams on Amazonian rivers using Ecopath with Ecosim: a case study of the Belo Monte Dam ........................................................................................................................ 168 Camargo M ................................................................................................................................................. 168 Giarrizzo T, Jesus AJ ................................................................................................................................. 168 Cumulative effects of environmental and human activities in the Southern Catalan Sea ecosystem (NW Mediterranean) associated with the Ebro River Delta ................................................................................ 170 Coll M, ........................................................................................................................................................ 170   Steenbeek J ................................................................................................................................................ 170 Palomera I .................................................................................................................................................. 170 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................. 170 Gulf of Mexico Species Interactions (GoMexSI): Integrated ecosystem trophic data for Ecopath models and ecosystem based fisheries management ............................................................................................... 172 Simons JD .................................................................................................................................................. 172 Poelen JH ................................................................................................................................................... 172 Yuan M ....................................................................................................................................................... 172 Vega-Cendejas ME .................................................................................................................................... 172 Carollo C ..................................................................................................................................................... 172 Reed D ........................................................................................................................................................ 172 Ainsworth CH ............................................................................................................................................ 172 END-TO-END MODELLING: ORAL PRESENTATIONS ............................................................................................... 174 The global ocean is an ecosystem: Simulating marine life and fisheries ................................................... 175 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................. 175 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 175 Buszowski J ................................................................................................................................................ 175 Cheung WWL ............................................................................................................................................. 175 Frölicher T .................................................................................................................................................. 175 Steenbeek J ................................................................................................................................................ 175 Stock CA ..................................................................................................................................................... 175 Watson RA ................................................................................................................................................. 175 Walters C .................................................................................................................................................... 175 Trophic impact and keystone species in two pelagic communities in the north chilean patagonian coastal system ................................................................................................................................................. 178 Pavés HJ ..................................................................................................................................................... 178 González HE............................................................................................................................................... 178 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................. 178 Modelling the potential effects of climate change on the Western Scotian Shelf ecosystem, Canada .... 180 Bundy A ...................................................................................................................................................... 180 Guénette S .................................................................................................................................................. 180 Araújo JN ................................................................................................................................................... 180 Bridging the gap between ecosystem modelling tools and Geographic Information Systems: driving a food web model with external spatial-temporal data ................................................................................. 182 Steenbeek J ................................................................................................................................................ 182 Coll M ......................................................................................................................................................... 182 Gurney L, Mélin F, Hoepffner N .............................................................................................................. 182 Buszowski J ................................................................................................................................................ 182 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................. 182 An intermediate complexity, physically coupled end-to-end model platform for coastal ecosystems ... 184 Ruzicka JJ .................................................................................................................................................. 184 Brink KH .................................................................................................................................................... 184 Gifford DJ .................................................................................................................................................. 184 Bahr F ......................................................................................................................................................... 184 Peterson WT............................................................................................................................................... 184 Two-way coupling of EwE in Fortran with an intermediate complexity NPZD model ............................ 187 Akoglu E(1), Libralato S.............................................................................................................................. 187 Salihoglu B ................................................................................................................................................. 187 Cossarini G(1), Lazzari P ............................................................................................................................ 187 Oğuz T ........................................................................................................................................................ 187 Solidoro C ................................................................................................................................................... 187 EwE models in Australia ............................................................................................................................... 189 Bulman CM, Fulton EA, Smith ADM, Johnson P ................................................................................... 189 Lozano-Montes H ...................................................................................................................................... 189 Griffiths SP, Bustamante R ....................................................................................................................... 189 Using Ecopath with Ecosim and Ecospace to model the response of eastuarine nekton to multiple habitat resotration scenarios in Barataria Bay, Louisiana, USA ................................................................ 192 Lewis KA..................................................................................................................................................... 192 Steenbeek J, Buszowski J ......................................................................................................................... 192   Cowan JH ................................................................................................................................................... 192 Managing lake ecosystem by using a food-web model – lake kinneret as a case study ........................... 194 Ofir E, Gal G ............................................................................................................................................... 194 Shapiro J .................................................................................................................................................... 194 Towards an ecosystem approach to fisheries in the Northern Humboldt Current System ..................... 196 Taylor MH, Wolff M .................................................................................................................................. 196 END-TO-END MODELLING: POSTER PRESENTATIONS............................................................................................ 198 Carbon fluxes of two pelagic communities in the North Chilean Patagonian coastal system ................. 198 Pavés HJ, González HE ............................................................................................................................. 198 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................. 198 Modelling the potential benefits of marine renewable energy installations ............................................. 201 Alexander KA ............................................................................................................................................. 201 Meyjes S...................................................................................................................................................... 201 Heymans JJ................................................................................................................................................ 201 WHAT NEXT? ........................................................................................................................................................ 203 WHAT NEXT? POSTER PRESENTATIONS ................................................................................................................ 204 Improving the EBFM Toolbox with an Alternative Open Source Mass Balance Model ......................... 204 Lucey SM ................................................................................................................................................... 204 Aydin KY.................................................................................................................................................... 204 Gaichas SK ................................................................................................................................................ 204 Fogarty MJ ................................................................................................................................................ 204 Hyun S-Y ................................................................................................................................................... 204 Cadrin SX .................................................................................................................................................. 204 EcoBase: a repository solution to gather and communicate information from EwE models ................. 206 Colléter M .................................................................................................................................................. 206 Valls A ........................................................................................................................................................ 206 Guitton J.................................................................................................................................................... 206 Morissette L .............................................................................................................................................. 206 Arreguín-Sánchez F .................................................................................................................................. 206 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................ 206 Gascuel D .................................................................................................................................................. 206 Pauly D ...................................................................................................................................................... 206 Overview of worldwide applications of the Ecopath with Ecosim approach using the EcoBase models repository ....................................................................................................................................................... 208 Colléter M .................................................................................................................................................. 208 Valls A ........................................................................................................................................................ 208 Guitton J.................................................................................................................................................... 208 Christensen V ............................................................................................................................................ 208 Gascuel D .................................................................................................................................................. 208 Pauly D ...................................................................................................................................................... 208 Programming with EwE: customizing EwE for your science ..................................................................... 211 Steenbeek J ................................................................................................................................................ 211 Technical Committee of the Ecopath Research and Development Consortium .................................. 211 The Ecopath Research and Development Consortium: the future of EwE ............................................... 213 The Executive Board of the Ecopath Research and Development Consortium ................................... 213 INDEX OF AUTHORS ............................................................................................................................................... 215 ADDENDUM ........................................................................................................................................................... 218 NOTES ................................................................................................................................................................... 219 NOTES .................................................................................................................................................................. 220 NOTES ................................................................................................................................................................... 221                                                         A Research Report from the Fisheries Centre at UBC 235 pages © Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2014   FISHERIES CENTRE RESEARCH REPORTS ARE ABSTRACTED IN THE FAO AQUATIC SCIENCES AND FISHERIES ABSTRACTS (ASFA) ISSN 1198-6727 Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 1 FOREWORD The baby has turned 30, so no longer a child. It’s time to grow up and take responsibility – that was the challenge I put forward to the participants at the closing of the Ecopath 25th Anniversary Conference five years ago at UBC. So, how is it doing? A check using Google Scholar will show that Ecopath is still popular, being referenced by 321 publications in 2010, and 399, 359, and 362 the following years, and 285 so far in 2014 – that’s one citation per day. But being popular doesn’t really indicate that one has grown up, though on that front there indeed has been significant development since the last Anniversary. The dynamic modeling in EwE has seen major additions, the spatial modeling is breaking new grounds, there have been major developments on plug-ins, and we have seen new model types being developed and published. What I find especially promising is the development on model coupling related to climate change research and the associated new capabilities for spatial modeling. Still, having learned great skills as part of one’s education, doesn’t necessarily translate into taking responsibility later in life – though it certainly is good ballast.  Moving from the academic world to the more applied is a challenge, also because fisheries management as a rule is rather reactive being focused on tactical issues. Where ecosystem-based methods have the strongest contribution to make for management is in relation to strategic management, i.e. mid-term questions about ecosystem changes and the associated tradeoffs for management. Ecosystem-based methods indeed have a strong role to play for management, and while we do see major progress on this front, notably in Europe and Australia, we still have a long way to go – so my challenge from 2009 stands. But the Ecopath 30th Anniversary Conference is on track to help move us toward ecosystem based management (EBM), and the success that is clearly indicated by the interest in the conference – as the extended abstracts in this volume is a strong indicator of – will serve as a milestone. The contributions range wide, starting off indeed with scientific advice for management, and on to marine conservation, ecosystem evolution, cumulative dynamics, and end-to-end. Overall, this shows the versatility of the approach and even more importantly, how the diversity of scientists that cooperate on moving us toward EBM jointly can contribute to a scientific development that is bigger than what any of us can accomplish individually. Synergistic cooperation is indeed the key issue for Ecopath and where we are heading. This is the foundation for the Ecopath Research and Development Consortium, which was established in 2011, and which now has close to 20 institutional members from throughout the world. We invite you all to join the effort.  Villy Christensen Co-Director Fisheries Centre, UBC Welcome Note 2 WELCOME NOTE Since the very successful 25 years of Ecopath conference, 5 years ago the Ecopath with Ecosim and Ecospace approach has gone from strength to strength. The Ecopath Research and Development Consortium (www.ecopath.org/consortium) was formed in 2011, and we have increased our presence in Europe with a new office in Barcelona (http://ecopathinternational.org/).   A Google Scholar Search of Ecopath from 2009-2014 provided 2,120 results, with at least 100 papers published since 2009. Thus the 200 publications mentioned in the Ecopath 25 years conference has been substantially enhanced in the past 5 years. The Ecopath 30 Years Conference and Workshops (4th-14th November 2014, Barcelona, Spain) aims to highlight how EwE has moved beyond the boundaries by modelling ecosystem dynamics. We will showcase 30 years of progress using the Ecopath approach in fields such as fisheries management, marine conservation, ecosystem dynamics, climate impacts, and ecosystem-based-management, as well as to introduce exciting new functionalities of the approach. We wish all participants a fruitful stay in Barcelona and two very exciting weeks at the Ecopath 30 Years Conference and Worshop Events!  THE ORGANIZING AND SCIENCTIFIC COMMITTEES -  ECOPATH 30 YEARS CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOPS  Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 3 THE ORGANIZING AND SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEES ORGANIZING AND SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE OF THE ECOPATH 30 YEARS CONFERENCE AND WORSHOP EVENTS:  Beth Fulton, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Hobart, Australia Chiara Piroddi, Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy Didier Gascuel, Fisheries and Aquaculture Sciences Centre Agrocampus Ouest, Rennes, France Ekin Akoglu, Instituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale, Trieste, Italy Franciso Sánchez-Arreguin, Centro Interdisciplinario de Ciencias Marinas, Baja California Sur, Mexico Isabel Palomera, Institute of Marine Science, Spanish Research Council, Barcelona, Spain Jeroen Steenbeek, Ecopath International Initiative Research Association, Barcelona, Spain Johanna J. Heymans, Scottish Association for Marine Science, Oban, Scotland Lynne Shannon, Marine Research Institute, University of Cape Town, South Africa Marta Coll, Institute of Research for the Development of Exploited marine Ecosystems, Sète, France Sebastian Villasante, University Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain Simone Libralato, Instituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale, Trieste, Italy Steve Mackinson, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft, UK Villy Christensen, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada  Acknowledgements 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Ecopath 30 Years Conference and Worshop Events were made possible through the support of the following institutions, sponsors and individuals: Several members of the Ecopath International Research and Development Consortium (www.ecopath.org/consortium) contributed actively by providing time for several staff to participate to the organisation of the events. The main institute behind the organization of the event was the Ecopath International Initiative (http://ecopathinternational.org/), the European office of the Ecopath and Research Consortium. The Institute of Marine Science (www.icm.csic), from the Spanish Research Council (Barcelona, Spain), graciously provided the venue for the events. Abstracts submitted to this conference were reviewed by an international scientific committee comprising of: Chiara Piroddi (JRC, Europe), Didier Gascuel (Agrocampus, France), Ekin Akoglu (OGS, Italy), Elisabeth A. Fulton (CSIRO, Australia), Francisco Arreguín-Sánchéz (CICIMAR, Mexico), Johanna J. Heymans (SAMS, UK), Lynne Shannon (UCT, South Africa), Marta Coll (IRD, France), Sebastian Villasante (USC, Spain), Simone Libralato (OGS, Italy), Steve Mackinson (CEFAS, UK), and Villy Christensen (UBC, Canada). We thank the scientific committee for the chairing of the sessions of the conference. We thank Villy Christensen (Opening Session and Session VI), Steve Mackinson (Session I), Tony Pitcher (Session II), Ken H. Andersen (Session III), Joanna J. Heymans, (Session IV), Marta Coll (Session IV & V) and Kerim Aydin (Session V) for being the keynotes of the conference sessions. The conference promotion material (banners, stickers, logos, T-shirts), name tags, certificates, and website were designed by Jeroen Steenbeek.  The materials provided to the participants (bags, mugs, notebook, pen) were made possible with the professional help of William Dunwell from “Anything But Cattle” (UK). The Istituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale (www.ogs.trieste.it/) and the Scottish Association for Marine Science (http://www.sams.ac.uk/) provided the USB keys for the conference and workshops. The City Hall of Barcelona provided free touristy information to participants.  The Fisheries Centre (www.fisheries.ubc.ca), University of British Columbia, made possible the publication of these proceedings. Tours to the CosmoCaixa Barcelona Science Museum were made available free of charge for participants to the events thanks to “La Caixa” Banking Foundation. Additional free tours were made available for participants thanks to the Maritime Museum of Barcelona (ewe30.ecopathinternational.org/trips-and-excursions/).  The organizers wish to thank all students and staff of the Institute of Marine Science from the Spanish Scientific Council (Barcelona, Spain) who volunteered to help out with the various and many tasks involved in making this conference run as smoothly as possible: Isabel Palomera, Anabel Colmenero, Claudio Barria, John Ramíerz, Marta Albo, Samuele Tecchio, Sònia Sanchez.  Aurora Requena and Eli Bonfill from “Plàncton, Divulgació i Serveis Marins” are acknowledged for their professional help in the organization of the event. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 5 ON BEING GREEN The Ecopath 30 Years Conference and Workshops Events Organizing Committee made an attemp to be ‘ecological’ and to employ ‘sustainable’ resources by:  (i) providing a website where documents relevant to the Conference and Workshops can be viewed and/or downloaded, thus supporting a ‘paperless’ option;  (ii) choosing a green option for the materials provided to participants (bags, mugs, notebook, pen);  (iii)  providing non-disposable coffee mugs;  (iv) using non-disposable dishes, glassware and cutlery during coffe breaks, lunches and welcoming reception; and  (v) providing water to all presenters in recicable cups and non-disposable jars.  The food catering is brought to the conference and workshops through the Movie Blues local caterer (http://ewe30.ecopathinternational.org/catering/), who will serve “Slow Food” using local ecological ingredients.  Participants are encouraged to use the cloth bags and coffee mugs provided to them during the conference and the workshops, or when buying at the nearby cafés and shops.   Program: Oral Presentations 6 VENUE AND INSTRUCTIONS The Ecopath 30 Years Conference and Workshop Events will be held at Institute of Marine Science (ICM-CSIC) Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta, 37-49, E-08003, Barcelona (Spain); Tel. (+34) 93 230 95 00; Fax. (+34) 93 230 95 55; Website: www.icm.csic.es. Presentations and keynotes of the conference will be hosted at the conference room (floor -1); all courses (the introductory course and the advance courses) will be hosted at room P31 (floor +1), except Ecotroph workshop that will be hosted at room P41 (floor +1). Just follow the signs to the find your room.  Oral presentations will be allocated 15 minutes (including questions), except keynote presentations that will be 30 minutes (including questions). Please submit your oral presentations to the registration desk when you arrive at the conference. Presentations must be delivered as Adobe PDF (.pdf) or PowerPoint (.ppt/.pptx) files. We do not support KeyNote files. Posters should be in vertical format A0 (width 841mm x height 1189mm, portrait orientation). Posters should be put on the first day of the conference during the morning and will be on display for the entire conference. Please remove your posters at the third day of the conference, after the poster session (12.30-14.00).  Posters should be briefly presented at dedicated ‘poster presentations’ scheduled the end of each Conference session. Each poster presentation is brief, no longer than 3 minutes per poster, with a maximum of 3 slides. Please submit your poster presentations to the registration desk when you arrive at the conference. Presentations must be delivered as Adobe PDF (.pdf) or PowerPoint (.ppt/.pptx) files. We do not support KeyNote files. Poster sessions will be concurrent with the welcome reception the first day of the conference (10th of November 2014) and lunch breaks of the second and third day (11-12th November 2014), which will be held at the patio (floor 0) and in the cafeteria of the Institute of Marine Science (floor +1), respectively. Wifi Internet access can be obtained through Portal-CSIC. Please inquire at the registration desk for details.   7 PROGRAM DAY 1: MONDAY 10TH NOVEMBER Master of Ceremony: Sheila Heymans (SAMS, UK) 08:00 – 09:00 Registration 09:00 Opening by Master of Ceremony 09:00 – 10:00 Welcome 09:00 – 09.30 Isabel Palomera, Senior Researcher at ICM-CSIC and head of the local organization committee Albert Palanques, Director of the Institute of Marine Science 09:30 – 10.00 Opening keynote by Dr. Villy Christensen:  Modelling marine ecosystems: Lessons learned and the road ahead 10:00 – 10.30 Coffee break 10.30 – 13:30 Session 1 – Scientific advice for management: from research to advisory tools Chairs: Steve Mackinson (CEFAS, UK), Villy Christensen (UBC, Canada) 10:30 Keynote by Dr. Steve Mackinson:  A European perspective on modelling to support an ecosystem approach to management 11:00 – 13:15 Oral presentations 11:00 Adebola & De Mutsert – Reducing Anthropogenic Impacts on Nigerian Costal Fisheries Resources 11:15 Bacalso & Wolff – Dynamic simulation model of illegal fishing gear removals in the Danajon Bank, Central Philippines 11:30 Fondo et al – The impacts of changes in prawn trawling effort on trophic structure after establishment of a Marine Park 11:45 Giacaman-Smith et al – Analysing recovery in the main demersal stocks from southern Chile in a multispecies context 12:00 Griffiths et al – Just a FAD? Potential ecological impacts of tuna purse seine fishing on Fish Attracting Devices in the western Pacific Ocean? 12:15 Meissa et al – Diagnosis of the ecosystem impact of fishing and trophic interactions between fleets: a Mauritanian application 12:30 Morato et al – Towards ecosystem based management of the Azores marine resources 12:45 Staebler et al – Potatoes of opportunity for fishing in the southern North Sea 13:00 – 13:30 Poster presentations  Angelini et al – Comparing the maximum sustainable yield of commercial stocks with the ecosystem sustainability of fishing  Bundy & Guénette – Loosening the corset: how real are wasp-waist ecosystems?  Halouani et al – How Fishing impacts Mediterranean marine ecosystems? An EcoTroph modeling approach  Kluger et al – Carrying capacity simulations as a tool for ecosystem-based management of a scallop aquaculture system  Lercari et al – A food web analysis of the Río de la Plata estuary and adjacent shelf ecosystem: trophic structure, biomass flows and the role of fisheries  Gasalla et al – Ecosystem model of the Santos Basin Marine ecosystem, SE Brazil  Opitz & Garilao – Impact of Commercial Fisheries on the Marine Ecosystem Within the German EEZ of the Western Baltic Sea  Ramsvatn et al – The A-lex project: Environmental effects of increased shipping in the Arctic- a case study for the Pechora Sea Carvalho & Angelini – Fisher’s consulting and biological evidence to probe loss of fish diversity in a tropical coastal lagoon 13:30 – 14:30 Lunch 14:30 – 18:00 Session 2 – Informing and planning marine conservation Chairs: L. J. Shannon (UCT, South Africa), Chiara Piroddi (JRC, Europe) 14:30 Keynote lecture by Dr. Tony Pitcher: Marine protected areas in the Haida Gwaii ecosystem (Canada): modelling and List of Poster Presentations 8 policy issues 15:00 – 17:30 Oral presentations 15:00 Wolff & Taylor – Simulating the combined effect of El Nino and the ban of the industrial fishery on the Galapagos Marine Reserve – an exploratory analysis using EwE 15:15 Barrier et al – Assessing the trophic functioning of the marine protected area of Portofina (Italy) with a standardized ecosystem model 15:30 – 16:00 Coffee break 16:00 Valls et al – Keystone species: a restored and operational concept to inform marine biodiversity conservation 16:15 Eddy et al – Trade-Offs between Invertebrate Fisheries Catches and Ecosystem Impacts in Coastal New Zealand 16:30 Rehren & Wolff – Modelling the Multispecies Fishery of Chwaka Bay, Zanzibar – Basis for Exploration of Use and Conservation Scenarios 16:45 Daskalov et al – Modelling spatial effects of illegal fishing in the north Caspian sea ecosystem 17:00 Morato et al – Deep-sea ecosystem model of the condor seamount 17:15 Fetzer – Implementing the Habitat Directive in Germany: case conventions versus Ecopath, Ecosim & Ecospace 17:30 Gruner – Effect of marine protected areas and fishing on population biomass of five species of Serranidae in La Paz Bay, Mexico: an Ecospace study 17:45 – 18:00 Poster presentations  Coll & Steenbeek – New software plug-in to calculate biodiversity and conservation-based indicators from Ecopath with Ecosim food web models  Prato et al – Towards a balance between complexity and feasibility in food-web models of Mediterranean coastal ecosystems: addressing uncertainty while accounting for data collection constraints  Bourdaud et al – Using models, to assess ecosystem indicators and define targets of the good environmental status.  Arriagada & Neira – Analysing the collapse and lack of recovery of the two Nototeniid stocks in the Antartic peninsule (Sub area 48.1)  Lercari et al – Trophic models in the Southwestern Atlantic Ocean: evaluating structure and functioning of coastal ecosystem 18:00 – 20:30 Poster session and welcome reception   9  DAY 2: TUESDAY 11TH NOVEMBER Master of Ceremony: Simone Libralato (OGS, Italy) 08:00 – 09:00 Registration 09:00 Opening by Master of Ceremony 09:00 – 13:00 Session 3 – Ecosystem evolution and challenges for management Chairs: Didier Gascuel (Agrocampus, France), Sebastian Villasante (University Santiago de Compostela, Spain) 09:00 Keynote lecture by Dr. Ken H. Andersen: Conflicting objectives for ecosystem based fisheries management 09:30 – 12:15 Oral presentations 09:30 Bevilacqua et al – Beyond anecdotal information: the use of fishers´ knowledge to model fisheries 09:45 Hernandez-Milian et al – The importance of locally specific data in Ecopath models 10:00 Bentorcha et al – EcoTroph to assess changes in marine ecosystems – Application to the Bay of Biscay and Celtic sea case study 10:15 Kumar et al – Simulation of zebra mussel invasion and evaluation of impacts on the Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota: An ecosystem model 10:30 – 11:00 Coffee break 11:00 Surma et al – Whaling, primary productivity and the changing structure of the Southern Ocean food web 11:15 Heymans & Tomczak – Regime shifts in the Northern Benguela, challenges for management 11:30 Lam & Pitcher – Niche Construction Theory and Ecosystem Stanza Modelling: Northern BC Fisheries 11:45 Zetina-Rejón et al – The relevance of cohesive structures in the self-organization of marine ecosystems 12:00 Colléter et al – A meta-analysis of ecosystems’ trophic functioning: identification of typical trophic behavior and associated responses to fishing impact 12:15 – 13:00 Poster presentations  Abdou et al – The use of Ecospace model as a simulation tool for fisheries management plans: case of the Gulf of Gabes  Arreguín-Sánchez et al – Developing scientific capacities through international collaboration for ecosystem-based management of marine resources facing climate change: Mexico, Uruguay and Colombia  Arreguín-Sánchez et al – Ecosystem changes and “ecosystem limit reference level” for sustainable fisheries: the Campeche Bank Mexico as study case  Bayle-Sempere et al – An ecosystem approach to the role of fish farming in coastal areas  Bezerra et al – Wasp-waist control on food web of a tropical freshwater reservoir  Akoglu et al – A comparative analysis on the ecosystem structure and functioning of four regional seas of Turkey (Black Sea, Marmara, Aegean and the Mediterranean)  Hernández-Padilla et al – Management of aquatic ecosystems exploited by adaptability and sustainability: the case of fisheries in Sinaloa, Mexico  Leite Lima et al – Using the Ecopath to simulate impacts on rivers  Lobry et al – Structural vs Functional approaches. A first comparison between Water Framework Directive indicators and Ecological Network Analysis indices on European estuaries  Neira et al – Analysing the ecological role of Falkland sprat (Sprattus fueguensis) in the inner sea of southern Chile  Piroddi et al – Modelling the Mediterranean marine ecosystem as a whole: addressing the challenge of complexity  Saygu et al – Modelling impacts of fishing on trophic energy flow in Mersin Bay, Northeastern Mediterranean  Tierney et al – Modelling the Bioaccumulation of Sellafield-derived radiocarbon (14C) in the Marine Environment List of Poster Presentations 10  Xavier et al – A Trophic Model for Mamanguape Mangrove Estuary (Northeastern Brazil) confirms the prominence of detritus role 13:00 Group photo 13:00 – 14:30 Poster sessions and lunch 14:30 – 18:00 Session 4 – Modelling cumulative ecosystem dynamics Chairs: Marta Coll (IRD, France), Sheila Heymans (SAMS, UK) 14:30 Keynote lecture by Dr. Sheila Heymans & Dr. Marta Coll: Modelling cumulative ecosystem dynamics: progress and challenges 15:00 – 17:30 Oral presentations 15:00 Pedersen et al – Ecopath modelling of a subarctic Norwegian fjord after a decline in the coastal cod (Gadus morhua) stock and invasion of red king crab (Paralithodes camtschaticus) 15:15 Zhu et al – Ecotrophic modeling of anthropogenic cumulative impacts on the sustainability of fisheries productions: comparison of Lake Erie and Great Slave Lake ecosystems 15:30 – 16:00 Coffee break 16:00 Lozano-Montes et al – Evaluating the ecosystem effects of variation in recruitment and fishing effort in the western rock lobster fishery 16:15 Tecchio et al – Comparative ecological analysis of Mediterranean deep-sea ecosystems and simulations of global change 16:30 Caccin et al – Marine food webs and warming scenarios: modelling a thermophilic species invasion  16:45 Christensen et al – Representing variable habitat quality in a spatial food web model 17:00 Piroddi et al – Advances on modelling spatial-temporal ecosystem dynamics in the Mediterranean Sea 17:15 Pethybridge et al – Biochemical tracer techniques and their utilization in ecosystem models 17:35 Poster presentations  Reyes-Martínez et al – Trophic functioning of sandy beaches with different degrees of human disturbance  Inoue et al – Temporal and spatial variability in overfished coastal ecosystems: a case study from Tango bay, Japan  Corrales et al – Ecosystem structure and fishing impacts in the NW Mediterranean Sea using a food-web model within a comparative approach  Corrales et al – Modelling the alien species impacts in marine ecosystems  Gal et al – Dessim: a decision support system for the management of Israel’s Mediterranean exclusive economic zone (EEZ)  Tomczak et al – Ecological network indicators of ecosystem status and change in the Baltic sea  Tecchio et al – Modelling trophic flows in the seine estuary: comparison between habitats with contrasting impact  Astorg et al – Shifting states of a Mediterranean food web evidenced by ecological network analysis  Nascimento et al – Potential impacts of global changes on a Brazilian continental shelf and slope communities  Camargo et al – Assessing the impact of hydroelectric dams on Amazonian rivers using Ecopath with Ecosim: a case study of the Belo Monte dam  Coll et al – Cumulative effects of environmental and human activities in the southern Catalan Sea ecosystem (NW Mediterranean) associated with the Ebro river delta  Simons et al – Gulf of Mexico species interactions (gomexsi): integrated ecosystem trophic data for Ecopath models and ecosystem based fisheries management   11  DAY 3: WEDNESDAY 12TH NOVEMBER Master of Ceremony: Chiara Piroddi (JRC, Europe) 08:00 – 09:00 Registration 09:00 Opening by Master of Ceremony 09:00 – 12:30 Session 5 – End-to-End modelling Chairs: Simone Libralato, Ekin Akoglu (OGS, Italy) 09:00 Keynote lecture by Dr. Kerim Aydin: Ecopath and Ecosim in fisheries management: notes from two decades on the front lines 09:30 – 12:30 Oral presentations 09:30 Christensen et al – The global ocean is an ecosystem: Simulating marine life and fisheries 09:45 Paves et al – Trophic impact and keystone species in the two pelagic communities in the North Chilean Patagonian coastal system 10:00 – 10:30 Coffee break 10:30 Bundy et al – Modelling the potential effects of climate change on the Western Scotian Shelf ecosystem, Canada 10:45 Steenbeek et al – Bridging the gap between ecosystem modelling tools and geographic information systems: driving a food web model with external spatial-temporal data 11:00 Ruzicka et al – An intermediate complexity, physically coupled end-to-end model platform for coastal ecosystems 11:15 Akoglu et al – Two-way coupling of EwE in Fortran with an intermediate complexity NPZD model 11:30 Bulman et al – EwE models in Australia 11:45 Lewis et al – Using Ecopath with Ecosim and Ecospace to model the response of estuarine nekton to multiple habitat restoration scenarios in Barataria Bay, Louisiana, USA 12:00 Ofir et al – Managing Lake Ecosystem by using a food-web model – Lake Kinneret as a case study 12:15 Taylor & Wolff – Towards an ecosystem approach to fisheries in the Northern Humboldt Current System 12:30 – 12:45 Poster presentations  Pavés et al – Carbon fluxes of the two pelagic communities in the North Chilean Patagonian coastal system  Alexander et al – Modelling the potential benefits of marine renewable energy installations 12:45 – 14:00 Poster sessions and lunch 14:00 – 17:30 Session 6 – What next? Villy Christensen (UBC, Canada), Marta Coll (IRD, France)  This session will be an open discussion with participants to the conference about ideas and suggestions for the future of the EwE approach and the field of ecological modelling. 14:15 – 15:00 Poster presentations  Lucey et al – Improving the EBFM Toolbox with an Alternative Open Source Mass Balance Model  Colléter et al – EcoBase: a repository solution to gather and communicate information from EwE models  Colléter et al – Overview of worldwide applications of the Ecopath with Ecosim approach using the EcoBase models repository  Steenbeek et al – Programming with EwE: customizing EwE for your science  The Executive Board of the Ecopath Consortium et al – The Ecopath Research and Development Consortium: the future of EwE 15:00 Open discussion 15:30 – 16:00 Coffee break 16:00 Open discussion (continued) 17:30 – 18:00 Closure of the Conference Keynote speakers 12 KEYNOTE SPEAKERS VILLY CHRISTENSEN Dr Villy Christensen is a professor and co-director at the Fisheries Center, University of British Columbia and director of the Global Modelling group. He works with ecosystem modeling and has a background in fisheries research. His research has since 1990 been centered on understanding impacts of human exploitation on marine ecosystems. He has been central to the development and dissemination of the Ecopath approach and software, a tool for ecosystem modeling. Ecopath modeling has become the de-facto standard for ecosystem approaches to fisheries management, and is being applied throughout the world. Through cooperation with scientists worldwide, he has focused on trophic dynamics of aquatic resources. He has led a large number of training courses and workshops throughout the world, centered on developing ecosystem approaches to fisheries management.  STEVE MACKINSON Dr Steve Mackinson is a scientist at the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS, UK). At CEFAS, he has been involved in Ecopath with Ecosim modeling and study of trophic transfer efficiencies in food-webs of North Sea. He has also worked on issues of model complexity and effects of model structure for the Ecopath and Ecosim modeling approach. Dr Mackinson’s research efforts also extend beyond the strict ecosystem modeling specialty into socio-economic drivers of fisheries management. He has worked on perceptions of the fishing industry and has elucidated measures to bridge gaps between science and stakeholders. TONY PITCHER Dr Tony Pitcher is a professor at the Fisheries Center, University of British Columbia and the director of the Policy and Ecosystem Restoration in Fisheries research group. His current research addresses three aspects of fisheries ecology:  1. The history and analysis of  the  impacts of fishing on aquatic ecosystems, and how future policy may use this information to foster sustainability and the reconciliation of  biodiversity with human benefits; 2. The development of quantitative, multi-criteria evaluation frameworks and rapid appraisal techniques for assessing the status of fisheries, management instruments and management goals in a scientific, evidence-based and replicable fashion; and 3. A predictive understanding of how fish shoaling behavior impacts fisheries. His research has taken him throughout Africa, Europe, Asia, Australasia, and Latin America. KEN H. ANDERSEN Dr. Ken H. Andersen is a theoretical physicist working with marine ecology. Ken wants to understand how life in the ocean is organised, why marine organisms look and act the way they do, and how marine ecosystems reacts to perturbations like fishing, species removals/invasions or climate change. More specifically Ken works on: trait-based models of life in the ocean (see http://www.oceanlifecentre.dk), size-structured models of marine ecosystems (see https://www.stockassessment.org/spectrum), and fisheries induced evolution.". JOHANNA J. HEYMANS Dr Johanna J. Heymans is a lecturer with the Ecology Department of the Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS, UK). She has worked extensively with Ecopath with Ecosim and Ecological Network Analysis and is very interested in the use of these tools for marine spatial planning as well as ways to combine ecological and social network analysis for ecosystem based management. Previously she worked at the Fisheries Centre on several ecosystem models for the east and west coast of Canada, the decline of Steller sea lions and a historical reconstruction for the Bird’s Head functional seascape in Eastern Indonesia. MARTA COLL Dr Marta Coll is a researcher from the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, at the Marine Exploited Ecosystems mixed research unit (EME 212 UMR - IRD, University of Montpellier II and  13 Ifremer) in Sète (France). Her research focuses on understanding patterns and processes that characterize marine ecosystems and, in particular, changes of, and threats to, marine biodiversity. She studies population, community and food-web dynamics linked with human activities (such as fisheries, climate change, eutrophication, and invasive species), and how these translate into changes in ecosystem structure and functioning, and services that humans obtain from the ocean. She develops and applies a variety of ecological analyses such as ecosystem modelling techniques and statistical tools, and uses historical data, fisheries statistics, experimental results and field data sets. KERIM AYDIN Dr. Kerim Aydin is a Research Fishery Biologist, at the NOAA Fisheries, Alaska Fisheries Science Center (USA). His research is focused on modeling predator/prey interactions, both from an individual behavioral standpoint and from a population (food web model) standpoint, on developing data collection techniques for examining marine food webs (e.g. , diet studies and stable isotope examinations of fish communities), and on applying these models in a fisheries management context. He is particularly interested in the stability and complexity of large marine food webs and how structural elements of marine food webs evolve in response to climate variation. He received his PhD in 2000 from the University of Washington, School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences. Scientific advice for management 14 SCIENTIFIC ADVICE FOR MANAGEMENT: ORAL PRESENTATIONS A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE ON MODELLING TO SUPPORT  AN ECOSYSTEM APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT 1 Mackinson S Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk, NR33 0HT, UK; Email: steve.mackinson@cefas.co.uk ABSTRACT Recent EU legislation makes explicit the need to take trophic interactions and marine environmental impacts in to account in management.  Policy requirements are echoed in the ICES strategic plan, where an integrated and ecosystem approach will form the basis for delivering scientific advice. Together, these commitments signal a clear need for ecosystem modelling tools to prove themselves worthy of providing evidence on the effects of trophic interactions that can be used with confidence in advice.  It’s a daunting but welcome challenge. Achieving this requires having a strategy to guide the development and use of models for advice, and convincing demonstrations of their utility.   Various tools will be required to meet the needs for supporting stock assessments and assessing ecosystem and fishery impacts. Bringing their results together to generate an integrated understanding and communicate it clearly is an important challenge.  The shift in the skill sets being required for generating advice requires investment in training and development.                                                  1 Cite as: Mackinson, S., 2014. A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE ON MODELLING TO SUPPORT AN ECOSYSTEM APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT, p. 14. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 14. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 15 REDUCING ANTHROPOGENIC IMPACTS ON NIGERIAN COSTAL FISHERIES RESOURCES2 Adebola TM, De Mutsert K Department of Environmental Science and Public Policy, George Mason University  Fairfax VA USA; Email: tadebola@masonlive.gmu.edu ABSTRACT Historically, Nigeria has produced from 25,000 MT to 323,200 MT of fish annually (1950-2006). This amount of fish production meets only a fraction of the animal protein needs of a growing population of 175 million.  Although imports have bridged the shortfalls in supply of fisheries resources, high demand for these resources has implications for overexploitation of marine and coastal resources. In addition to heavy exploitation of marine resources, other anthropogenic stressors in the coastal ecosystems include petroleum hydrocarbon pollution, and habitat degradation due to the close proximity of megacities such as Lagos and Africa’s largest hydrocarbon extraction industry in the Niger Delta. More recently, effects of overfishing in the industrial fishing subsector may have been ameliorated due to a release of fishing pressure caused by accessibility issues. The most important ecological issues are: (1) habitat degradation arising from nutrient enrichment and land reclamation from the sea in coastal cities. (2) Severe environmental pollution in the Niger Delta (an important nursery area for a variety of marine and brackish water species) caused by direct discharge of petroleum hydrocarbons into estuarine habitats and oceanic waters, (3) Large scale artisanal fisheries with approximately 100,000 small fishing units employing low to medium technologies to exploit fish resources in 850 km stretch of coastal waters, and (4) Intensification of industrial shrimp trawling from the mid 1980s - 2000s when landing far outstripped prediction from shrimp resource potential in the Gulf of Guinea coastal surveys of the 1960s.  A more recent development for the industrial fishing subsector is restriction of access to important fishing grounds due to safety concerns caused by unrest in the Niger Delta. An ecosystem approach is proposed using the Ecopath with Ecosim software to answer the following questions: How is recruitment impacted by loss of habitat through sea reclamation and oil pollution? How has waste generated from coastal cities impacted the quality of coastal waters and their ability to support important fisheries? How do high densities of fishing canoes impact coastal fisheries?  How are these multiple factors interacting to drive observed patterns and processes in Nigeria’s coastal ecosystems? What strategies are required to safeguard coastal resources so they can continue providing the important ecological and economic services they have traditionally provided? To address these questions, we (1) build a food web model for Nigerian coastal waters and account for fisheries, (2) model impacts of habitat loss, (3) traces contaminants through the marine food web, and (4) explore management alternatives for the fisheries and hydrocarbon extraction industries. REFERENCES Ayoola S.O., Kuton M.P., 2009. Seasonal variation in fish abundance and physicochemical parameters of Lagos lagoon, Nigeria. African J. Env. Sci. Tech. 3, 149-156. Moses, B.S., 2000. A review of artisanal marine and brackishwater fisheries of South-eastern Nigeria. Fish. Res. 47, 81-92. Namdi, H., Amaeze, R.I., Egonmwan, A.F., Jolaoso, Otitoloju, A.A., 2012. Coastal environmental pollution and fish species diversity in Lagos lagoon, Nigeria. Int. J. Envir. Prot. 2, 8-16.                                                  2 Cite as: Adebola, TM, De Mutsert, K. 2014. Reducing anthropogenic impacts on Nigerian costal fisheries resources, p. 15-16. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 15. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 16 Ogbonna, J.C, 2001. Reducing the impact of tropical shrimp trawling on the living marine resources through the adoption of environmentally friendly techniques in Nigeria. FAO Fisheries Circular. No. 974 FIIT/C974. Ukwe, C.N., Ibe, C.A., Alo, B.I. Yumkella, K.K., 2003. Achieving a paradigm shift in environmental and living resource management in the Gulf of Guinea: The large marine ecosystem approach. Mar. Poll. Bull. 47, 219-225. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 17 DYNAMIC SIMULATION MODEL OF ILLEGAL FISHING GEAR REMOVALS IN THE DANAJON BANK, CENTRAL PHILIPPINES3 Bacalso RTM The Ecosystems Improved for Sustainable Fisheries (ECOFISH) Project, 6/F CIFC Towers, J. Luna cor. J.L. Briones, NRA, 6000 Cebu City, Philippines;  Email: Regina.Bacalso@ecofish-ph.com / regina.bacalso@gmail.com  Wolff M Leibniz Center for Tropical Marine Ecology,Fahrenheitstraße 6, 28359 Bremen, Germany;  Email: matthias.wolff@zmt-bremen.de  ABSTRACT The northern section of the Danajon Bank in the Central Visayas, Philippines is a shallow, tropical reef system that supports a multi-gear, multi-species fishery, which is primarily artisanal and subsistence in nature.  At the same time, illegal fishing gears that are deemed destructive by either their manner of operation (e.g. blast fishing, fishing using cyanide and other noxious substances, bottom seining) or technical design (e.g. use of fine mesh netting) continue to operate and are seemingly able to evade the local fishery law enforcement.  In this study, we used a dynamic simulation model, Ecosim, to explore the ecological and socio-economic impacts of a hypothetical successful ban on the illegal fisheries in the Danajon Bank. Two main scenarios were compared: one whereby the displaced illegal fishers were reallocated to the remaining legal fisheries, and another without a reallocation of displaced fishing effort.  For both scenarios, we calculated the relative increments of the biomasses of living groups, harvests and catch values, and corresponding net profit and employment. The simulations yielded varying types and magnitudes of system response, with strong implications on the underlying food-web dynamics.  Foremost, the study demonstrated that the value of fishing effort reduction lies not in the resulting dramatic changes in overall harvestable biomass but in effecting discrete biomass changes across the trophic strata.  In this regard, all simulations of illegal fishery removals resulted in relative increases in predator group biomasses that subsequently resulted in direct and indirect top-down trophic responses. Conjointly, simulated increases in overall system biomass did not necessarily translate to expected increases in overall yields and profits, but showed noteworthy impacts at the per capita level of specific fishing operations.  The magnitude and direction of change likewise varied for the scenarios with and without the fishing effort reallocation.  We therefore advocate the exploration of other alternative fishing effort reallocation scenarios with a focus on per capita yield and profit incomes analysis against the overall gains of the fishery, both at the short- and long-term.  These provide useful insights that are relevant to informing policy for the management of small-scale and subsistence fisheries. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank all the field data collectors, FISH Project staff, and the local community members who helped considerably in the data collection and consolidation. We likewise thank Prof. Nygiel Armada, the senior fisheries adviser of the FISH Project and Prof. Wilfredo Campos of the University of the Philippines for their invaluable inputs and comments to developing the work.  This research was supported in part by the DAAD-Scholarship Programme “Postgraduate Degree Courses with Relevance to Developing Countries”.                                                  3 Cite as: Bacalso, RTM, Wolff, M. 2014. Dynamic simulation model of illegal fishing gear removals in the Danajon bank, Central Philippines, p. 17-18. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 17. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 18 REFERENCES Ainsworth, C.H., Varkey, D.A., Pitcher, T.J., 2008. Ecosystem simulations supporting ecosystem-based fisheries management in the Coral Triangle, Indonesia. Ecol. Model. 214, 361-374. Bacalso, R.T.M., Wolff, M., (in press). Trophic flow structure of the Danajon ecosystem (Central Philippines) and impacts of illegal and destructive fishing practices. 10.1016/j.jmarsys.2014.05.014. Baum, J.K., Worm, B., 2009. Cascading top-down effects of changing oceanic predator abundances. J. Anim. Ecol. 78, 699-714. Bundy, A., 2004. The ecological effects of fishing and implications for coastal management in San Miguel Bay, the Philippines. Coast. Manag. 32, 25-38.  Christensen, V., Walters, C.J., 2004. Trade-offs in ecosystem-scale optimization of fisheries management policies. B. Mar. Sci. 74, 549-562. Essington, T.E., Beaudreau, A.H., Wiedenmann, J., 2006. Fishing through marine food webs. PNAS 103, 3171-3175.  Nañola, C., Aliño, P., Carpenter, K. 2011. Exploitation-related reef fish species richness depletion in the epicentre of marine biodiversity. Environ. Biol. Fish. 90, 405-420. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 19 THE IMPACTS OF CHANGES IN PRAWN TRAWLING EFFORT ON TROPHIC STRUCTURE AFTER ESTABLISHMENT OF A MARINE PARK4 Fondo EN University of Queensland,School of Biological Sciences, Goddard Building 8, St. Lucia 4072, Brisbane, Australia and Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, P.O.Box 81651-80100 Mombasa, Kenya;  Email: esther.fondo@uqconnect.edu.au Skilleter GA University of Queensland,School of Biological Sciences, Goddard Building 8, St. Lucia 4072, Brisbane, Australia; Email: g.skilleter@uq.edu.au Chaloupka M University of Queensland, Ecological Modelling Services P/L, PO Box 6150, St Lucia, Queensland, 4067, Brisbane, Australia; Email: m.chaloupka@uq.edu.au ABSTRACT The effects of trawling on structurally complex habitats and fauna have been compared to the effects of forest clear-cutting (Watling and Norse, 1999) with the growing awareness that trawling disturbance has wide-ranging impacts on the marine environment and is well known to modify benthic habitat and community structure (Jennings and Kaiser, 1998, Jennings et al. 2001, Pauly et al., 2002 and Kaiser et al., 2006). The impacts of commercial trawling include alteration of benthic environments, removal of targeted and by-catch species, and alteration of food webs; and in the recent years there has been a world-wide concern over the potential impacts of the capture and discard of non-targeted organisms by prawn trawling (Saila, 1983). Moreton Bay is a subtropical Bay influenced by freshwater inputs from several river systems and the wetlands surrounding the Bay are protected under the United Nations Convention on Wetlands of International Importance as Ramsar Site No. 4 (Chan & Dening, 2007). The Bay supports many different fish species and hence an important area for both commercial and recreational fisheries and also supports a highly productive penaeid prawn fishery (Courtney, 1995). The Moreton Bay Marine Park (MBMP) which was established in 1993, hosts a number of threatened species such as dugongs, turtles and grey nurse sharks.  A mass-balanced model of the Moreton Bay ecosystem was developed in Ecopath and was used to simulate the effects of changes in prawn trawling in the Bay before and after the establishment of the Marine Park. The scenarios were simulated using Ecosim, the time dynamic simulation module for policy exploration. The initial Ecopath model consists of 22 functional groups which include prawns and endangered species such as dugongs, turtles and dolphins. Figure 1 illustrates the trophic flows and trophic levels that represent the principal trophic interactions of the Moreton Bay ecosystem, in which each functional group is represented by a circle, with size proportional to biomass. Functional groups are illustrated by their trophic levels, ranging from 1.0 to 5.0. The model gives an overview of the resources found in the Bay and reveals the examined ecosystem’s dynamics which are important for improving the knowledge of the structure and functioning of the Bay’s ecosystem and the ecosystem impacts of fishing. The effects of prawn trawling effort regulation and by-                                                 4 Cite as: Fondo, EN, Skilleter, GA, Chaloupka, M. 2014. The impacts of changes in prawn trawling effort on trophic structure after establishment of a marine park, p. 19-20. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 19. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 20 catch reduction on the functional groups and their interactions were investigated and the predictions discussed in relation to the management of objectives and the future of the MBMP.  Figure 1. Flow diagram representing the trophic structure and biomass flow in the Moreton Bay ecosystem model. Circles represent the functional group and horizontal lines show the trophic level. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We acknowledge the University of Queensland for support. REFERENCES Chan, K., Dening, J., 2007. Use of sandbanks by terns in Queensland, Australia: a priority for conservation in a popular recreational waterway. Bio. Cons. 16, 447-464. Courtney A. J., Masel J.M., Die D.J., 1995. Temporal and Spatial Patterns in Recruitment of Three Penaeid Prawns in Moreton Bay, Queensland, Australia. Est. Coast. Shelf Sc. 41, 377-392. Jennings, S., Kaiser M. J., 1998. The effects of fishing on marine ecosystems. Adv. Mar. Biol. 34, 201–352. Jennings S., Dinmore, T.A., Duplisea, D.E., Warr K.J., Lancaster, J.E., 2001. Trawling disturbance can modify benthic production processes. J. An. Ecol. 70,  459-475. Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guénette, S., Pitcher, T.J., Sumaila, U.R., Walters, C.J., Watson, R., Zeller D., 2002. Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature 418, 689-695. Saila S.B., 1983. Importance of discards in commercial fisheries.  FAO Fisheries Circular No. 765. 1-62. Watling, L., Norse E.A., 1999. Disturbance of the seabed by motile fishing gear: a comparison to forest clear-cutting. Cons.. Biol. 12, 180-197. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 21 ANALYZING RECOVERY IN THE MAIN DEMERSAL STOCKS FROM SOUTHERN CHILE IN A MULTISPECIES CONTEXT5 Giacaman-Smith J Programa de Magister en Ciencias Mención Pesquerías, Universidad de Concepción and Programa COPAS Sur-Austral, Universidad de Concepción, P.O. Box 160-C, Concepción, Chile;  Email: jgiacama@udec.cl Neira S Departamento de Oceanografía and Programa COPAS Sur-Austral, Universidad de Concepción, Chile; Email: seneira@udec.cl  Arancibia H Departamento de Oceanografía and Unidad de Tecnologías Pesqueras (UNITEP), Universidad de Concepción, Chile; Email: harancib@udec.cl  ABSTRACT The main demersal stocks supporting Chilean trawling and longline fisheries are either overexploited or collapsed. That is the case of southern hake (Merluccius australis), hoki (Macruronus magellanicus) and kingklip (Genypterus blacodes), among others. Therefore, recovery strategies for overexploited and collapsed stocks are required and are now mandated by the new Chilean Fishery and Aquaculture Law N° 20657, promulgated in 2013, which establishes that the target biological point must be the maximum sustainable yield (MSY). In this context, total annual allowable catch (TAC) in these stocks have been set for 2014 considering to reach a target spawning biomass B40% (default 40% of unfished biomass) and fishing mortality rate (F) which result in an equilibrium biomass level equal to B40%, being used F45% as a proxy of FMSY. These catch levels are estimated under single-species considerations only. However, the Chilean fisheries based on demersal stocks are multifleet and multispecific with strong predator–prey relationships between fishing resources such as southern hake, hoki, southern blue whiting, as well as cannibalism. Therefore, our objective is to evaluate whether applying single-species MSY policy in southern hake, hoki and blue whiting is successful when the multispecies/food web context is taken into account.  To accomplish the above, we built a model representing the food web in southern Chile (41° 28´S - 57°S). The model considers 12 functional groups from phytoplankton to top predators. However, the model is focused in the interactions among fishing resources. The modeling framework is the Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) software (Walters et al. 1997). The model was fit to time series of biomass (B) for the main fish stocks for the period 1990 to 2012, using time series of fishing mortality as forcing factor. To attain the better fit was used the Monte Carlo approach included in EwE. With this approach, 500 trials of parameter-combinations were tried until a balanced Ecopath model compose for a parameters combination which minimize the sum of squares (SS) was achieved. In addition, an evaluation of both the sensitivity of SS to vulnerability parameter and changes in model primary production were required to improve the overall fit. Data source corresponds to Chilean official statistics for the main fisheries (see www.subpesca.cl; www.fip.cl; www.ifop.cl). Later, we projected the biomass of southern hake, southern blue whiting and hoki from 2013 to 2022 under scenarios with different levels of F like: 1) a scenario of biomass trends for each stock under FMSY, while keeping current fishing mortalities for all others fishing                                                  5 Cite as: Giacaman-Smith J, Neira S, Arancibia H. 2014.  Analyzing recovery in the main demersal stocks from Southern Chile in a multispecies context, p. 21-22. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 21. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 22 resources; and 2) a scenario in which all three stocks are fished at FMSY at the same time. The values of the target fishing mortality rate (F45%) and target spawning biomass (B40%) used for the three stocks in southern Chile are: southern hake F45% =0.236 / Fcurrent =0.37 / B40% = 185040 ton; hoki F45% =0.173/ Fcurrent =0.186 / B40% = 354600 ton; blue whiting F45% =0.336/ Fcurrent =0.02 / B40% = 359938 ton. The results show that the fit of EwE estimates to observed biomasses from 1990-2012 are acceptable in southern hake, kingklip, blue whiting (Micromesistius australis) and hoki (Figure 1). The initial value of SS was 13,180, but after using routines for minimization of SS the final value was SS = 2,658. In terms of the sensitivity of SS to vulnerability parameters, and therefore to the model´s residuals, the overall fit was more sensitive to the following predator-prey interactions: small pelagic fish-zooplankton, hoki–zooplankton, southern blue whiting–zooplankton and southern hake-southern blue whiting.  In the projected period (from 2013 to 2022), neither stock reached the target reference point of spawning biomass (B40%) when fished at FMSY, either independently (scenario 1) or when they all three are fished at FMSY (scenario 2), using F45% as a proxy of FMSY. Clark (2013) indicates that F45% could be used as proxy of FMSY for Chilean fisheries of demersals because F45% tracks the target B40% very closely and does better at low steepnesses than the F40% strategy. That is the reason why we selected to use the F45% proxy in ours simulations. We conclude that single species MSY might not secure stock recovery in fisheries of demersal fish stocks from southern Chile, because reference point disregards ecological interactions and therefore stock recovery could be over-optimistic under MSY approach when the multispecies/food web context is taken into account.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors acknowledge funding from the COPAS Sur -Austral Program at Universidad de Concepción and FONDECyT Project nº1110545. REFERENCES Walters, C., Christensen, V., Pauly, D., 1997. Structuring dynamic models of exploited ecosystems from trophic mass-balance assessments. Rev. Fish. Biol. Fish. 7, 139-172. Clark, B., 2013. Notes on implementing the B40% target biomass strategy (method 4). Working group report on biological reference point for Chilean fisheries, Viña del Mar, December 9-13, Chile.  Figure 1. Biomass for the main fishing resources including in the model for the period 1990-2012. Key: line = EwE estimates; dots: observed data. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 23 JUST A FAD? POTENTIAL ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS OF TUNA PURSE SEINE FISHING ON FISH ATTRACTING DEVICES IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC OCEAN? 6 Griffiths SP  CSIRO Wealth from Oceans Flagship, GPO Box 2583 Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia; Email: shane.griffiths@csiro.au  Allain V, Nicol S, Hoyle S, Lawson T Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Oceanic Fisheries Programme, B.P. D5, 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia. ABSTRACT Fisheries that target predatory species occupying high trophic levels have been shown to have negative impacts on not only the target species, but the structure and functionality of the supporting ecosystem (Pauly et al., 1998; Cox et al., 2002; Polovina et al., 2009). For example, in a subtropical Pacific ecosystem, Polovina et al. (2009) showed that the commercial pelagic longline fishery was likely responsible for a significant decrease in the abundance and mean size of primary tuna target species. This effect changed the structure of the ecosystem by freeing a trophic niche that allowed the proliferation of unmarketable bycatch species, including lancetfish and snake mackerel. Similarly, in the Gulf of Thailand, Christensen (1998) showed that the average trophic level of the ecosystem decreased from 3.35 to 3.15 over 25 years of intensive fishing. This indicated a reduction in the abundance of large fish and a progressive shift towards targeting smaller species. This process known as ‘fishing down the food web’ (Pauly et al., 1998), can result in the proliferation of species having high short life spans and rapid growth rates, and often low economic value, thus causing substantial regimes shifts in ecosystem structure (Carscadden et al., 2001; Daskalov, 2002). Fishery scientists and managers now recognised the potential negative ecological effects of targeting single species on the overall ecosystem. Consequently, ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) has become a common policy of many fisheries worldwide (Scandol et al., 2005). Fisheries targeting species that occupy high trophic levels may be more susceptible to breaching such policy, and therefore, need to be given close attention in assessing their broader ecological impacts. The Warm Pool oceanographic province in the western Pacific Ocean is defined by the 28° C sea surface temperature isotherm, covering over 181 million km2. It supports the largest and most valuable tuna fisheries in the world that capture a range of high trophic level species using pelagic longline, pole-and-line, and purse seine either unassociated (PSU) or in association with (PSA) natural or artificial floating objects, or Fish Attracting Devices (FADs). In particular, these fisheries target bigeye and yellowfin tunas, skipjack, swordfish and albacore. In recent years, the increased efficiency and catches made by the PSA fishery has raised concerns over the sustainability of bigeye, yellowfin and skipjack tunas, since their juvenile often aggregate in the vicinity of floating objects (Leroy et al., 2013). Furthermore, the increased PSA effort has dramatically increased the catch of non-target species. Although this has seen to be beneficial in some respects by opening new markets for edible bycatch species (e.g. dolphinfish, wahoo and rainbow runner), it raises serious concerns by fishery managers over the long-term sustainability of more vulnerable species with less productive life histories, such as sharks and billfish (Taquet, 2013).                                                  6 Cite as: Griffiths, SP, Allain, V, Nicol, S, Hoyle, S., Lawson, T. 2014. Just a fad? Potential ecological impacts of tuna purse seine fishing on fish attracting devices in the western Pacific Ocean?, p. 23-24. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 23. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p.  Scientific advice for management 24 The objective of the present study was to build an Ecopath ecosystem model of the Warm Pool ecosystem to explore the potential effects of purse seine fishing on ecosystem structure and functionality, as well as direct changes in the biomass of individual target and bycatch species. The year 2005 was chosen as the reference year to model the trophic flows in the Warm Pool in the Ecopath model, since this period coincided with an extensive dietary study of pelagic fishes by the SPC Oceanic Fisheries Programme. The Warm Pool ecosystem was represented as 44 functional groups, with the primary target species being disaggregated into juvenile and adult life stanzas. The SPC coordinate a scientific observer program for WCPO pelagic fisheries, and from 1995 included monitoring of bycatch species. Coupled with data from age-structured stock assessments for the principal species, the addition of bycatch time series permitted extensive Ecosim model calibration using 111 time series of biomass, fishing mortality and catch trends for 37 of the 44 ecological functional groups. Ecosim simulations were then undertaken to investigate the potential impacts of fishery management strategies of changing the 2013 PSA effort by +/- 50% or 100% and observing the ecosystem and species biomass responses 10 and 30 years later.  Ecosystem indicators (Fishing in Balance, Kempton’s Q, and Mean Trophic Level of the Catch) showed the Warm Pool ecosystem changed considerably since the early 1970s due to the cumulative impacts of increasing effort in the four pelagic fisheries. The indicators showed an expansion of the fishery, which resulted in a slight increase in the average trophic level of the catch due to increase catch of high trophic level bycatch species, such as sharks and billfish. However, diversity and biomass of the ecosystem comprising trophic level 3 and greater has been diminished. Simulated changes to PSA effort resulted in only modest changes (<10%) in the biomass of functional groups directly interacting with the fishery. There was little evidence that PSA or PSU fishing would cause significant disruption of the ecosystem integrity in the short term by causing trophic cascades, since the impacts of most fishery simulations did not propagate lower than a trophic level of 3. The most important results from PSA simulations was that increases in effort caused the greatest biomass declines in longer-lived bycatch species, namely Silky and White tip sharks. Conversely, decreases in PSA effort resulted in reciprocal increases in biomass of these species and a negative effect on their prey biomass, which were generally target species of the PSA fishery (i.e. bigeye and yellowfin tuna). Therefore, this presents fishery managers with a complex trade-off where conservation and fishery profitability need to be balanced. These results demonstrate the value of ecosystem models for disentangling some of the highly complex ecological interactions present in pelagic ecosystems, which can provide greater confidence in developing EBFM strategies that may achieve the long-term sustainability of species populations and fishery profitability. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors thank NZ AID, SPC and the CSIRO for funding the development of the Ecopath model. REFERENCES Carscadden, J. E., Frank, K. T., Leggett, W. C., 2001. Ecosystem changes and the effects of capelin (Mallotus villosus), a major forage species. Can. J. Fish. Aqua. Sci. 58, 73-85. Christensen, V., 1998. Fishery-induced changes in a marine ecosystem: insights for models of the Gulf of Thailand. J. Fish. Biol. 53, 128-142. Cox, S. P., Essington, T. E., Kitchell, J. F., Martell, S. J. D., Walters, C. J., Boggs, C., Kaplan, I., 2002. Reconstructing ecosystem dynamics in the central Pacific Ocean, 1952-1998. II. A preliminary assessment of the trophic impacts of fishing and effects on tuna dynamics. Can. J. Fish. Aqua. Sci. 59, 1736-1747. Daskalov, G. M., 2002. Overfishing drives a trophic cascade in the Black Sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 225, 53-63. Leroy, B., Phillips, J. S., Nicol, S., Pilling, G. M., Harley, S., Bromhead, D., Hoyle, S., Caillot, S., Allain, V., Hampton, J., 2013. A critique of the ecosystem impacts of drifting and anchored FADs use by purse-seine tuna fisheries in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Aqua. Liv. Res. 26, 49-61. Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R.,  Torres Jr, F., 1998. Fishing down marine food webs. Science. 279, 860-863. Polovina, J. J., Abecassis, M., Howell, E. A., Woodworth, P., 2009. Increases in the relative abundance of mid-trophic level fishes concurrent with declines in apex predators in the subtropical North Pacific, 1996-2006. Fish. Bull. 107, 523-531. Scandol, J. P., Holloway, M. G., Gibbs, P. J., Astles, K. L., 2005. Ecosystem-based fisheries management: An Australian perspective. Aqua. Liv. Res. 18, 261-273. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 25 Taquet, M., 2013. Fish aggregating devices (FADs): good or bad fishing tools? A question of scale and knowledge. Aqua. Liv. Res. 26, 25-35. Scientific advice for management 26 DIAGNOSIS OF THE ECOSYSTEM IMPACT OF FISHING AND TROPHIC INTERACTIONS BETWEEN FLEETS: A MAURITANIAN APPLICATION7 Meissa B Institut Mauritanien de Recherches Océanographiques et des Pêches (IMROP), BP: 22,  Nouadhibou, Mauritania Gascuel D Université Européenne de Bretagne, Agrocampus Ouest, UMR985 Ecologie et santé des écosystèmes, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes cedex, France; Email: didier.gascuel@agrocampus-ouest.fr Guénette S EcOceans, St Andrews, NB, Canada; Email: sylvie.guenette@gmail.com ABSTRACT Based on the Mauritanian case study, this presentation shows how the EcoTroph model (Gascuel et al., 2011) can be used to build global diagnosis of the ecosystem impact of fishing, and to analyze interactions between fleets targeting various compartments of the ecosystem. We used a preexisting EwE model, which includes 51 trophic groups and covers the whole Mauritanian continental shelf (Guénette et al., 2014). The model, initially fitted on catches and survey time series over the 1991-2006 period, was first updated based on recent stock assessment results (Meissa, 2013). Then, starting from the 2010 Ecopath model, simulations of increasing or decreasing fishing efforts were performed, using the ET-Diagnosis routine of the EcoTrophR package (Colléter at al., 2013). Multipliers of the current fishing mortality, ranking from zero (no fishing) to five (strong increase in the fishing pressure), were applied, either to the whole fisheries or fleet by fleet in order to analyse fisheries interactions (Gasche and Gascuel, 2013). Compared to the pristine conditions, the current exploitation is estimated to lead to a 25 % decrease in the total ecosystem biomass (for all animals), and to a 65 % and 70 % decrease for the biomass of exploited species, and top predators (TL > 4), respectively. Two indicators can be used to build a global diagnosis of the fishing impact at the scale of the entire food web (Figure 1). The E_msy indicator is the fishing mortality multiplier that allows obtaining the maximum sustainable yield of a given trophic class. Therefore, if E_msy is lower than 1, the related trophic class is overexploited (and conversely, underexploited for E_msy higher than 1). The E_0.1 indicator is commonly used in single species stock assessments, in order to define the starting point of the full exploitation (i.e. the lowest value of the fishing mortality characterised by a flat yield curve, with catch values close to MSY). Therefore, E_0.1 values smaller than 1 characterise fully or overexploited situations, while                                                  7 Cite as: Meissa, B, Gascuel, D, Guénette, S. 2014. Diagnosis of the ecosystem impact of fishing and trophic interactions between fleets: a Mauritanian application, p. 26-27. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 26. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Figure 1. Global diagnosis of the ecosystem impact of fishing in the Mauritanian continental shelf ecosystem. Indicators E_msy and E_0.1 are the fishing mortality multipliers which allow reaching Fmsy and F0.1, the reference values for full and overexploitation respectively. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 27 values higher than 1 relate to underexploited trophic classes. These indicators show that all trophic levels higher than 4.3 are currently overfished, while those between 3.0 and 4.3 are fully exploited. In addition, trophic levels between 2.6 and 3.0 are close to full exploitation, only lowest trophic levels being currently under-exploited.  As an example, we show here results of simulations related to interactions between the industrial foreign fishery (IPF) targeting pelagics (mainly sardinella), and the small scale coastal fishery (SSCF), targeting a wide range of species including small pelagics, demersal fish and octopus (Figure 2). In these simulations, other fleet segments (i.e. industrial demersal fisheries) remained constant. Results demonstrated the strong interactions between the two fisheries. An increase in the fishing effort of the industrial pelagic fishery would lead to an increase in total catch but to a significant decrease in the whole ecosystem biomass, in the catch of the small scale fishery, and in the mean trophic level of ecosystem biomass and catches. The impact results from both direct and indirect effects, because the industrial pelagic fishery targets species that also targeted by the small scale fishery and prey for demersal fish exploited by the small scale fishery. Conversely, increasing the fishing effort of the small scale fishery would have limited quantitative impacts (on the whole ecosystem biomass and catch) and limited qualitative impacts (on mean trophic levels).  Other simulations (not shown) also suggested interactions between the small scale and the industrial demersal fisheries. Each one has a limited quantitative impact on the other (i.e. on total biomass and catch), but higher qualitative impact, where increasing fishing effort would lead to a depletion in high trophic levels abundance, and therefore to a decrease in the mean trophic level of biomass and catch.   Such EcoTroph simulations finally demonstrated that fisheries management depends on highly political choices. The development of the small scale coastal fishery in Mauritania would imply to reduce the fishing effort of foreign fleets. Interactions between fleets do result not only from the target of the same species, but also from indirect effects propagating from one fishery to the other through the food web. In particular, industrial fisheries targeting small pelagics have large impacts on the whole food web, thus impacting all local fisheries. REFERENCES Colleter M., Guitton J., Gascuel D., 2013. An Introduction to the EcoTrophR package: analyzing aquatic ecosystem trophic network.  The R Journal. 5,98-107. Gasche L., Gascuel D., 2013. EcoTroph: a simple model to assess fisheries interactions and their impacts on ecosystems. ICES J.Mar. Sci. 70, 498-510. Gascuel D, Guénette S, Pauly D., 2011. The trophic-level based ecosystem modelling approach: theoretical overview and practical uses. ICES J Mar. Sci. 68, 1403-1416. Guénette S., Meissa B., Gascuel D., 2014. Assessing the Contribution of Marine Protected Areas to the Trophic Functioning of Ecosystems: A Model for the Banc d’Arguin and the Mauritanian Shelf. PLoS ONE. 9, e94742. Meissa O.B., 2013. Dynamique des ressources démersales dans l’écosystème marin mauritanien: vulnérabilité des ressources et impacts de la pêche. Thèse Agrocampus Ouest, mention écologie, 234 p.  Effort  multiplier SSCF Effort multiplier SSCFEffort multiplier IPFEffort multiplier IPFBiomass TL-BiomassCatch TL-Catch Catch SSCF TL-Catch SSCF Effort multiplier IPFEffort  multiplier SSCF Effort  multiplier SSCF Effort  multiplier SSCF Effort  multiplier SSCF Figure 2. Simulation of biomass, total catch and catch of the small scale fishery, as a function of the fishing mortality multiplier of the small scale fishery (x-axis) and the industrial small pelagics fishery (Y-axis). Left column refers to the variable of interest (in tons per km2), while right column refers to the mean trophic level of the same variable. Dash line refers to the current small scale fishing effort, while arrows indicate trends. Scientific advice for management 28 TOWARDS ECOSYSTEM BASED MANAGEMENT OF THE AZORES MARINE RESOURCES8 Morato T, Lemey E  IMAR University of the Azores, 9901-862 Horta, Portugal; Email: telmo@uac.pt  Heymans JJ Scottish Association for Marine Science, Oban PA37 1QA Scotland; Sheila.Heymans@sams.ac.uk  Pitcher TJ Fisheries Centre University of British Columbia Vancouver BC Canada V6T 1Z4;  Email: t.pitcher@fisheries.ubc.ca  ABSTRACT The European Marine Strategy Framework Directive intends to adopt an ecosystem-based management for resources, biodiversity and habitats that puts emphasis on maintaining the health of the ecosystem alongside appropriate human use of the marine environment, for the benefit of current and future generations. Within the overall framework of ecosystem-based management, ecosystem models are tools to evaluate and gain insights in ecosystem properties and functioning. In this talk, an Ecopath with Ecosim and Ecospace model for a North-Atlantic deep-sea ecosystem was developed to conduct simulations to explore and, when possible, to quantify the effects of the new Common Fisheries Policy regulations in the Azores ecosystem; to examine management questions such as the impact of fishing on vulnerable habitats; to examine the use of no-take areas to explore their role in ecosystem based management; to explore the potential management options such as spatial zones to enhance the sustainability of commercial and recreational fisheries. The first step consisted of modeling the flows and biomasses of the Exclusive Economic Zone waters of the Azores using appropriate data on biology and fisheries, with preference to local data. A total of 45 functional groups, including a detritus group, two primary producer groups, eight invertebrate groups, 29 fish groups, three marine mammal groups, a turtle and a seabird group, were modeled in this work. Cephalopods, pelagic sharks and toothed whales were identified as groups with key ecological roles in the ecosystem. In a second step, the ecosystem model for the Azores region was fitted to real data. The fitting procedure resulted in a considerable improvement in goodness-of-fit to historical and current fishing effort and biomass estimates. Optimal sets of predator-prey relationships and environmental variability were explored. This proved a big step forward in developing credible ecosystem models that can simulate the effect of different management options for the Azorean fisheries on the ecosystem. The final steps consisted of developing a fully spatial version of the Azores marine ecosystem model to explore Ecospace allows to expand spatially and to simulate different management scenarios involving spatial management.                                                  8 Cite as: Morato, T, Lemey, E, Heymans, S, Pitcher, TJ. 2014. Towards ecosystem based management of the Azores marine resources, p. 28. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 28. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 29 POTATOES OF OPPORTUNITY FOR FISHING IN THE SOUTHERN NORTH SEA9 Staebler M  Thuenen-Institute of Sea Fisheries, Palmaille 9, Hamburg 22767, Germany; Institute for Hydrobiology and Fisheries Science, University of Hamburg, Olbersweg 24, 22767 Hamburg, Germany;Email: moritz.staebler@ti.bund.de Kempf A Thuenen-Institute of Sea Fisheries, Palmaille 9, Hamburg 22767, Germany; Email: alexander.kempf@ti.bund.de  Temming A Institute for Hydrobiology and Fisheries Science, University of Hamburg, Olbersweg 24, 22767 Hamburg, Germany; Email: atemming@uni-hamburg.de  ABSTRACT Within the North Sea, the shallow central and southern part is distinct through the importance of flatfish and brown shrimp in species and catch compositions. Policies designed to manage fisheries for the two groups face conflicting objectives as young flatfish die in shrimpers’ nets; and incentives to recover European cod may compromise yields through predation and competition. Aside the main commercial species, bycatch and fishing of sharks, rays and turbot play a role in thinking on sustainable exploitation of the southern North Sea. Breeding seabirds as well as marine mammals may be competing with fishers for their prey. Attempts to achieve good environmental status (GES) in any of these aspects can impair fishing objectives, and may even be contradictory to other conservation efforts. As such, reducing discards means less easily accessible food for surface-feeding sea birds. To cover these mixed-fleet and species interaction aspects, we parameterized an Ecosim model representing 60+ functional groups ranging from planktonic and benthic invertebrates via commercial species targeted by the 12 fleets embraced to sharks, rays, marine mammals and seabirds. The model was challenged with time series of biomasses, catches, fishing mortalities and efforts to ascertain plausibility of its time dynamic behaviour. When the different fleets are subjected to a range of effort regimes, long term simulations can highlight combinations of effort levels that lead to combined yields being around the maximum possible value (the ‘potato of maximum sustainable yield opportunities’ in a multidimensional graphical representation). The simulation results can then be tested for their compliance with given reference levels of the various GES indicators deemed acceptable, creating the ‘potato of GES’. Areas of overlap between the two indicate sustainable exploitation, while failures to match suggest which trade-offs in terms of yield or conservation goals may have to be accepted. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The research leading to the results has received funding through the MYFISH project (Maximising yield of fisheries while balancing ecosystem, economic and social concerns), a European Union’s Seventh                                                  9 Cite as: Staebler, M, Kempf, A, Temming, A. 2014. Potatoes of opportunity for fishing in the Southern North Sea, p. 29. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 29-30. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 30 Framework Programme (FP7 /2007-2013) under grant agreement no 289257, and is part of M. Staebler’s Ph.D. aspirations. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 31 SCIENTIFIC ADVICE FOR MANAGEMENT: POSTER PRESENTATIONS COMPARING THE MAXIMUM SUSTAINABLE YIELD OF COMMERCIAL STOCKS WITH THE ECOSYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY OF FISHING10 Angelini R Departamento de Engenharia Civil, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte - UFRN, BR 101, Campus Universitário, 59078-970 Natal, RN, Brasil;Email: ronangelini@gmail.com  Coll M Institut de Recherche pour le Développment, UMR EME 212, Centre de Recherche Haliutique Méditerranéenne et Tropicale, Avenue Jean Monnet, BP 171. 34203 Sète Cedex, France; Ecopath International Initiative Research Association, Barcelona, Spain; Email: marta.coll@ird.fr  Steenbeek J Ecopath International Initiative Research Association, Barcelona, Spain; Email: jeroen.steenbeek@gmail.com  Libralato S Istituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale – OGS, Borgo Grotta Gigante - Brisciki 42/c - 34010 Sgonico - Zgonik (Trieste) Italy;  Email: slibralato@ogs.trieste.it  *Bolsista CAPES/Brasil ABSTRACT Despite reports of optimism in a few developed countries, most marine fisheries and exploited ecosystems around the world are in a worrisome state (Pauly et al., 2002; Froese and Proelß, 2010). Therefore, several national and international initiatives have been issued with the aim to halt degradation trends and ensure the sustainability of fisheries, such as the new European Common Fisheries Policy (EC, 2013). One of the main goals of sustainable fisheries is to achieve sustainable levels of fish stock exploitation. To date, the sustainability of fishing is assessed on the basis of the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) concept. The MSY is the theoretical largest catch that can be taken from an exploited stock over an indefinite period. The MSY permits to maintain the population at the point of maximum growth rate by harvesting the surplus production of the population, allowing the population to continue to be productive indefinitely (Hilborn and Walters, 1992). Above the MSY, density dependent factors increasingly limit breeding until the population reaches carrying capacity. The MSY-derived indicators are widely applied to guide fisheries management and MSY has been highlighted by the European Commission as a main goal to achieve under the new CFP. However, fishing all commercial stocks at MSY levels does not guarantee the sustainability of fisheries because species in marine ecosystems interact in complex ways (Walters et al., 2005). Classic MSY                                                  10 Cite as: Angelini, R, Coll, M,  Steenbeek, J, Libralato, S. 2014. Comparing the maximum sustainable yield of commercial stocks with the ecosystem sustainability of fishing, p. 31-32. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 31. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 32 MSYFishing vector0CatchFmsyPsustL index100% Psust75% Psust50% Psust ? Figure 1. Expected evolution of catch with fishing vector and the MSY, L index and Psust indicators sustainability assessments fail to take essential factors into account such as the dynamics and interactions between both commercial and non-commercial species and other drivers than fishing that affect productivity of marine ecosystems, including environmental changes.  Several integrative ecological indicators to complement single stock assessment evaluations have been proposed to address this shortcoming (Cury and Christensen, 2014). One of these indicators build on the notion that exploited ecosystems are characterised by exports of secondary production from each fished trophic level that reduce the energy available for upper levels at the ecosystem scale, thus impinging on overall secondary production. Thus, this depletion in secondary production has been proposed as a proxy for quantifying the ecosystem effects of fishing with the Loss in Production Index (L index) as the synthesis indicator to compute this loss (Libralato et al., 2008). Based on simple ecological theories, this index has been defined taking into account both ecosystem properties (primary production and transfer efficiency) and features of fishing activities (trophic level of catches and primary production required) for quantifying the loss in total secondary production within an ecosystem due to fishing. The loss in production has been associated with the probability of sustainable fishing at the ecosystem level (Psust), thus a relationship between how much secondary production is loss due to fishing and how probable is the ecosystem to be sustainably fished permits to set thresholds on the basis of accepted risk of overfishing (Libralato et al., 2008). For this study, the L index and Psust have been added to the computations of the Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) ecosystem food web modelling tool (Christensen and Walters, 2004). The Ecopath and Ecosim modules and the MSY routine in EwE v6 (Walters et al., 2005) have been linked to the Lindex and Psust indicators, allowing the calculations of ecosystem dynamics, MSY and the L index and Psust to be used simultaneously to compare the outputs of a series of fisheries management simulations (Figure 1). This enables to compare both the status of single exploited stocks with the status of the whole ecosystem being exploited and evaluate the trade-offs at the different species – ecosystem level to achieve the sustainability of fisheries. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS * This study was developed with the funding of Science Without Borders Program to the project "Desenvolvimento e adequação do “Ecopath with Ecosim and Ecospace” (EwE Ecospace) para subsidiar o manejo pesqueiro ecossistêmico no Brasil, com destaque para a modelagem econômica-social da pesca e do crescimento da teoria de teias tróficas" PVE: MEC/MCTI/CAPES/CNPq/FAPs, Government of Brazil.  REFERENCES Christensen, V., Walters, C., 2004. Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities and limitations. Eco. Mod. 72, 109-139. Cury, P., Christensen, V., 2014. Quantitative ecosystem indicators for fisheries management. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 62, 307-310. EC (2013) Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC. Froese, R., Proelß, A., 2010. Rebuilding fish stocks no later than 2015: will Europe meet the deadline? Fish. Fish. 11,194-202. Hilborn, R., Walters, C., 1992. Quantitative Fisheries Stock Assessment. Choice, Dynamics and Uncertainty. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 570 p. Libralato, S., Coll, M., Tudela, S., Palomera, I. Pranovi, F., 2008. Novel index for quantification of ecosystem effects of fishing as removal of secondary production. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 355, 107-129. Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guenette, S., Pitcher, T.J., Sumaila, U.R., Walters, C.J., Watson, R., Zeller, D., 2002. Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature 418, 689-695. Walters, C.J., Christensen, V., Martell, S.J., Kitchell, J.F., 2005 Possible ecosystem impacts of applying MSY policies from single-species assessment. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 62, 558-568. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 33 LOOSENING THE CORSET: HOW REAL ARE WASP-WAIST ECOSYSTEMS? 11 Bundy A  Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Bedford Institute of Oceanography, PO Box 1006, Dartmouth, NS B2Y 4A2, Canada; Email: alida.bundy@dfo-mpo.gc.ca  Guénette S EcOceans, 291 Water Street, St. Andrews, NB Canada E5B 1B8; Email: sylvie.guenette@gmail.com  ABSTRACT The concept of a wasp-waist system centres on the dominance of the intermediate trophic level (ITL) of marine ecosystems by a few species of small pelagics that funnel the biomass from plankton to predators. These species were hypothesized to exert top-down control on zooplankton and bottom-up control on their predators. We used EwE models of 17 ecosystems spanning upwelling, coastal shelves and semi-enclosed seas to evaluate the importance of wasp-waist species, other small pelagics (forage fish), and other mid -trophic level plankton consuming species. EwE are an ideal tool for this analysis since they quantify flows into, and from, the intermediate trophic levels. Our results question the very existence of the simple wasp-waist structure:  the wasp-waist may not be as narrow as it was assumed originally as WW does not always dominate the biomass of ITL; wasp-waist species constitute an important prey but are unlikely to control most predators of the ecosystem; wasp-waist species are not the main predator of plankton in most ecosystems and are unlikely to exert top-down control on them. Furthermore, euphausiids and other large zooplankton play an important role in channelling zooplankton to predators directly. Wasp-waist (and forage) species are undeniably essential in marine ecosystems because of their abundance and nutritional qualities but they should be considered as part of a more integrated and complex ecosystem structure. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are thankful to all authors that graciously provided the data from their balanced models directly to us or by posting them on the web.  We also thank three anonymous reviewers whose comments have led to an improved paper. This work was funded by Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s Strategic Program for Ecosystem Research and Advice (SPERA) project “The functional role of forage fish species and implications for EAM in Canada”.  REFERENCES Araújo, J.N., Bundy, A., 2011. Description of three Ecopath with Ecosim ecosystem models developed for the Bay of Fundy, Western Scotian Shelf and NAFO Division 4X.  2952, 189 pp. Araújo, J.N., Bundy, A., 2012. Effects of environmental change, fisheries and trophodynamics on the ecosystem of the western Scotian Shelf, Canada. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 464, 51-67. Bakun, A., Babcock, E.A., Lluch-Cota, S.E., Santora, C., Salvadeo, C.J. 2010. Issues of ecosystem-based management of forage fisheries in "open" non-stationary ecosystems: the example of the sardine fishery in the Gulf of California. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 20, 9-29. Cury, P., Bakun, A., Crawford, R.J.M., 2000. Small pelagics in upwelling systems: patterns of interaction and structural changes in "wasp-waist"ecosystems. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57, 603-618. Fauchald, P., Skov, H., Skern-Mauritzen, M., Johns, D., Tveraa, T., 2011. Wasp-waist interactions in the North Sea ecosystem. PLoS ONE 6, e22729.                                                  11 Cite as: Bundy, A, Guénnete, S. 2014. Loosening the corset: how real are wasp-waist ecosystems?, p. 33-34. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V.Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 33. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 34 Griffiths, S.P., Olson, R.J., Watters, G.M., 2013. Complex wasp-waist regulation of pelagic ecosystems in the Pacific Ocean. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 23, 459-475. Griffiths, S.P., Young, J.W., Lansdell, M.J., 2010. Ecological effects of longline fishing and climate change on the pelagic ecosystem off eastern Australia. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 20, 239-272. Peck, M.A. 2011. Deliverable 1.2 Report on trophic interactions between forage fish and their prey, including the potential for top-down effects on early life stages of commerical important marine fish species (Month 18). FACTS - Forage Fish Interactions 44 pp. Rice, J. 1995. Food web theory, marine food webs, and what climate change may do to northern marine fish populations. In: Climate change and northern fish populations. (Ed. R.J. Beamish), Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences pp. 561-568. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 35 HOW FISHING IMPACTS MEDITERRANEAN MARINE ECOSYSTEMS? AN ECOTROPH MODELING APPROACH12 Halouani G UR 03AGRO1 Ecosystèmes et Ressources Aquatiques, Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie,  43 Avenue Charles Nicolle, 1082 Tunis, Tunisia;  UMR 6539 LEMAR (CNRS/UBO/IRD/IFREMER) Institut de Recherche pour le Développement  Technopôle Brest-Iroise, Rue Dumont d'Urville, 29280 Plouzané, France; Email:ghassen.halouani@gmail.com  Gascuel D UMR 985 Ecologie et Santé des Ecosystèmes (Agrocampus Ouest/INRA), Université Européenne de Bretagne,  Agrocampus Ouest 65 rue de Saint-Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes cedex, France;  Email : didier.gascuel@agrocampus-ouest.fr Hattab T UMR 6539 LEMAR (CNRS/UBO/IRD/IFREMER) Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Technopôle Brest-Iroise, Rue Dumont d'Urville, 29280 Plouzané, France;  Email: hattab.tarek@gmail.com Ben Rais Lasram F UR 03AGRO1 Ecosystèmes et Ressources Aquatiques, Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie, Avenue Charles Nicolle, 1082 Tunis, Tunisia; Email: frida.lasram@gmail.com Coll M UMR 212 Ecosystèmes Marins Exploités (IRD/IFREMER/UM2) Institut de Recherche pour le Développement) & Ecopath Internatinal Initiative Research Association, Barcelona, Spain, Avenue Jean Monnet, BP 171, 34203 Sète, France; Email: marta.coll@ird.fr Tsagarakis K Hellenic Center for Marine Research, Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters, Agios Kosmas, 16610, Elliniko, Athens, Greece; Email: kontsag@hcmr.gr  Piroddi C Institute for Environment and Sustainability, European Commission - Joint Research Centre, Ispra 21027, Italy, Email: cpiroddi@hotmail.com Romdhane MS UR 03AGRO1 Ecosystèmes et Ressources Aquatiques, Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie, Avenue Charles Nicolle, 1082 Tunis, Tunisia; Email: ramadhanms@gmail.com                                                   12 Cite as: Halouani, G, Gascuel, D, Hattab, T, Ben Rais Lasram, F, Coll, M, Tsagarakis, K, Piroddi, C, Romdhane, M S, Le Loc’h, F., 2014. How Fishing impacts Mediterranean marine ecosystems? An EcoTroph modeling approach, p. 35-36. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 35. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 36 Le Loc’h F UMR 6539 LEMAR (CNRS/UBO/IRD/IFREMER) Institut de Recherche pour le Développement,  Technopôle Brest-Iroise, Rue Dumont d'Urville, 29280 Plouzané, France;  Email: francois.le.loch@ird.fr ABSTRACT The use of trophic models such as Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) (Christensen and Walters, 2004) is an effective way to describe the trophic structure and functioning of the ecosystem. But comparison or meta-analyses are often difficult between models built using heterogeneous approaches, and especially using different species aggregations into trophic boxes.  In this study, the EcoTroph modelling appraoch (Gascuel and Pauly, 2009) was applied to five Mediterranean marine ecosystems (i.e. Gulf of Gabes, Ionian Sea, North Aegean Sea, Northern and Central Adriatic Sea and South Catalan Sea) to characterize their food webs and investigate ecosystem responses under various simulated fishing scenarios (Table 1). Table 1. Ecopath models Ecosystems Time range Number of trophic groups Reference Gulf of Gabes 2000-2005 41 (Hattab et al., 2013) Ionian Sea  2007 19 (Piroddi et al., 2011) North Aegean Sea  mid 2000s 40 (Tsagarakis et al., 2010) Northern and Central Adriatic Sea  1990s 40 (Coll et al., 2007) South Catalan Sea  1994 40 (Coll et al., 2006)  This study presents a first attempt of using EcoTroph as common framework focused on trophic levels to compare different ecosystems through their trophic spectra of biomass, catch and fishing mortalities in the Mediterranean Sea. Based on trophic level data, this approach should lead to a better understanding of ecosystem functioning from both an ecological and fisheries perspectives in order to assess ecosystem health. Following the construction of the EcoTroph models, we described the trophic spectra of each ecosystem and we simulated the effects of an increased fishing mortality on ecosystem biomass and catch in order to analyze the sensitivity of each system.  Results highlight that the Mediterranean Sea is highly affected by the depletion of high trophic level organisms, which also appear very sensitive to fishing mortality, and that fishing impact per trophic level differs between ecosystems according to their trophic structure and exploitation patterns (Figure 1). At the ecosystem scale, different simulations of fishing mortality illustrate trophic cascades through the impact of predator biomass on their prey, which leads to subsequent biomass increase in lower trophic levels. We also noticed that ecosystems where trophic cascades were reported are less sensitive to a variation of fishing mortality. Finally, two ecosystem indicators EMSY and E0.1 were proposed to assess the level of exploitation per trophic level and to provide a diagnosis on the fishing impact at the ecosystem scale.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This publication has been produced with the financial support of the DPF PhD fellowships program of the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD) for GH and TH and was partly funded by the projects BISTROMED (ENVI-Med – MISTRALS) and CHARMMED (Fondation TOTAL).   Figure 1. Simulated relative biomass (B/Bref: simulated biomass/current biomass) for fishing mortality multipliers ranging from 0 to 5 in Mediterranean ecosystems. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 37 REFERENCES Christensen, V., Walters, C.J., 2004. Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities and limitations. Ecol. Model. 172, 109-139.  Coll, M., Santojanni, A., Palomera, I., Tudela, S., Arneri, E., 2007. An ecological model of the Northern and Central Adriatic Sea: Analysis of ecosystem structure and fishing impacts. J. Mar. Syst. 67, 119-154.  Coll, M., Shannon, L.J., Moloney, C.L., Palomera, I., Tudela, S., 2006. Comparing trophic flows and fishing impacts of a NW Mediterranean ecosystem with coastal upwelling systems by means of standardized models and indicators. Ecol. Model. 198, 53-70. Hattab, T., Ben Rais Lasram, F., Albouy, C., Romdhane, M.S., Jarboui, O., Halouani, G., Cury, P., Le Loc’h, F., 2013. An ecosystem model of an exploited southern Mediterranean shelf region (Gulf of Gabes, Tunisia) and a comparison with other Mediterranean ecosystem model properties. J. Mar. Syst. 128, 159-174.  Piroddi, C., Bearzi, G., Gonzalvo, J., Christensen, V., 2011. From common to rare: The case of the Mediterranean common dolphin. Biol. Conserv. 144, 2490-2498.  Tsagarakis, K., Coll, M., Giannoulaki, M., Somarakis, S., Papaconstantinou, C., Machias, A., 2010. Food-web traits of the North Aegean Sea ecosystem (Eastern Mediterranean) and comparison with other Mediterranean ecosystems. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 88, 233–248.  Scientific advice for management 38 CARRYING CAPACITY SIMULATIONS AS A TOOL FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT OF A SCALLOP AQUACULTURE SYSTEM13 Kluger LC, Wolff M, Taylor MH Leibniz Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Fahrenheitstr. 6, 28359 Bremen; Email: lotta.kluger@zmt-bremen.de; matthias.wolff@zmt-bremen.de; marc.taylor@zmt-bremen.de ABSTRACT Over the past decade, Sechura Bay has become the center for mariculture in Peru. Here, the Peruvian bay scallop (Argopecten purpuratus) is grown in bottom cultures and the intensity and area extent of the cultivation activities have continuously increased over the years. Currently, the business involves 2500 artisanal fishermen and an export value of more than 100 million US$ per year, but activities are still expanding. For previous cultivation efforts it was shown that too high stocking densities of scallops combined with critical environmental changes may cause mass mortalities and eventually the total depletion of scallop populations (e.g. Wolff 1985; Wolff & Mendo 2000; Zhang et al. 2006; Koch et al. 2005). Accordingly, the ecosystem-based assessment of the current situation and the determination of long-term sustainable limits to scallop culture for the bay of Sechura became crucial. In order to evaluate ecosystem changes following the introduction of great amounts of scallop biomass to the bay and to estimate the long term carrying capacity of the bay for scallop culture, a bilateral German-Peruvian research project was initiated in 2012 (SASCA: Sustainability Analysis of Scallop Culture in Sechura Bay; www.sascaperu.wordpress.com). The results of this project may be applied to other coastal systems exposed to similar development by representing an ecosystem-based approach for integrated management. Monitoring data of the bay’s benthic community, harvest volumes (scallops and other fishery target species) as well as data of density and biomass of cultivated scallops and of primary production were assembled. In addition, in-situ experiments on scallop filtration and respiration rates were conducted. The ecological and physiological data were used to construct a trophic steady state energy flow model and the ecological carrying capacity was estimated by a step-wise increase of scallop’s biomass (Figure 1 and 2). Ecological carrying capacity was reached when more food was needed than produced by the system, indicated by ecotrophic efficiencies for the phytoplankton group greater than one (after Wolff 1994; Jiang & Gibbs 2005; Byron et al. 2011a,b). The model was further subjected to the following scenarios of varying conditions and the system response was explored using the EwE software: 1) Seasonal changes in primary productivity as derived from satellite data and in-situ measurements; 2) Reduction in primary productivity as measured during the strong El Niño event in 1997/98; 3) Continuous increase in cultivated scallop biomass following the trajectory of the past five years, and 4) considering the “bottleneck month”                                                  13 Cite as: Kluger, LC, Wolf, M, Taylor, M. 2014. Carrying capacity simulations as a tool for ecosystem-based management of a scallop aquaculture system, p. 38-39. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 38. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p.  Figure 1. Flow diagram of the trophic structure of the Sechura bay system. All biomass flows in t km-2. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 39 (February) of lowest primary productivity in the bay. Results from these model explorations suggest: that a) the current magnitude of scallop bottom culture appears sustainable under environmental conditions of normal years, b) the carrying capacity of the bay for scallop culture greatly varies seasonally and inter-annually, and c) that under conditions of an El Niño induced (several months) reduction in primary productivity the bay`s carrying capacity is expected to fall below the level of current magnitude of scallop bottom culture. Carrying capacity simulations can be used to limit aquaculture growth in a responsible way (Byron et al. 2011a). In the case of Sechura bay, resulting thresholds and management scenarios are urgently needed providing a valuable tool for both local fishers and managers in their challenging task of finding sustainable long-term levels for this important socio-economic activity in Sechura Bay.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors are grateful for the support of Edwin Barriga Rivera and Elky Torres Silva from the Instituto del Mar del Perú (IMARPE) in providing valuable data on the benthic community of Sechura bay and of Prof. Dr. Jaime Mendo for the help in obtaining landing statistics. The bilateral SASCA project is financed by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Germany.  REFERENCES Byron, C., Link, J., Costa-Pierce, B., Bengston, D., 2011a. Calculating ecological carrying capacity of shellfish aquaculture using mass-balance modeling: Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island. Ecol. Model. 222, 1743-1755. Byron, C., Link, J., Costa-Pierce, B., Bengston, D., 2011b. Modeling ecological carrying capacity of shellfish aquaculture in highly flushed temperate lagoons. Aquaculture. 314, 87-99. Jiang, W.M., Gibbs, M.T., 2005. Predicting the carrying capacity of bivalve shellfish culture using a steady, linear food web model. Aquac. 244, 171-185. Koch, V., Mazón Suástegui, J.M., Sinsel, F., Mungaray, M.R., Dunn, D., 2005. Lion’s paw scallop (Nodipecten subnodosus, Sowerby 1835) aquaculture in Bahía Magdalena, Mexico: effects of population density and season on juvenile growth and mortality. Aquac. Res. 36, 505-512. Wolff, M., 1985. Fischerei, Oekologie und Populationsdynamik der Pilgermuschel Argopecten purpuratus im Fischereigebiet von Pisco (Peru) unter dem Einfluss des El Nino 1982/1983. PhD Thesis, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany.  Wolff, M., 1994. A trophic model for Tongy Bay – a system exposed to suspended scallop culture (Northern Chile). J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 182, 149-168. Wolff, M., Mendo, J., 2000. Management of the Peruvian bay scallop (Argopecten purpuratus) metapopulation with regard to environmental change. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshwat. Ecosyst. 10, 117-126. Zhang. X., Zhu, M., Li, R., Wang, Z., Xia, B., Zhang, L., 2006. Density-dependent mortality of the scallop Chlamys farreri (Jones & Preston) in grow-out culture. Aquac.37, 842-844. Figure 2. Calculation of ecological carrying capacity by a step-wise increase of scallop’s biomass. Multiplier 1 represents current ecosytem state (with scallop biomass at 162 t km-2). Dashed line represents the carrying capacity threshold of 796.25 t km-2 defined as the last system state at which ecotrophic efficiency (EE) of phytoplankton is still below 1. Scientific advice for management 40 A FOOD WEB ANALYSIS OF THE RÍO DE LA PLATA ESTUARY AND ADJACENT SHELF ECOSYSTEM: TROPHIC STRUCTURE, BIOMASS FLOWS AND THE ROLE OF FISHERIES14 Lercari D UNDECIMAR - GEPEIA, Facultad de Ciencias – Centro Universitario Región Este (CURE), Universidad de la República, Iguá 4225, Montevideo 11400, Uruguay. lercari@fcien.edu.uy Horta S, Martínez G Dirección Nacional de Recursos Acuáticos, Constituyente 1497, Montevideo 11200, Uruguay. Calliari D Ecología Funcional de Sistemas Acuáticos, Universidad de la República, Uruguay.  CURE Rutas 9 y 15 s/n Rocha, Uruguay Bergamino L Department of Zoology and Entomology, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94,  Grahamstown 6140, South Africa. ABSTRACT We performed an inclusive assessment of the structure and functioning of the Río de la Plata estuary and adjacent shelf ecosystem (RdlP), including the effect of fishing. A trophic mass-balance model was used to: 1) characterize the ecosystem in terms of aquatic food web theory; 2) evaluate the particular role of individual biotic components on the ecosystem (e.g. top predators, invasive mollusc species, etc.) and 3) asses the role of diverse fishing fleets on the ecosystem.  The mass-balanced model of the RdlP ecosystem is based on 37 functional groups: 3 marine mammals; one coastal birds; 17 fish; 12 invertebrates; two zooplankton; one phytoplankton; and one detritus. Fish biomass were obtained from the swept area method based on local high precision stock assessment surveys, while biomass data for most other groups (e.g. marine mammals, benthic invertebrates) were estimated by local information available in the literature. Production/biomass ratios (P/B) and consumption/biomass ratios (Q/B) were taken from the literature or obtained from the application of empirical equations, while diet composition where compiled from published information. Five fishing fleets operating in the study area were identified and categorized by base port location and country where landings took place. Uruguayan coastal fisheries comprise the industrial bottom trawl fishery, the artisanal fleet  and the artisanal mussel fishery. Argentinean fleets included the northern coast of Buenos Aires fisheries and Mar del Plata fisheries fleets. The results indicate a trophic structure and functioning common to other estuaries, where outstanding primary production exceeds consumption, and detritus accumulates in the system. This leads to distinct attributes such as high total system throughput, herbivory outweighing detritivory and an intermediate state in terms of ecosystem growth and development. Model results showed that seabirds, sea lions (Otaria flavescens) and the Rio de la Plata Dolphin (Pontoporia blainvillei), are apex predators, with high levels of niche overlap among them, suggesting                                                  14 Cite as: Lercari, D, Horta, S, Martínez, G, Calliari, D, Bergamino, L. 2014. A food web analysis of the Río de La Plata estuary and adjacent shelf ecosystem: trophic structure, biomass flows and the role of fisheries, p. 40-41. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 40. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 41 competition for similar resources such as fish species (Bergamino et al. 2012). Marine mammals and seabirds produce negative effects on commercially important species, while, at the same time, indirect positive effects (increase of the biomass) were also detected in some groups related to trophic cascade effects.   In addition the two invasive mollusc species affect multiple ecosystem components both directly and indirectly (Lercari & Bergamino 2011). In this sense, the gastropod Rapana  venosa and the commercially valuable whitemouth croaker, Micropogonias furnieri, exhibited a high level of niche overlap (91%), while the clam Corbicula fluminea exhibited a high level of niche overlap with Mytilidae (94%), which suggests in both cases high levels of competition for similar resources. Rapana venosa had mixed trophic impacts but exhibited a predominantly top down effect on most bivalves and could could be a threat to natural resources in the area affecting to the fishing fleets. Corbicula fluminea negatively influenced phytoplankton and detritus biomass and its positive effects on higher trophic level groups suggest a central bottom-up role in the food web as a bentho-pelagic coupler. Both species had negative impacts on the five fleets modeled, showing that the effects of these invasive species could extend to the socio-economic sector.  Fisheries analyses showed widespread impacts produced by industrial bottom trawl fleets, and specific impacts produced by artisanal fisheries over important groups. The evaluation of the effects of fishing showed minor ecosystem consequence of the loss of secondary production and a high probability of sustainable fishing at ecosystem level. This study sets up the basis for temporal ecosystem level monitoring of the state of the Río de la Plata estuary and adjacent shelf ecosystem. The model captured the main features of the RdlP ecosystem: a high production associated with low transfer efficiency from primary producers to higher TLs, significant flows to detritus and also fishing activities most likely targeting intermediate trophic groups requiring a small portion of the total available primary production. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank all the people that produced fundamental information for the implementation of the ecosystem model for the Río de la Plata. Support from projects PDT 7107 and DINARA/ FAO/GEF (ID 3410) is recognized. We are grateful to the Uruguayan National Aquatic Resources Office (DINARA, Uruguay) for providing useful information during 2007. PDT 7107 and the AUCI for traveling support. REFERENCES Bergamino, L., Szteren, D., Lercari, D., 2012. Trophic impacts of marine mammals and seabirds in the Río de La Plata estuary and the nearshore oceanic ecosystem. Est. Coasts 35, 1571-1582. Lercari, D., Bergamino, L., 2011. Impacts of two invasive mollusks, Rapana venosa (Gastropoda) and Corbicula fluminea (Bivalvia), on the food web structure of the Río de la Plata estuary and nearshore oceanic ecosystem. Biol. Inv. 13, 2053-2061. Scientific advice for management 42 ECOSYSTEM MODEL OF THE SANTOS BASIN MARINE ECOSYSTEM, SE BRAZIL15 Gasalla MA, Rodrigues AR, Pincinato RBM Fisheries Ecosystems Laboratory (LabPesq), Oceanographic Institute, University of São Paulo, Praça do Oceanografico, 192. Cidade Universitaria, São Paulo, SP 055080-120 Brazil; Email: mgasalla@usp.br Christensen V Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Canada; Email: vchristensen@fisheries.ubc.ca ABSTRACT The Santos Basin/South Brazil Bight ecosystem corresponds to the northern portion of the South Brazil Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem, characterized by the occurrence of seasonal upwellings/intrusions and oceanic mesoscale vortex formation. Trophodynamics is mainly based on pools of primary production and detritus-based pathways with high biodiversity richness, and regular fisheries removals. In fact, humans have extracted benefits to food production and livelihoods through both small-scale and industrial fisheries, with a particular emphasis on the sardine Sardinella brasiliensis and several shrimps target stocks that have also an important ecological role up the marine foodweb. An end-to-end description of the ecosystem was undertaken with EwE focusing on the region up to 1000 m depth, representing the early 2000-decade. The model represents the integration and synthesis of a broader effort of evaluating the Santos Basin ecosystem based on an in-depth GIS-based database funded by a national environmental licensing/mitigation program. The aim was to undertake an ecological audit of current produced knowledge on marine biodiversity based on a trophic model of 35-compartment summarizing ecosystem structure and functioning (Fig.1). With the aim of providing advice on the key scientific gaps on regional marine biodiversity useful for ecosystem-based management purposes, quantitative ecological indicators were selected based on the matrix of trophic impacts (MTI). A ranking on the importance of each compartment in terms of trophic status will be shown considering energy fluxes and biomass.                                                  15 Cite as: Gasalla, MA, Rodrigues, AR, Pincinato, RBM. Christensen, V. 2014. Ecosystem model of the Santos Basin Marine Ecosystem, p. 42-43. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 42. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 43  Figure 1. Schematic representation of the trophic model structure in terms of compartments and main flows of the Santos Basin marine ecosystem. Scientific advice for management 44  Figure 1. Area represented by the fishery model: South-Western Baltic Sea with German EEZ (green line), NATURA 2000 areas (white) and ICES subdivisions 22 and 24 (red line). IMPACT OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES ON THE MARINE ECOSYSTEM WITHIN THE GERMAN EEZ OF THE WESTERN BALTIC SEA16 Opitz S, Garilao C GEOMAR Helmholtz Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel Düsternbrooker Weg 20, 24105 Kiel, Germany; Email: sopitz@geomar.de; cgarilao@geomar.de ABSTRACT Fisheries belong to the strongest negative anthropogenic interventions on marine ecosystems  (Jones 1992, Hall et al. 2000, and Kaiser et al. 2006).  In Europe, this is particularly true for the North and Baltic Sea and therefore also for the German Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of both seas.  In the scope of the project “ecosystem based fisheries management in the German EEZ” implemented by the German Federal Agency for Environmental Protection (Bundesamt für Naturschutz BfN) impacts of commercial fisheries on the marine ecosystem in the German EEZ of North and Baltic Sea, with special emphasis on NATURA 2000 areas are being studied with the use of trophic network models. Model results offer suggestions for sustainable fisheries management measures according to article 2.3 of the new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) of the European Union (EU) for implementation of “an ecosystem based approach for fisheries management by minimizing the negative impacts of fishing activities”.  For the south-western Baltic Sea a trophic network model has been constructed representing the following geographical regions: Great Belt, Little Belt, Kiel Bay, Bay of Mecklenburg, Arkona Basin until West of Bornholm Basin (ICES subdivisions 22 and 24) and including all NATURA 2000 areas in the German EEZ (see Fig. 1). NATURA 2000 areas in the German EEZ comprise Fehmarn Belt, Kadetrinne, Westliche Rönnebank, Adlergrund and  Pomeranian Bay with Oderbank, while Pomeranian Bay is also a designated EU bird protection area (see Fig. 1).  The modeling software Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE www.ecopath.org) was used for model preparation. FishBase (www.fishbase.org), SeaLifeBase (www.sealifebase.org), ICES database, ICES Stock_Summary, DATRAS, BfN clusters 4 and 6, published models, and other relevant literature (e.g. Froese & Sampang 2013, Opitz 2007) served as data sources.  The model for the Western Baltic Sea represents the following 24 trophic groups: Seals  (Phoca vitulina, Halichoeres grypus), (sea-) birds, harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), cod (Gadus morhua) 3+ years, 2 years, <2 years, flounder (Platichthys flesus), dab (Limanda limanda), plaice (Pleuronectes platessa), turbot (Scophthalmus maximus), other demersal fish, herring (Clupea harengus) >2 years, <2 years, sprat (Sprattus sprattus), other pelagic fish, pelagic macrofauna (jelly fish), benthic macrofauna, mesozooplankton, microzooplankton, benthic meiofauna, bacteria/ microorganisms, phytoplankton,                                                  16 Cite as: Opitz, S, Carilao, C. 2014. Impact of commercial fisheries on the marine ecosystem within the German EEZ of the western Baltic Sea, p. 44-45. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 44. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 45 benthic producers, detritus/DOM.  The model aims to analyze impact of fisheries on the marine ecosystem of the western Baltic Sea with focus on the interaction (diet competition, cannibalism) of the main commercial target species cod, herring and sprat.  Other questions to be answered by the model are: Which ecosystem-based fisheries management provides for the economically most important species in the German EEZ and the German NATURA 2000 areas of the Baltic Sea a) the highest catch b) with the highest profit, and c) with the least negative impacts on the ecosystem as specified by the CFP (F<Fmsy) and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) (B > Bmsy, healthy size and age structure of the stocks, no impacting of other species)? Note that a) and b) do not have a legal basis.  The Western Baltic Sea fishery model is furthermore viewed as a supporting tool for comparing model results with stock assessments of ICES. The model serves also as a prerequisite for estimating the impact of the recently modified CFP on commercially exploited fish stocks and other elements of the ecosystem of the Western Baltic Sea. Taking into account proposals for actions for a fisheries management in NATURA 2000 areas as in Sell et al. (2011) different closure scenarios and their effects on the ecosystem are being simulated by use of the model.  For the Baltic Sea a series of predecessor models exists. All of them represent regions East of the areas where the German NATURA 2000 areas are situated. Furthermore, with one exception, all models were prepared almost exclusively with data sets from the last third of the 20th century. The preparation of updated models is thus not only of importance for the alignment of actions for ecosystem based fisheries management in the entire region of the German EEZ and particularly in NATURA 2000 areas but contributes to fill gaps of knowledge from a scientific point of view. The new model shows if - and to what extent - results of the predecessor models can be transferred to present conditions and to other regions in the Baltic Sea.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The German Federal Agency for Environmental Protection (Bundesamt für Naturschutz BfN) provided financial support, members of Clusters 4 and 6 provided necessary data for marine mammals and sea birds.  REFERENCES Froese, R. Sampang, A., 2013. Potential indicators and reference points for good environmental status of commercially exploited marine fishes and invertebrates in the German EEZ. World Wide Web electronic publication, available from http://oceanrep.geomar.de/22079/. Hall, M. A., Alverson, D.L., Metuzals, K.I., 2000. By-Catch: problems and solutions. Mar. Poll. Bull. 41, 204-219.   Jones, J.B., 1992. Environmental impact of trawling on the seabed: a review. N. Zea. J. Mar. Fresh. Res. 26, 59-67.  Kaiser, M. J., K. R. Clarke, H. Hinz, M. C. V. Austen, P. J. Somerfield und I. Karakassis, 2006. Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 311, 1-14.  Opitz, S., 2007. Food Web Simulations with ECOPATH for the Potential Offshore Windpark Sites Butendiek, Dan Tysk and Sandbank 24. Coastal Futures Working Report 15.  Sell, A., Pusch, C., v. Dorrien, C., Krause, J., Schulze, T., Carstensen, D., 2011. Maßnahmenvorschläge für das Fischereimanagement in Natura 2000-Gebieten der deutschen AWZ der Nord- und Ostsee. Bundesamt für Naturschutz, von Thünen-Institut für See- und Ostseefischerei, Leibniz-Institut für Meereswissenschaften an der Universität Kiel: 299 p. Scientific advice for management 46 THE A-LEX PROJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF INCREASED SHIPPING IN THE ARCTIC- A CASE STUDY FOR THE PECHORA SEA 17 Ramsvatn S, Larsen LH, Sagerup K Akvaplan-niva AS;  Email: sir@akvaplan.niva.no; lhl@akvaplan.niva.no; ksa@akvaplan.niva.no ABSTRACT As the polar ice cap is retracting, shipping along the Northern Sea route is increasing. The Arctic areas are rural and sensitive and infrastructure is scarce. The A-lex project aims to assess effects of a possible oil spill in the European Arctic to support the future legislation and Norwegian foreign policy in the Arctic. Considering likely effects from oil spills, do present international regulations and standards for inter-national shipping under MARPOL and IMO sufficiently preserve the Arctic environment and ecosystems? The Pechora Sea (Russian Arctic) is the South-eastern part of the Barents Sea and is considered to be a separate sea area because of marked differences in environmental conditions compared to the rest of the Barents Sea. The coast of the Pechora Sea is among the most sensitive areas in the region to an accidental oil spill. The area is an important spawning ground for Arctic fishes and is rich in sea birds (e.g. ducks) and mammals (e.g. walrus) that feed on benthic invertebrates. The coastline is characterised by low-level marshes which suffer frequent and long-term flooding as well as abrasive effects of sea ice, which lies often along the muddy coasts of marine inlets and salt lakes. These muddy coasts are characterized by a high abundance of mussels, and the extensive shallow areas are susceptible to oil sinking into the ground and polluting for many years, as seen after the Florida spill (1969, Massachusetts, USA).  Through a case study of a fictitious ship wreckage where "the Oleum" has an engine malfunction and runs aground, the A-lex project describes oil spill response in Russia as well as a study of Russian legislation. "The Oleum" is a vessel type likely to be serving the future petroleum exploitation in the Arctic. To assess the environmental damage we are combining ecotoxicology and ecological modelling by using the results from ecotoxicology studies done in the laboratory (on mussels), but verified as being highly realistic after an accidental release of diesel at Skjervøy in Northern Norway, to assess effects at population level for mussels. We are integrating these results into an ecosystem model (Ecopath with Ecosim) for the Pechora Sea to make predictions on effects of a potential oil spill. We are using the lessons learned from previous spills, such as the Prince William Sound spill (Exxon Valdez) to estimate possible effects of an oil spill on the Pechora Sea including long term effects. The ecosystem framework extends ecotoxicology from treating each species separately and restricting assessment to acute short-term impacts, to include interactions among biological components of the larger ecosystem and to longer-time series.  The A-lex project will provide a common integrated knowledge base on the political, legal, environmental and technological challenges related to Arctic shipping, exemplified by the European Arctic. The project is conducted as a co-operation between UiT-The Arctic University of Norway (faculty of law), Akvaplan-niva AS (environmental studies) and Marintek (technology for the future of Arctic Shipping). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project is financed through the Norwegian Ministry of foreign affairs.                                                  17 Cite as: Ramsvatn, S, Larsen, LH, Sagerup K. 2014. The A-lex project: Environmental effects of increased shipping in the Arctic- a case study for the Pechora Sea, p. 46-47. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 46. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 47 REFERENCES Culbertson, J.B., Valiela, I., Pickart, M., Peacock, E.E., Reddy, C.M., 2008. Long-term consequences of residual petroleum on salt marsh grass. J. App. Eco. 45, 1284-1292. Denisenko, S.G., Denisenk, N.V., Lehtonen, K.K., Andersin, A.B., Laine, A.O., 2003. Macrozoobenthos of the Pechora Sea (SE Barents Sea): community structure and spatial distribution in relation to environmental conditions. Mar. Eco. Prog. Ser. 258:109-123.  Kulakov M. Y. 2004.  Ecosystem of the Barents and Kara Seas, Coastal segment. In: Robinson, A.R., Brink, K.I. The Sea, Volume 14. Edited by Harvard University Press.  Peterson, C.H., Rice, S.D., Short, J.W., Esler, D., Bodkin, J.L., Ballachey, B.E., Irons, D.B., 2003 Long-term ecosystem response to the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Science 302, 2082-2086. Spiridonov V.A., Gavrilo M.V., Krasnova E.D., Nikolaeva N.G. (eds.)., 2011. Atlas of marine and coastal biological diversity in the Russian Arctic, Moscow, WWF. Scientific advice for management 48 FISHER’S CONSULTING AND BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE TO PROBE LOSS OF FISH DIVERSITY IN A TROPICAL COASTAL LAGOON18 Carvalho AR Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte – UFRN. Department of Ecology.  Campus Universitário s/n, Lagoa Nova. Cx p 1524. CEP 59.098-970 Natal; Email:acarvalho.ufrn@gmail.com Angelini R Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte – UFRN.  Department of Civil Engineering;Email:ronangelini@gmail.com ABSTRACT In this paper, resources users were assumed as experts on environment and resources exploited. Accordingly, we focused on Fisher’s Knowledge Approach (FKA) to assemble information aiming validate and complement biological data on fish community and fisheries in a tropical coastal lagoon. To achieve this, first fisher’s information (as experts) was cross-validated with biological data and next their knowledge was used to justify biological findings from literature and from Ecopath model simulations using data currently sampled. The predictions assumed were that (1) fishers will claim that the peacock bass (a invasive fish species introduced) had harmful effect on fish biodiversity due to the top down control on the system; (2) the past and current food web described by fishers will match to those described by the literature and by data recently sampled and (3) experts information will support Ecopath model simulations outcomes regarding to the invasive fish species.  Table 1. Jaccard similarity index for species richness in Extremoz Lake, based on current samplings, literature (Vieira & Shibatta, 2002 and Starks, 1913), and Fisher’s Information for Past (before 2000) and currently. Jaccard similarity index Current Samples Vieira (2002) Starks (1913) Fisher’s Information (Past) Currently Sampling (CS) 1    Vieira & Shibatta (2002) 0.40 1   Starks (1913) 0.20 0.20 1  Past Information (Fishers) 0.14 0.60 0.10 1 Current Information ( Fishers) 0.63 0.37 0.20 0.10  According to fishers 22 species were usually caught in the past and only 13 of these are still occurring currently. Fisher’s knowledge endorsed the presence of five marine species in the past and the current absence of marine species in the lagoon while Vieira (2002) caught 35 species (four marine) and Starks (1913) reported the occurrence of 13 species with five marine fish species (Table 1). Current food web (Figure 2a) and past food web (Figure 2b) elaborated following fisher’s information were much simpler than the food web elaborated with data from Vieira (2002; Figure 2c). Simplest food web however resulted from current biological samplings (Figure 2d). These differences are reflected in food web metrics that reveal more paths and higher path lengths in older food webs (Table 2).                                                  18 Cite as: Carvalho, AR. et al. 2014. Fisher’s consulting and biological evidence to probe loss of fish diversity in a tropical coastal lagoon, p. 48-49. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 48. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 49 Experts indicated the collapse of fishery for commercial and subsistence purposes due to the loss of biodiversity, changes in fish species composition and simplification in trophic web, confirming biological data. Additionally fisher’s indication that the main cause for ecosystem  changes was the sequential construction of bridges that interrupted water flow between the lagoon and the ocean, matched to the Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) model simulations findings in that exotic species (Cichla kelberi) removal from the ecosystem does not recovery fish composition or the trophic web complexity.  Figure 1. Food webs of Extremoz Lagoon: a) Past food web elaborated according to fisher’s information; b) Current food web elaborated according to fisher’s information; c) Past food web elaborated on the basis of Vieira (2002) data; d) Current food web elaborated by Ecopath software using data currently sampled. The first three food webs were developed in Cytoscape software.  Table 2. Food web’s metrics for the lake, based on our samplings, literature (Vieira & Shibatta, 2002), and Fisher’s Information for Past (before 2000) and currently. Food web’s Metrics Fisher’s information Biological data Past Currently Vieira & Shibatta (2002) Currently samples Shortest Path 124 89 166 32 Path Length 1.47 1.53 1.55 1.15 Av. no. of neighbor 4.26 3.66 3.27 4.1  The introduction of peacock bass was reported by 40% of fishers as the second main reason for biodiversity loss in the lagoon. Furthermore, peacock bass was associated to the trophic web unbalance by 76% of the fishers because it "eats what it sees ahead”. Major control on the food web was attributed to shrimp compartment and detritus food chain, confirming model evidence that peacock bass is not forcing top down control. Fisher’s view on the role of peacock bass, enlightened simulations outcomes that never restored food web even after this top predator removal. Results endorse that fisher’s knowledge actually is subject to bias due to the influence of local facts, personal skills, time of fishing practice and others. But these features also underscore their ability in observing and report local events and may, under certain situations, be the only source of information.  REFERENCES Vieira, D.B., 2002. Icthyofauna freshwater survey in Rio Grande do Norte State (Brazil). Final Undergraduate Report. Londrina, Paraná. 104p. (In Portuguese). Starks, E.C., 1913. The fishes of the Stanford Expedition to Brazil. Leland Stanford Publications University Series. 77 pp.  Scientific advice for management 50 INFORMING AND PLANNING MARINE CONSERVATION: ORAL PRESENTATIONS MARINE PROTECTED AREAS IN THE HAIDA GWAII ECOSYSTEM: MODELLING AND POLICY ISSUES19 Pitcher TJ, Kumar R, Varkey DA, Surma S, Lam ME  University of British Columbia Fisheries Centre,Vancouver, BC, Canada;  Email: pitcher.t@gmail.com, r.kumar@fisheries.ubc.ca, d.varkey@fisheries.ubc.ca, s.surma@fisheries.ubc.ca, mimibethlam@gmail.com ABSTRACT An Ecospace model of the marine ecosystem around Haida Gwaii, Canada, employs detailed habitat and fisheries maps on a 4km grid deriving from extensive GIS material that is part of an official regional spatial planning process by the Haida Nation and the Canadian government. MPAs are designated by Marxan modeling and by the output of a 3-year marine spatial planning process performed by the local community. In addition to the usual biomass conservation from protected areas, results suggest considerable benefits to some fisheries from spillover around MPAs, even for quite modest amounts of protected area in the order of 10%. Although Ecospace modeling can be very helpful in indicating likely benefits once MPAs are established, the work raises many issues in its practical application to real situations. Choice of boundaries for MPAS that are yet to be gazetted can be controversial and unfortunately many results are dependent on small local difference. Marxan output is often not usable directly for both ecological and human reasons, and similar issues apply to MPAs set by collaborative marine spatial planning. Spill-over benefits are very sensitive to values for dispersal parameters in Ecospace. This type of work not only raises fundamental issues in the governance of marine protected areas but also highlights the uncertainties inherent in even the best spatial modeling, which may be seen in public policy fora as weaknesses to question to the method or even be exploited to the advantage of some stakeholders ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work was sponsored in part by the Council of the Haida Nation and by the Natural Environment Research Council of Canada. We thank Russ Jones, Jason Thompson, Chris McDougall and Catherine Riggs of the Haida Oceans Technical Team, twelve members of Marine Advisory Committee for Haida Gwaii, and the Marine Planning Partnership of British Columbia for access to data, support and discussion of these issues.                                                  19 Cite as: Pitcher, T. et al. 2014. Marine protected areas in the Haida Gwaii ecosystem: modelling and policy issues, p. 50. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 50. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 51 SIMULATING THE COMBINED EFFECT OF EL NINO AND THE BAN OF THE INDUSTRIAL FISHERY ON THE GALAPAGOS MARINE RESERVE – AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS USING EWE20 Wolff M, Taylor MH Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Fahrenheitstrasse 8, 28359 Bremen, Germany; Email: mwolff@zmt-bremen.de ABSTRACT The open waters surrounding Galapagos were subjected to heavy industrial fishery from the 1930s onwards. The main target species were tuna, with catches that ranged from 412 tons in 1933 to more then 23000 tonnes in 1940, but also bait species, like Sardines and Salemas were heavily exploited. During the period 1995-1997, 16 industrial fishing boats were operating around the Galapagos catching about 40,000 tons of yellowfin, bigeye and skípjack tuna. Industrial fishery was banned in 1998 with the declaratory of the Special Law for Galapagos (SLG) and the creation of the Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR). This law allows only artisanal fishing with locally based, small boats and simple gears. Since then finfish catches have decreased greatly in the GMR to a few tens of tonnes annually. Over the last years, and after a period of mainly targeting demersal fish (grouper) and invertebrates (Lobster and sea cucumber) resources artisanal fishermen have started to move to the pelagic resources again with yellowfin tuna and wahoo being the target species. In the very same year 1998, when the new law came into play and the industrial fishing was stopped, Galapagos was hit by the strongest El Nino of the past century and the GMR was impacted in dramatic ways: the thermocline deepened, the biogeographic patterning of the archipelago was homogenized and tropical warm water conditions were found everywhere. And a long-lasting (10 months) reduction in the primary productivity with an associated shift in plankton species composition caused a starving of the food web from below with drastic consequences for many biota. We build a trophic model of the GMR of 34 functional compartments for the time period for the mid 1990s based on a diverse data set and used this reference model to explore the effect of the fishing ban and the El Nino impact on the ecosystem and its resources. We assumed a 90% reduction in the industrial fishery following the year 1998 (allowing 10% clandestine fishery to continue) and used satellite time series data of phytoplankton biomass for the El Nino period and thereafter. These data were then used to drive model behavior over time (15 years). Our findings suggest that the El Nino-induced starving of the food web overrides the positive effect of the fishing ban for a period of 2 to 3 years, suggesting that during this period the bottom up effect of reduced primary productivity is stronger than the top-down effect from the release of the fishery. However, the disruption of the system by the El Nino impact seemed to lead to higher biomasses of large pelagic fish predators in the medium term (3-9 years), than would have occurred under the same fishery condition without the El Nino impact.  It thus seems that, since predator biomass is greatly reduced during and shortly after the El Nino event, the fast growing populations of prey fish find an “open loop hole” (sensu Bakun and Weeks) to proliferate (to higher then average levels) first and are then followed by their predators in a Lotka-Volterra fashion. It then takes several years for the system to normalize. Since the residence time for the different species in the area of the GMR  is largely unknown, we also explored the effect of different residence times on the biomass increase of pelagic target resources and found a substantial increase (>10%) even at residence times as low as 10%.                                                  20 Cite as: Wolff, M. et al. 2014. Simulating the combined effect of El Nino and the ban of the industrial fishery on the Galapagos Marine Reserve – an exploratory analysis using EwE, p. 51. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 51. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 52 ASSESSING THE TROPHIC FUNCTIONING OF THE MARINE PROTECTED AREA OF PORTOFINO (ITALY) WITH A STANDARDIZED ECOSYSTEM MODEL21 Barrier C, Prato G Université de Nice Sophia‐Antipolis; Faculté de Sciences,  EA 4228 ECOMERS, 06108 Nice cedex 2, France; Email: cebarrier@gmail.com, gprato@unice.fr Gascuel D Université Européenne de Bretagne, UMR Agrocampus ouest /INRA Ecologie et Santé des Ecosystèmes, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes cedex, France;  Email: didier.gascuel@agrocampus-ouest.fr Guidetti P Université de Nice Sophia‐Antipolis; Faculté de Sciences,  EA 4228 ECOMERS, 06108 Nice cedex 2, France; Email: paolo.guidetti@unice.fr Cappanera V Portofino Marine Protected Area, Santa Margherita Ligure, Genova, Italy;  Email: v.cappanera@portofinoamp.it Cattaneao-Vietti R Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, Ancona, Italy; Email: catta@unige.it Mangialajo L, Francour P Université de Nice Sophia‐Antipolis; Faculté de Sciences, EA 4228 ECOMERS, 06108 Nice cedex 2, France; Email: luisa.mangialajo@unice.fr, francour@unice.fr ABSTRACT Marine protected areas (MPAs) have been recognized as an effective tool to reduce and manage human impacts on marine ecosystems, but there are still strong gaps in knowledge on the possible consequences of protection on food web interactions. Mediterranean coastal ecosystems are complex systems that support a great diversity of habitats and species. The application of food-web modelling to these ecosystems allows to unravel such complexity and could thus help to better pursue the conservation and management objectives of Mediterranean MPAs.  Unfortunately, studies of these kind are scarce due to the difficulty of obtaining local biomass data for all functional groups in coastal protected areas of high biodiversity. In a previous work the authors proposed a standardized and simplified model structure for a coastal Northwestern Mediterranean MPA, with 31 functional groups. Here, we applied this standardized structure to model the Portofino promontory MPA, Italy (Figure 1). The model focuses on the area of major protection interest, i.e. the southern front of the protected promontory. Considerable effort has been dedicated to collect local and precise biomass data derived from the many years of research on this MPA.                                                   21 Cite as: Barrier, C. et al. 2014. Assessing the trophic functioning of the marine protected area of Portofino (Italy) with a standardized ecosystem model, p. 52-53. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 52. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 53 This study allowed us to: 1 - Provide a snapshot of ecosystem functioning 10 years after protection, confirm the key ecological role of the top predator Epinephelus marginatus, (highly valued as a strong touristic attraction within the MPA) as well as identify other key species 2.  Quantify the potential export of fish biomass from the MPA to the exploited surrounding zones. 2. Test the feasibility and reliability, through extensive sensitivity analysis, of applying standardized Ecopath models centred on local biomass data, to NW Mediterranean marine protected areas.    Figure 1. Portofino Marine Protected Area. The modeled area encloses the area of major protection interest (black rectangle). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The MMMPA - Training Network for Monitoring Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) [grant number 290056]. Scientific advice for management 54 KEYSTONE SPECIES: A RESTORED AND OPERATIONAL CONCEPT TO INFORM MARINE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION22 Valls A (1)Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, V6T1Z4 Vancouver, B.C., Canada;Emails: a.valls@fisheries.ubc.ca Coll M Institut de Ciències del Mar (ICM-CSIC), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta 37-49,  08003 Barcelona, Spain;  Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, UMR EME 212,  Centre de Recherche Halieutique Méditerranéenne et Tropicale,  Avenue Jean Monnet, BP 171. 34203 Sète Cedex, France; Email: marta.coll@ird.fr; Ecopath International Initiative Research Association, Barcelona, Spain. Christensen V Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, V6T1Z4 Vancouver, B.C., Canada;Emails: v.christensen@fisheries.ubc.ca; ABSTRACT The metaphorical terminology of ‘keystone species’ was introduced in aquatic food web ecology by R.T. Paine (1969). Variations in the keystone species abundance or activity would have greater impacts on biodiversity and trophic structure, compared to other coexisting species with similar or higher abundance in the ecosystem (Paine 1969). Since Paine’s analogy, the concept of keystone species rapidly expanded, as it was applied to an ever-growing number of aquatic and terrestrial species, playing a wide variety of critical roles in the ecosystem (Paine 1995; Power and Mills 1995; Power et al. 1996). In our approach, we extricated the keystone species concept of all overlapping concepts describing other ecologically important species, and we defined a keystone species as a species characterized by a high and wide impact on its food web, despite a low biomass.  Two alternative indices measuring the potential for being a keystone species, or ‘keystoneness’ (KS), have been implemented in the Ecopath with Ecosim software (Christensen et al. 2008). The first index was proposed by Libralato et al. (2006), and the second one was adapted from a methodology proposed by Power et al. (1996). Both indices were applied to several modeled food webs, but led to inconsistent results in terms of species identified as potential keystone ones (e.g., Coll et al. 2013; Tecchio et al. 2013). In our study, we intended to explain and overcome the limitations of the existing functional KS indices.  We derived a new functional index estimating species keystoneness from a meta-analysis on a selection of food web models. 101 Ecopath models, representative of the variety of marine ecosystems worldwide, were selected with a scoring method. A suite of KS indices, comprising new and existing ones, were formulated, by combining measures of the Mixed Trophic Impact (Ulanowicz and Puccia 1990) and biomass. The 12 KS indices were applied to the 101 selected models, and the identified keystone species were recorded. Two statistical methods were used to select the new KS index: Spearman rank correlation tests and a classification tree, in which ecosystem-specific thresholds were defined.                                                   22 Cite as: Valls, A. et al. 2014. Keystone species: a restored and operational concept to inform marine biodiversity conservation, p. 54-55. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 54. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 55 The selected KS index was shown to be more balanced than the ones previously proposed in the literature and implemented in Ecopath, thus attributing high keystoneness to species having both low biomass and high trophic impact. Species were ranked according to their estimates of keystoneness with the selected KS index, so that potential keystone species were quantitatively identified in the 101 modeled food webs, and compared across models. Cartilaginous fishes and toothed whales obtained the highest occurrences over all models.  Keystone species, by maintaining the food web structure of their community, are critical species, which play an important ecological function, performed by few other species in the ecosystem (Perry 2010). The identification of functionally important species, such as keystone species, not only helps developing effective conservation strategies for species-level prioritization, but also better understanding ecosystem functioning and processes (Jordán 2009; Clemente et al. 2010).  REFERENCES Christensen, V., Walters, C., Pauly, D., Forrest, R., 2008. Ecopath with Ecosim version 6 User Guide. Lenfest Ocean Futures Project. Clemente, S., Hernández, J.C., Rodríguez, A., Brito A., 2010. Identifying keystone predators and the importance of preserving functional diversity in sublittoral rocky-bottom areas. Marine Ecology Progress Series 413, 55-67. Coll, M., Navarro, J., Palomera, I., 2013. Ecological role, fishing impact, and management options for the recovery of a Mediterranean endemic skate by means of food web models. Biological Conservation 157, 108-120. Jordán, F., 2009. Keystone species and food webs. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 364(1524), 1733-1741. Libralato, S., Christensen, V., Pauly, D., 2006. A method for identifying keystone species in food web models. Ecological Modelling 195(304), 153-171. Paine, R.T., 1969. A note on trophic complexity and community stability. The American Naturalist 103(929), 91-93. Paine, R.T., 1995. A conversation on refining the concept of keystone species. Conservation Biology 9(4), 962-964. Perry, N., 2010. The ecological importance of species and the Noah's Ark problem. Ecological Economics 69(3), 478-485. Power, M.E., Mills, L.S., 1995. The keystone cops meet in Hilo. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 10(5), 182-184. Power, M.E., Tilman, D., Estes, J.A., Menge, B.A., Bond, W.J., Mills, L.S., Daily, G., Castilla, J.C., Lubchenco, J., Paine, R.T., 1996. Challenges in the quest for keystones. BioScience 46(8), 609-620. Tecchio, S., Coll, M., Christensen, V., Ramírez-llodra, E., Sardà, F., 2013. Food web structure and vulnerability of a deep-sea ecosystem in the NW Mediterranean Sea. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers. Ulanowicz, R.E., Puccia, C.J., 1990. Mixed Trophic Impacts in ecosystems. Coenoses 5(1), 7-16. Scientific advice for management 56 TRADE-OFFS BETWEEN INVERTEBRATE FISHERIES CATCHES AND ECOSYSTEM IMPACTS IN COASTAL NEW ZEALAND23 Eddy TD (1)Biology Department, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; Email: tyler.eddy@dal.ca; Coll M Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, UMR EME 212, Centre de Recherche Halieutique Méditerranéenne et Tropicale, Avenue Jean Monnet, BP 171, 34203 Sète cedex, France;  Email: marta.coll@ird.fr;  Ecopath International Initiative Research Association, Barcelona, Spain; Fulton EA CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia; Email: beth.fulton@csiro.au Lotze HK Biology Department, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; Email: heike.lotze@dal.ca ABSTRACT Invertebrate catches are increasing globally following the depletion and collapses of many finfish stocks (Anderson et al. 2011a; Anderson et al. 2011b), however stock assessments and management plans for invertebrates are rare.  Recent fisheries research has aimed to understand fisheries impacts at the ecosystem scale, rather than traditional single-species approaches. We have employed an ecosystem modeling approach to explore the tradeoffs between invertebrate fisheries catches and their impacts on the associated reef ecosystem for an area on the south coast of Wellington, New Zealand. Fisheries for lobster (Jasus edwardsii), abalone (Haliotis australis and Haliotis iris), and urchin (Evechinus chloroticus) exist in this region, as well as traditional finfish fisheries.  We simulated exploitation for each of these groups over a range of depletion levels, from no depletion to local extinction, to estimate catches and associated ecosystem impacts, using a food web model representing the Wellington south coast, New Zealand (Figure 1; Eddy et al. 2014) and developed using the Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) approach (Christensen and Walters 2014). In all three fisheries, the current exploitation level is estimated to be greater than that which produces maximum sustainable yield, and a reduction of current depletion of the commercial invertebrates is predicted to increase catches, with less impact on other species in the ecosystem. We found that similar catches could be made at approximately half of the present levels of depletion, which would strongly reduce ecosystem impacts. Exploitation of lobster showed the strongest ecosystem effects, followed by abalone and urchin, respectively.  Ecosystem indicators - relative abundance and keystoneness - for invertebrate groups were useful for predicting the magnitude of ecosystem impacts under exploitation scenarios. Our ecosystem approach has implications for the conservation and management of marine invertebrate resources on broader scales since they can play strong ecosystem roles.                                                  23 Cite as: Eddy, TD. et al. 2014. Trade-offs between invertebrate fisheries catches and ecosystem impacts in coastal New Zealand, p. 56-57. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 56. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 57 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We acknowledge funding support from the Lenfest Oceans Program. REFERENCES Anderson, S.C., Mills Flemming, J., Watson, R., Lotze, H.K., 2011a. Rapid Global Expansion of Invertebrate Fisheries: Trends, Drivers, and Ecosystem Effects. PLoS ONE 6(3): e14735. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014735.  Anderson, S.C., Mills Flemming, J., Watson, R., Lotze, H.K., 2011b. Serial exploitation of global sea cucumber fisheries. Fish and Fisheries 12(3), 317-339.  Christensen, V., Walters, C.J., 2004. Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities, and limitations. Ecological Modelling 172, 109-139. Eddy, T.D., Pitcher, T.J., MacDiarmid, A.B., Byfield, T.T., Jones, T., Tam, J., Bell, J.J., Gardner, J.P.A., 2014. Lobsters as keystone: Only in unfished ecosystems? Ecological Modelling 275, 48-72.   Figure 1. Map of Taputeranga Marine Reserve (black box, labelled Taputeranga MR), and area of the Wellington south coast area for which an EwE model was developed.  The location of Taputeranga MR within New Zealand is shown as a red square in bottom right insert.  The model area is characterised by different substrate types: intertidal reef (yellow); subtidal reef (red); and soft and mobile substrates (darker blue). Scientific advice for management 58  Figure 1. Figure of Chwaka Bay, modified from Muhando and Reuter 2014. MODELLING THE MULTISPECIES FISHERY OF CHWAKA BAY, ZANZIBAR – BASIS FOR EXPLORATION OF USE AND CONSERVATION SCENARIOS24 Rehren J, Wolff M Leibniz Center for for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Fahrenheitstraße 6, 28359 Bremen; Email: jennifer.rehren@zmt-bremen.de; matthias.wolff@zmt-bremen.de ABSTRACT The fishery of Zanzibar, a semi-autonomous Island state off the coast of Tanzania, is said to show serious signs of resource overexploitation and degradation of coastal habitats. Similar to many other East African regions, the fishery of Zanzibar is an artisanal, multispecies fishery with multiple gear use, lacking fundamental knowledge about stock size, age composition and spatial resolution of fishing effort and productivity. Comprehensive assessments of target resources are missing and therewith temporal and spatial moratoriums for exploited species. Marine reserves, so far, have been implemented based on biodiversity and habitat assessments, mainly focusing on the pristinity of habitats and the benefits for the tourism sector, thereby disregarding the fishery. The corresponding management actions therefore often lack the compliance of the respective fishing community.  The aim of the presented study is to assess the fishery of Zanzibar applying an ecosystem-based approach and to simulate use and management scenarios using the software package Ecopath with Ecosim and Ecospace.  Chwaka Bay, located at the east coast of Zanzibar was chosen as study site, since large spatial and temporal data sets are available for developing an ecosystem-based-model.  Due to its environmental features the community strongly relies on fishing for income and protein supply (98%). The Bay comprises an area of 50 km2 and consists of three coastal key habitats as nursery and breeding grounds of marine species: a fringing reef, protecting the inner bay, large seagrass meadows and the largest mangrove area on the island, located at the south of the bay. Chwaka Bay is part of the current MACEMP’s (Marine and Coastal Environment Management Project) Mnemba Island Marine Conservation Area management plan and a designated National Park since 2003 The specific objectives of the study are three fold: 1) A description of the Chwaka Bay food web to elucidate the major flows and compartments of the system as well as characterizing the ecosystem in terms of productivity and transfer efficiencies. 2) Assessment of the state of the fishery on target resources and of resource productivity within the different habitats of the bay. 3) Simulation of spatial and temporal management scenarios to generate adequate zonation and management measures that allow for sustainable resource use, while maintaining fishermen income.                                                  24 Cite as: Rehren, J. et al. 2014. Modelling the multispecies fisheries of Chwaka Bay, Zanzibar – basis for exploration of use and conservation scenarios, p. 58-59. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 58. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 59 The biomass data for the different compartments of the food web model are based on catch information. The sampling period of the ongoing study lasts from January – June 2014 and September – December 2014. Biomass data are to be complemented with existing fish and invertebrate abundance studies conducted within the different habitats of Chwaka Bay. Production per biomass values for seven of the major target species are derived from catch curve estimates from fisheries data. Diet information is being obtained from stomach content analysis and existing feeding ecology studies of Chwaka Bay fish species. Fishing grounds and habitats are mapped to create the base map for spatial simulations. Historical catch and effort data, obtained from the Department of Marine Fisheries Resources on Zanzibar, are analyzed to evaluate temporal changes in fishing impacts on the ecosystem.  The study is the first attempt, to integrate data on target resource populations, fishing gears and economical parameters for a holistic evaluation of Zanzibar’s fisheries. Model outcomes will provide spatial and temporal management scenarios, which are expected to substantially contribute to the development of sustainable resource management strategies, as envisioned by MACEMP.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors thank the Institute of Marine Science on Zanzibar (IMS) for the support in organizing and conducting the necessary fieldwork as well as the Department of Marine Fisheries on Zanzibar for providing valuable fisheries data. REFERENCES Colbert-Sangree, N., 2012. "The State of Artisanal Fisheries in Southern Unguja: Governance, Conservation and Community". Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection. Paper 1279. January, M. and Ngowi, H.P. 2010. Untangling the Nets: The Governance of Tanzania ’s Marine Fisheries. South Africa.  South African Insitute of International Affairs. (SAIIA Research Report No 5). Jiddawi, N. S., and Ohman, M. C. 2002. Marine fisheries in Tanzania. Ambio, 31, 518–527. Jiddawi, N.S. and Lindström, L. 2012. Physical Characteristics, Socio-economic Setting and Coastal Livelihoods in Chwaka Bay. In: People, Nature and Research in Chwaka Bay, Zanzibar, Tanzania. (eds M. de la Torre-Castro and T.J. Lyimo). WIOMSA, Zanzibar Town, pp 23–40. Jiddawi, N.S. 2012 Artisanal Fishery and other Marine Resources in Chwaka Bay. In: People, Nature and Research in Chwaka Bay, Zanzibar, Tanzania. (eds M. de la Torre-Castro and T.J. Lyimo). WIOMSA, Zanzibar Town, pp 193–212. McLean, B., Hikmany, A.n., Mangora, M. and Shalli, M. 2012. An Assessment of Legal and Institutional Framework for Effective Management of Marine Managed Areas in Tanzania, 1-97 pp. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.  Scientific advice for management 60 MODELLING SPATIAL EFFECTS OF ILLEGAL FISHING IN THE NORTH CASPIAN SEA ECOSYSTEM25 Daskalov GM (1)Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research (IBER-BAS), 2 Yurii Gagarin Street,  Sofia 1113, Bulgaria; Email: georgi.m.daskalov@gmail.com Abdoli A Environmental Sciences Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University (SBU), P.O.BOX 19615 -768, Tehran, Iran, Email: asabdoli@yahoo.com Akhundov M Azerbaijan Fisheries Research Institute, Demirchizade str., 16, Azerbaijan, AZ 1008, Baku, Azerbaijan, Email: azfiri@azeurotel.com Annachariyeva J National Institute of Desert, Flora and Fauna of Ministry of Nature Protection of Turkmenistan, B.Annanova str., 15a - 9, 744035, Ashgabat, Turkmenistan, Email: jakhanhally@mail.ru Isbekov K Kazakh Scientific and Research Institute of Fisheries, Ul, Jhandosova, 51, Almata, Kazakhstan, Email: isbekov@mail.ru Khodorevskaya R CaspNIRKh, 414056 Russian Federation, Astrakhan, Savushkin str., 1, Email: chodor@mail.ru Kim Y Atyrau Branch of the Kazakh Scientific and Research Institute of Fisheries, ul. Bergalieva, 80, Atyrau, Kazakhstan, Email: y.kim@kazceb.kz Mammadli T Azerbaijan Fisheries Research Institute, Demirchizade str., 16, Azerbaijan, AZ 1008, Baku, Azerbaijan, Email: tariyelmamedli@rambler.ru Morozov B ANO “Centre for International Projects”,58b Pervomaiskaya Str., 105043 Moscow, Russia,  Email: okpd@eco-cip.ru                                                  25 Cite as: Daskalov, GM. 2014. Modelling spatial effects of illegal fishing in the North Caspian Sea ecosystem, p. 60-62. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 60. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 61 Muradov O State Committee of Fish Industry, Ashgabat, Turkmenistan, Email: Fish_industry_tm@yahoo.com Shahifar R Iranian Fisheries organization, West Fatemy Avenue, No 250, Postal code, 1413636331, Tehran, Iran, Email: r.shahifar@gmail.com ABSTRACT Nowadays, resource overexploitation and climate change are recognised as considerable threats to the sustainable development of socio-economic systems and environment. With growing evidence, highlighting the uncertain state and future of world fish stocks, new approaches to fisheries management that take account of fishing and climate change effects on ecosystems, are being called for. The Ecosystem Based Bio-resources Management, or EBBM is defined as a science based approach of managing human activities, such as fishing, fish stock enhancement, drivers of pollution/eutrophication with a view to, in parallel, conserve and sustainably use in the long-term run the nature living resources (Daskalov et al 2013). It is meant to deal with issues such as scientific assessment of the Caspian ecosystem and fisheries, environmental change, biological interactions, anthropogenic impacts, conservation and recovery of biodiversity, as well as the social and economic impacts. Major task to promote EBBM in the Caspian region was to also provide the decision-makers with innovative tools to support both traditional and innovative management practices. We apply an ecosystem model (EwE) to explore effects of IUUC (Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Catches) on the ecosystem. The EwE model can provide testable insights into changes that have occurred in the ecosystem and help to design policies implementing EBBM in the Caspian. The study proved that the ecosystem components and various fish populations in the Caspian interact in a rather complex way. The effects of predation and other multi-species interactions, combined with climate change and anthropogenic pressures create a formidable challenge for the ecosystem and bio-resource managers - a challenge that needs new approaches and directions. The proposed model demonstrates its ability to resolve multi-species interactions, habitats preferences and account for environmental and anthropogenic stressors, in the process of evaluating spatial management scenarios. Figure 1. Biomass change (%) in various fish groups in the original and extended (X) SPACE scenarios. Scenarios: SPACE describes effects of closing the original SPACE areas, SPACE IUUC describes effects of closing the SPACE areas and controlling IUUC inside of them, SPACE X describes effects of closing SPACE areas extended to 50% of the basin, and SPACE X IUUC describes effects of closing the extended SPACE areas and controlling IUUC. A Russian stugeon B. Total fish biomass.  The most important factor dominating in all possible scenarios is the illegal fishing or IUUC. The main targets of the IUU fishing are the stocks of valuable fish resources, especially sturgeons. Therefore, the control over IUUC must be a priority target for the EBBM, especially when building recovery strategies for sturgeons (Figure 1). -10520355065SPACESPACE IUUCSPACE XSPACE X IUUCBiomass change % A. Sturgeons-10520355065SPACESPACE IUUCSPACE XSPACE X IUUCBiomass change % B. Total Fish        Scientific advice for management 62 47.54746.54645.54544.54443.54346 46.5 47 47.5 48 48.5 49 49.5 50 50.5 51 51.5 52 52.5 53 53.50.03-0.040.02-0.030.01-0.020-0.01-0.01-0-0.02--0.01 Figure 2. Map of the change in biomass (difference between biomass before and after the closure in t/km²) when closing all SPACE areas for fishing and full control on IUUC of Russian sturgeon.  The evaluation of spatial scenarios demonstrates that the effects of protected areas (Special Protected Areas for the Caspian ecosystem or SPACE) are proportional to the size of the closed areas, and specific (for different fish groups) to their placement. SPACEs have to be sufficiently large, and to cover the main target fish distribution areas. Effective IUUC control measures need to be enforced inside of the SPACEs, and even better in the whole region (Figure 2). The importance of the benthic pathways are pronounced in the North Caspian. It seems that pelagic and benthic systems are relatively decoupled. However, the relatively high importance of the benthic system may buffer the population explosion of the invasive Mnemiopsis leidyi, as a result the effect of this species in the North Caspian is expected to be less severe compared to other areas of the sea.  REFERENCES Daskalov, G. M., Abdoli, A., Akhundov, M., Annachariyeva, J., Isbekov, K., Khodorevskaya, R., Kim Y, Mammadli T, Morozov B, Muradov O & Shahifar, R., 2013. Ecosystem Modelling in Support of Ecosystem-Based Management in the Caspian. The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry 2013 Springer Berlin Heidelberg ISSN 1867-979X, DOI 10.1007/698_2013_245, 1-36. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/698_2013_245 Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 63 DEEP-SEA ECOSYSTEM MODEL OF THE CONDOR SEAMOUNT26 Morato T, Giacomello E, Bon-de-Sousa J IMAR University of the Azores, 9901-862 Horta, Portugal; Email: telmo@uac.pt Heymans JJ Scottish Association for Marine Science,  Oban PA37 1QA Scotland; Email: Sheila.Heymans@sams.ac.uk Menezes GM IMAR University of the Azores, 9901-862 Horta, Portugal; Pitcher TJ Fisheries Centre University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC Canada V6T 1Z4; Email: t.pitcher@fisheries.ubc.ca ABSTRACT Seamounts have been found to be areas of increased biodiversity, productivity and biomass. These ecosystems are also subject to intensive exploitation and therefore it is urgent to apply ecosystem based approaches towards the management of sustainable fisheries. Condor seamount (Azores, North east Atlantic) is a temporary protected area initially set for scientific research. The decision to close this seamount to fisheries arose from a collaborative, bottom-up process involving scientists, local fishermen, tourist operators and the Regional Government of the Azores. Despite the traditional importance of Condor for local demersal fishing fleet, the fishing associations supported the measure but asked for a continuous monitoring of the status of the ecosystem. Ecosystem models for the condor seamount were built to understand the interactions between fisheries, exploited species and the ecosystem that supports them, enabling impact assessments of human activities on the marine environment. Moreover, ecosystem models were used to have an alternative estimate of the time required for the recovery of selected fish stocks in that particular seamount. The Condor seamount model comprises 23 functional groups, including plankton, invertebrates, fishes, marine mammals and seabirds. The fisheries component consists on the regional fleet, with an emphasis on demersal fisheries. The model was fit to real data and simulations of the effect of fishing on Condor seamount conducted. Although fisherman expected the recovery of the seamount to happen in a 2-5 years our preliminary simulations suggested that the recovery of the seamount could take from 15-25 years. Although these results need further validation it highlights once again that a rapid recovery of a deep-sea ecosystem is unlikely.                                                  26 Cite as: Morato, T. et al. 2014. Deep-sea ecosystem model of the Condor seamount., p. xx-xx. In: Lastname, Firstname initial (ed.) Report title. Fisheries Centre Research Reports V(n). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia  [ISSN 1198-6727]. Scientific advice for management 64   Figure 1. Forests habitats (green area, dark green:  beech forest), farmland (brown) and species habitats (orange: stag beetle habitat, light brown: red kite feeding site) impacted by a planned industrial area (black edging) IMPLEMENTING THE HABITATS DIRECTIVE IN GERMANY: CASE CONVENTIONS VERSUS ECOPATH, ECOSIM & ECOSPACE27 Fretzer S Kleine Loge 5, 27721 Ritterhude, Germany; kontakt@sarahfretzer.de ABSTRACT The Habitats Directive (92/43/EWG) is the most important law to protect listed species and habitats in the European Union. Since 2007, the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) has recommended the application of ‘Case Conventions’ to implement the Habitats Directive in Germany (Lambrecht & Trautner 2007). The Case Conventions defined spatial benchmarks for different habitat types and species that must be followed when a project might affect the protected area of a Natura 2000-site (Lambrecht & Trautner 2007). According to the European Court of Justice, there must be no doubts, if the case conventions declared that a project would not cause severe damage (EuGH, Rs. C-127/02, Slg. 2004, I-7405 – Cockle Fishery Rn. 43 f., 59). However, the development of the Case Conventions raised doubts as ecological basic knowledge was ignored and the spatial benchmarks for listed species were developed in a discussion among experts (p. 80 in Lambrecht and Trautner (2007)) and were not derived from scientific experiments and statistical data analysis. Furthermore, this management tool completely ignores species interactions and indirect effects.  Today, only 28% of all habitat types are in a good condition and the majority of species in Germany is in a bad or deficient condition (Dröschmeister et al. 2014). One reason for this decline could be the application of Case Conventions, as this tool might be incapable of protecting listed species and habitats. The Case Convention report provided an example to explain the application of spatial benchmarks (p. 63 – 66 in Lambrecht & Trautner (2007)). The study site showed a forest area (light green area, Fig. 1) that included two habitat sites (orange areas, Fig. 1) of the protected stag beetle (Lucanus cervus), a protected woodrush beech forest habitat (dark green area, Fig. 1) and arable farmland (brown area) that partly served as feeding habitat (light brown area, Fig. 1) for a protected bird, the red kite (Milvus milvus). The northern part of the study site was a protected Nature Reserve (yellow line, Fig. 1) These habitats were impacted by a planned industrial area (black edging, Figure 1). According to the Case Conventions, the environmental impact was negligible (Table 1). In order to assess the impact of the industrial area and the validity of the Case Conventions, an Ecopath model was developed that included the forest habitats, protected species and farmland (Figure. 1). In a second model, the industrial area was also considered and the modelled habitat areas were reduced in size according to the description in the report (p. 63-66 in Lambrecht and Trautner, 2007).                                                  27 Cite as: Fretzer, S. 2014. Implementing the Habitats Directive in Germany: Case Conventions versus Ecopath, Ecosim & Ecospace, p. 64-65. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 64. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 65 By comparing the Ecopath models before and after the construction of the industrial area, the results showed that the red kite would not be affected, but the stag beetle and the woodrush beech forest would decrease in biomass and also flow indices and system statistics were altered (Table 1). The Case Conventions were not able to detect these impacts. Table 1. Assessing the environmental impact of a planned industrial area on protected species and woodrush beech forest habitat in Figure 1 by comparing the results of the Case Conventions and Ecopath analysis  Listed species/ habitat (Habitats Directive 92/43/EWG) Case Conventions Ecopath Stag beetle (Lucanus cervus) -800 m² 9% biomass loss Red kite (Milvus milvus) -0.5 ha No losses Woodrush beech forest habitat (Code: 9110)  -1.700 m² 64% biomass loss Changes in system statistics, flow and cycling indices  ∑ impact negligible impact not negligible   There is a need for a standardized method to implement the Habitats Directive in Germany (Lambrecht and Trautner, 2007). Ecopath, Ecosim and Ecospace are a much better tool than the Case Conventions in order to meet the legal requirements (Habitats Directive, Federal Nature Conservation Act (= BNatSchG)) for environmental management in Germany.  Ecopath is able to assess the status quo of an ecosystem (§9 BNatSchG) and is able to identify flows and functioning of the system, which have to be preserved (§1 (3), BNatSchG). Biological diversity and ecosystems have to be protected in the long-term and have to be used sustainably (§4 BNatSchG), which can be assessed by Ecosim. By applying Ecospace, the management scenario with the least environmental, spatial impact can be identified (§15 BNatSchG). Furthermore, this modelling technique can estimate the environmental impact of a project, investigate cumulative effects and help identify sustainable compensation measures (§15,16, BNatSchG). For this reason, it is recommended to establish Ecopath, Ecosim and Ecospace as standard method for environmental management in Germany. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Stefan Möckel for his expertise and advice in environmental law. Furthermore, I would like to thank Martin Fretzer, who supported me and helped me to carry out this project. REFERENCES  Dröschmeister, R. Ellwanger, G. Emde, F., Ssymank, A., Kllingenstein, F., 2014. Die Lage der Natur in Deutschland - Ergebnisse von EU-Vogelschutz- und FFH-Bericht. Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), 17 pp.  Lambrecht, H., Trautner, J., 2007. Fachinformationssystem und Fachkonventionen zur Bestimmung der Erheblichkeit im Rahmen der FFH-VP - Endbericht zum Teil Fachkonventionen, Schlussstand Juni 2007. FuE-Vorhaben im Rahmen des Umweltforschungsplanes des Bundesministeriums für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit im Auftrag des Bundesamtes für Naturschutz, FKZ 804 82 004,  239 pp.  Scientific advice for management 66 EFFECTS OF MARINE PROTECTED AREAS AND FISHING ON POPULATION BIOMASS OF FIVE SPECIES OF SERRANIDAE IN LA PAZ BAY, MEXICO: AN ECOSPACE STUDY28 Gruner N University of Bremen, Bibliothekstraße 1, 28359 Bremen; Email: nicolas.gruner@hotmail.com ABSTRACT Many species of Serranidae are at risk of overexploitation in the northern Gulf of California due to their life-cycle and spawning behavior, which makes them susceptible to fisheries. The status of the species of this Serranidae family however, is unclear in the La Paz Bay but it is expected that they suffer from overfishing as the fisher act under an open access scheme and shrimp fisher press for access but are not allowed to operate yet. The five target species of this study are Mycteroperca rosacea, Paralabrax auroguttatus, Epinephelus niphobles, Epinephelus acanthistius and Paranthias colonus.  In the La Paz Bay, a Marine Protected Area (MPA) has been implemented in 2007, which protects biodiversity and spawning grounds. The aims of this thesis are to model the effects of MPAs (including 2 additional hypothetical MPAs), the effects of rising fishing effort and the effects of shrimp fishing on the population biomass of five species of Serranidae in the La Paz Bay. Another aim is to model the optimal fishing effort/fishing mortality to get the maximum sustainable yield to see the status of the five target populations. These effects were modelled by the spatial trophic ecosystem modelling software Ecospace. The following questions are to be answered in this study:  • What are the expected/simulated effects of the Espiritu Santo MPA and other hypothetical MPAs on the biomass development of the populations of the five target species? • Which MPA scenario gives the highest relative catch for each of the five target species? • What are the expected/simulated effects of rising fishing effort on the population biomass development of the five target species? • What are the expected/simulated effects of shrimp fisheries on the population biomass development of the five target species? To answer these questions, different scenarios were constructed, with different MPAs, including and excluding shrimp fisheries and with different fishing efforts. This model is based on three previous models by Arreguin-Sanchez et al. (2004), Diaz-Uribe et al. (2007) and Arreguin-Sanchez et al. (2007). It was found that during present conditions, for one species (M. rosacea), the three MPAs combined lead to the highest increase in biomass, while for the other target species, the MPAs are less effective. However, the catch is highest when only two of the three MPAs are implemented.  The model also shows, that increasing fishing effort leads to extinction of all five target species, only M. rosacea can be protected by MPAs. The results suggest that the shrimp fisheries have mostly negative effects on the target species and increase the efficiency of the MPAs to protect the target species.                                                   28 Cite as: Gruner, N. 2014. Effects of Marine Protected Areas and Fishing on Population Biomass of five species of Serranidae in La Paz Bay, Mexico: An Ecospace Study, p. 66-67. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 66. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 67  Figure 1. Total Difference in % of relative biomass comparing each MPA scenario with the MPA 0 scenario, pooling all target species per MPA scenario, with steady fishing effort and excluding shrimp fisheries.  The model also suggests, that shrimp fisheries lead to the overexploitation of 4 target species (excluding M. rosacea), while without shrimp fisheries all target species are shown as underexploited. This leads to the conclusion, that MPAs are not efficient for all Serranidae populations and need to be supported by fisheries management. Although the Serranidae populations are presently underexploited, a preventive fishing management would help to avoid overexploitation in the future.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the University of Bremen, the ZMT, the DAAD and also thanks for partial support through the projects SEP-CONACyT 104974 and SIP-IPN 20131266. REFERENCES Arreguin-Sánchez, F., 2004. Optimal management scenarios for the artisanal fisheries in the ecosystem of La Paz Bay, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Ecological Modelling 172, 373–382 Arreguín-Sánchez, F., del Monte-Luna, P., Díaz-Uribe, J.G., Gorostieta, M., Chávez, E.A. and Ronzón-Rodríguez, R., 2007. Trophic model for the ecosystem of La Paz Bay, Southern Baja California Peninsula, Mexico, p. 134–160. In: Le Quesne, W.J.F., Arreguín-Sánchez, F. and Heymans, S.J.J. (eds.) INCOFISH ecosystem models: transiting from Ecopath to Ecospace. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 15(6). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia  Diaz-Uribe J.G. Arreguin-Sanchez F., Cisneros-Mata M.A., 2007. Multispecies perspective for small-scale fisheries management: A trophic analysis of La Paz Bay in the Gulf of California, Mexico. Ecological Modelling 201, 205–222 Scientific advice for management 68   Figure 1. Ecopath plug-in results applied to the Southern Catalan Sea model representing 1978 (Coll et al. 2006). INFORMING AND PLANNING MARINE CONSERVATION: POSTER PRESENTATIONS NEW SOFTWARE PLUG-IN TO CALCULATE BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION-BASED INDICATORS FROM EWE FOOD WEB MODELS29 Coll M  Institut de Recherche pour le Développment, UMR EME 212, Centre de Recherche Haliutique Méditerranéenne et Tropicale, Avenue Jean Monnet, BP 171. 34203 Sète Cedex, France; Email: marta.coll@ird.fr Ecopath International Initiative Research Association, Barcelona, Spain;  Institut de Ciències del Mar (ICM-CSIC), Barcelona, Spain Steenbeek J Ecopath International Initiative Research Association, Barcelona, Spain;  Email: jeroen.steenbeek@gmail.com Institut de Ciències del Mar (ICM-CSIC), Barcelona, Spain ABSTRACT Biodiversity decline and increase of species at risk is one of the most pressing world crises, and there is a growing global concern about the status of biological resources upon which human welfare depends (Butchart et al. 2010). Even if proven global extinctions remain scarce in the sea compared to terrestrial systems, local or even regional diversity declines have been observed in many marine ecosystems (Dulvy et al. 2014) under cumulative human impacts including overfishing, habitat degradation, and pollution. Ecosystem food web models provide a variety of results that can be used to inform biodiversity and conservation issues since they can take into account the dynamic of commercial and non-commercial species, their interactions and the main drivers. These results provide insights about the status and dynamics of different level of biological organization, from species to ecosystem level, providing useful ecological indicators to be used for marine conservation planning. Such indicators are needed to fulfil the targets of different National and Transnational management plans and conventions, such as the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) or the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). To enable the standardized calculation of several of the most widely used ecological indicators to inform biodiversity and conservation-based issues, we have developed a plug-in for the Ecopath with Ecosim software (Christensen and Walters 2004) that calculates these indicators from aquatic food web models                                                  29 Cite as: Coll, M. et al. 2014. New software plug-in to calculate biodiversity and conservation-based indicators from EwE food web models, p. 68-69. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 68. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 69 (Figure 1). This plug-in is freely distributed with the EwE software and can be used to calculate indicators from the snapshot Ecopath model, the temporal-dynamic module Ecosim, and the temporal-spatial module Ecospace. Ecological indicators are divided in i) Trophic-based, ii) Biomass-based, iii) Catch-based, iv) Species-based, and v) Size-based indicators (Figure 1). The Biodiversity plug-in is connected to the Monte Carlo simulations routine in Ecosim, calculating the ecological indicators for each Monte Carlo simulation taking input range parameters into account (Figure 2). The plugin is also connected to Ecospace, calculating indicators over time and space (Figure 2). The first step to use the plug-in is to define the taxonomic composition of functional groups in the new “Define Taxa” form in Ecopath. Once defined, users can enter detailed information per species or functional group related, for example, to the species ecology (e.g. type of organism, such as invertebrate or fish), species traits (e.g. mean max length) and species conservation status (e.g. IUCN status) in the new “Taxonomy” form under Ecopath Tools. They should also specify the mean proportion of the species in catch and biomass of each functional group. This taxonomic information is then used by the plug-in to calculate the ecological indicators. The plug-in can be set to automatically save results, or can save results from its user interface. Technical limitations of the plug-in include limited capability of EwE models to represent size-based changes in food webs, and lack of variation in the proportion of species in catch and biomass of each functional group if species are not parameterized as individual groups or multi-stanza groups. Data shortage in taxonomic resolution of some groups (e.g. invertebrates) can limit the applicability, too. The interpretation of results from the plug-in should take these limitations into account.   Figure 2. Monte Carlo and Ecospace plug-in results applied to the Southern Catalan Sea model fitted from 1978 to 2010 (Coll et al. 2008; Coll et al. 2013).  REFERENCES Butchart, S.H.M., Walpole, M., Collen, B., van Strien, A., Scharlemann, J.P.W., Almond, R.E.A., Baillie, J.E.M., Bomhard, B., Brown, C. and Bruno, J., 2010. Global biodiversity: Indicators of recent declines. science 328(5982), 1164. Christensen, V. and Walters, C., 2004. Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities and limitations. Ecological Modelling 72, 109-139. Coll, M., Navarro, J. and Palomera, I., 2013. Ecological role of the endemic Starry ray Raja asterias in the NW Mediterranean Sea and management options for its conservation. Biological Conservation 157, 108-120. Coll, M., Palomera, I., Tudela, S. and Dowd, M., 2008. Food-web dynamics in the South Catalan Sea ecosystem (NW Mediterranean) for 1978-2003. Ecological Modelling 217(1-2), 95-116. Coll, M., Palomera, I., Tudela, S. and Sardà, F., 2006. Trophic flows, ecosystem structure and fishing impacts in the South Catalan Sea, Northwestern Mediterranean. Journal of Marine Systems 59(1-2), 63-96. Dulvy, N.K., Fowler, S.L., Musick, J.A., Cavanagh, R.D., Kyne, P.M., Harrison, L.R., Carlson, J.K., Davidson, L.N.K., Fordham, S.V., Francis, M.P., Pollock, C.M., Simpfendorfer, C.A., Burgess, G.H., Carpenter, K.E., Compagno, L.J.V., Ebert, D.A., Gibson, C., Heupel, M.R., Livingstone, S.R., Sanciangco, J.C., Stevens, J.D., Valenti, S. and White, W.T., 2014. Extinction risk and conservation of the world's sharks and rays. eLife 3, e00590. Scientific advice for management 70 TOWARDS A BALANCE BETWEEN COMPLEXITY AND FEASIBILITY IN FOOD-WEB MODELS OF MEDITERRANEAN COASTAL ECOSYSTEM: ADDRESSING UNCERTAINTY WHILE ACCOUNTING FOR DATA COLLECTION CONSTRAINTS30 Prato G (1)Université de Nice Sophia‐Antipolis; Faculté de Sciences, EA 4228 ECOMERS, 06108 Nice cedex 2, France; Email: gprato@unice.fr Gascuel D Université Européenne de Bretagne, UMR Agrocampus ouest / INRA Ecologie et Santé des Ecosystèmes, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes cedex, France;  Email: didier.gascuel@agrocampus-ouest.fr Valls A University of British Columbia, AERL, Fisheries Centre,  Vancouver, British Columbia V6T1Z4, Canada; Email: a.valls@fisheries.ubc.ca Francour P Université de Nice Sophia‐Antipolis; Faculté de Sciences, EA 4228 ECOMERS, 06108 Nice cedex 2, France; Email: francour@unice.fr ABSTRACT Mass-balance trophic models (Ecopath and Ecotroph) are valuable tools to describe ecosystem structure and functioning, to identify target species to be monitored and to allow comparisons of ecosystem states under different management options. Nevertheless, the use of the Ecopath modelling approach is generally constrained by two major sources of uncertainty, model complexity and quality of the input data. Both constraints strongly limit the construction of Ecopath models, especially for complex Mediterranean coastal ecosystems.  Here we developed an approach aiming at identifying an optimum and standardized model structure to represent coastal Mediterranean marine food-webs that accounts for trade-offs between feasibility, complexity and uncertainty. Starting from a highly detailed reference model of the Port-Cros National Park (NW Mediterranean Sea), we assessed which aggregation choices, driven by a simplification of sampling effort, should be avoided since they strongly affect the Ecopath and EcoTroph model outputs. Subsequently, we identified for which functional groups imprecise input biomass significantly alter model description of ecosystem functioning and trophodynamics. High trophic level predators, abundant primary producers (Posidonia oceanica) and groups with high biomass and/or diversified diet (epifauna, decapods, planktivorous fish and cephalopods) significantly affected the model structure, with different relative effects on the trophic structure and the maturity and complexity indices of the ecosystem. When building trophic models for similar ecosystems, priority should be given to the collection of local and accurate biomass data especially for the functional groups we identified. Our methodological approach for addressing model simplification could allow for increasing the feasibility of Ecopath applications in Mediterranean coastal zones, improving our knowledge of these ecosystems. In particular, fostering food-                                                 30 Cite as: Prato, G. et al. 2014. Towards a balance between complexity and feasibility in food-web models of Mediterranean coastal ecosystem: addressing uncertainty while accounting for data collection constraints, p. 70-71. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 70. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 71 web modelling on coastal marine protected areas would help to better inform management decisions and increase the efficiency of monitoring programs. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The MMMPA - Training Network for Monitoring Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) [grant number 290056]. Scientific advice for management 72 USING MODELS TO ASSESS ECOSYSTEM INDICATORS AND DEFINE TARGETS OF THE GOOD ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS31 Bourdaud P Ifremer, EMH, rue de l’île d’Yeu, BP 2011, 44311 Nantes cedex 03, France;  Email: p.l.e.bourdaud@gmail.com  Université Européenne de Bretagne, UMR Agrocampus ouest / INRA Ecologie et Santé des Ecosystèmes, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes cedex, France; Gascuel D(2), Bentorcha A Université Européenne de Bretagne, UMR Agrocampus ouest / INRA Ecologie et Santé des Ecosystèmes,65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes cedex, France;  Email: Didier.Gascuel@agrocampus-ouest.fr, karimbentorcha@gmail.com Brin d’Amour A Ifremer, EMH, rue de l’île d’Yeu, BP 2011, 44311 Nantes cedex 03, France;  Email: Anik.Brindamour@ifremer.fr ABSTRACT There is a worldwide emergent need for simple indicators to assess the environmental status of marine ecosystems. These indicators must reflect the effects of fluctuations in fishing pressure and be easily implemented in an Ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM). Here, we tested various indicators computed from community size and trophic spectra, assuming that both types of spectrum correctly reflect the functional biodiversity of marine food webs. The indicators include the slope, the 95th percentile, the mean length, weight or trophic level, the equitability, the large fish indicator, the high trophic level indicator and the total abundance of the simulated spectra are compared between current spectra and potential reference situations. Four ecosystems were used as case studies: the Bay of Biscay/Celtic Sea, North Sea and English Channel ecosystems. Current size spectra are obtained from scientific surveys data and trophic spectra from pre-existing Ecopath models, while reference situations are estimated by simulations. Reference situations are simulated at three different fishing pressures: the virgin state and two candidate targets for an EAFM, one with fishing mortality=0.2 and the other with fishing mortality=natural mortality for all exploited species. Simulations are developed using 3 different methods: (i) demographic simulations at equilibrium for size spectra; (ii) EcoTroph simulations for trophic spectra; (iii) Ecosim simulations for trophic spectra. Inter-ecosystems comparisons are done to contrast the reference situations, analysis the responses of all indicators, and assess the states of the studied ecosystems. Sensitivity analyses are also conducted on the main simulation parameters to test the robustness of the chosen indicators. Preliminary results underline the sensitivity of the target values to the choice of the species composing the size spectra, while some trophic indicators appeared sensitive to the value of certain ecological parameters such as the top-Down effect used in EcoTroph. We also identify a subset of operational indicators to assess the good status of marine food webs, and suggest reference values for an effective EAFM. Current states indicator values exhibited improving trends, especially in the Bay of Biscay and Celtic Sea, but remained below target values in the three other ecosystems. We conclude that our selection of indicators is especially relevant to assess multiannual trends in marine ecosystems.                                                  31 Cite as: Bourdaud, P. et al. 2014. Using models to assess ecosystem indicators and define targets of the Good Environmental Status, p. 72. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 72. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 73  Figure 1. Study area, FAO subarea 48.1 ANALYZING THE COLLAPSE AND LACK OF RECOVERY OF TWO NOTOTHENIID STOCKS IN THE ANTARCTIC PENINSULA (SUB AREA 48.1)32 Arriagada A Departamento de Oceanografía, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Oceanográficas, Universidad de Concepción,Barrio Universitario s/n, Concepción, Chile; Email:anaarriagada@udec.cl Neira S Departamento de Oceanografía, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Oceanográficas,  Universidad de Concepción,Barrio Universitario s/n, Concepción, Chile; Programa COPAS Sur-Austral and INCAR Centre, Universidad de Concepción, Barrio Universitario s/n, Concepción, Chile; Email:seneira@udec.cl ABSTRACT The Antarctic Ocean region has experienced noticeable changes in last decades, among which we can mention the collapse of several fisheries due to overfishing (Kock, 1992; Constable et al., 2000). Fishing exploitation in the Antarctic continent started in late 1960s with Notothenia rossii and Gobionotothen gibberifrons as main target species (Kock, 1992). The most of the catches were registered in the first two years of the fishery, seriously reducing both stocks (Kock, 1992; Kock, 1998; Barrera-Oro et al., 2000). In 1985 the fishery based on N. rossii was closed and in 1990 an indefinite ban was established for fish in the Antarctic region. However, recent assessments indicate that the biomass of N. rossii and G. gibberifrons in the region has continued to decline and that recovery is lacking even in the absence of fishing (Jones et al., 2000; Barrera-Oro et al., 2003; Marschoff et al., 2012). The lack of recovery in these two stocks after 30 years and the understanding of the impact of their collapse in the ecosystem have not been addressed. Therefore, the objective of this study is to evaluate the possible causes of the collapse and lack of recovery of N. rossii and G. gibberifrons in the marine ecosystem off the Antarctic Peninsula. Using the EwE software (EwE) (Christensen y Walters, 2004) we built a model that represents the food web in the sub-area FAO 48.1 (figure 1) at the Antarctic Peninsula (60° S a 65° S; 50° W a 70°W), covering a surface area of 672000 km2. The model considers the system conditions in year 1977, previous to the exploitation of N. rossii and G. gibberifrons in the zone, and the simulation period covers from 1979, onset of the fishery in the Peninsula, to year 2010. Our model considers 23 functional groups that include all trophic levels, from primary producers to top predators. However, the model is focused on the trophic interactions of the two target stocks N. rossii and G. gibberifrons.  Input parameters (biomass, production/biomass, Consumption/biomass, diets and landings) were either gathered or calculated from available information. Once the model was found to be properly balanced, we simulated changes in fishing mortality in N. rossii and G. gibberifrons during the exploitation period and anomalies in models primary production forced by changes in atmosphere and ocean circulation at large                                                  32 Cite as: Arriagada, A. 2014. Analysing the collapse and lack of recovery of two Nototheniid stocks in the Antarctic Peninsula (subarea 48.1) , p. 73-74. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 73. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 74  Figure 2. Biomass trends in seeral groups a) under an increase fishing mortality in Notothenia rossii from 1979 and 1985, and in Gobionotothen gibberifrons between 1979 and 1990; b) under long-term decline in model primary production; c) under a combination of a and b. scale. We did not simulate changes in predation as forcing since there is no evidence that predators of N. rossii and G. gibberifrons (birds and whales) have increased in last decades.  Simulation results (figure 2) show that fishing mortality does not cause the collapse of the biomass of N. rossii and G. gibberifrons, unless reported landings had been serioulsy underreported during the first years of the fishery (figura 2a). On the other hand, changes in the primary production explain the decline in the biomass, but not the lack of recovery in N. rossii and G. gibberifrons in the long-term (figure 2b). We conclude that the collapse and lack of recovery of N. rossii and G. gibberifrons is better explained by a combined effect of intense fishing and a likely long-term system decline primary production (figure 2c). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are grateful to Programa COPAS Sur Austral, INCAR Centre and FONDECyT Project 11110545 REFERENCES Barrera-Oro, E., Marschoff, E., Casaux, R., 2000. Trends in relative abundance of fjord Notothenia rossii, Gobionotothen gibberifrons and Notothenia coriiceps at potter cove, South Shetland Islands, after commercial fishing in the area. CCAMLR Sci. 7, 43-52. Kock,K., 1992. Antarctic fish and fisheries. Cambridge, New York, USA. Kock, K., 1998. Changes in the fish biomass around Elephant Island (subarea 48.1) from 1976 to 1996. CCAMLR Sci. 5, 165-189. Barrera-Oro, E., Marschoff, E., Casaux, R., Gonzalez, B., 2003. Monitoring of relative abundance of fjord Notothenia rossii, Gobionotothen gibberifrons and Notothenia coriiceps at Potter Cove, South Shetland Islands, in years 2000 to 2003. Document WG-FSA-03/89 CCAMLR. Hobart, Australia. Jones, C., Kock, K., Balguerias, E., 2000. Changes in biomass of eight species of finfish around the South Orkney Islands (subarea 48.2) from three bottom trawl surveys. CCAMLR Sci. 7, 53-74. Marschoff, E., Barrera-Oro, E., Alescio, N., Ainley, D., 2012. Slow recovery of previously depleted demersal fish at the South Shetland Islands, 1983–2010. Fish. Res. 125–126, 206–213. Christensen, V., Walters, C. J., 2004. Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities and limitations. Ecol. Model. 172, 109-139. Constable, A. J., De La Mare, W. K., Agnew, D. J., Everson, I., Miller, D., 2000. Managing fisheries to conserve the Antarctic marine ecosystem: practical implementation of the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57, 778-791. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 75 TROPHIC MODELS IN THE SOUTHWESTERN ATLANTIC OCEAN: EVALUATING STRUCTURE AND FUNCTIONING OF COASTAL ECOSYSTEM33 Lercari D  (1)Unidad de Ciencias del Mar, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de la República (UNDECIMAR), Montevideo, Uruguay; Email: lercari@fcien.edu.uy Vögler R Centro Universitario de la Región Este - sede Rocha, Universidad de la República (CURE-Rocha, UdelaR), Rocha, Uruguay  Milessi AC, Jaureguizar A( Comisión de Investigaciones Científicas de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (CIC), Argentina Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo Pesquero (INIDEP). Paseo Victoria Ocampo 1, B7602HSA, Mar del Plata, Argentina Velasco G Instituto de Oceanografía, Universidad Federal de Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil ABSTRACT Knowledge about the structure and functioning of marine ecosystems is of outmost importance to the management perspective and to the development of ecosystem science theory. Formal models play a fundamental role to improve our understanding and allow us to represent the trophic interactions between multiple species including fisheries within an ecosystem. In the last years, the Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) approach is the most used and tested ecosystem modelling tool for addressing ecosystem-level responses both to changes in fishing and the influences of the environmental forcing. Coastal marine food webs are subjected to anthropogenic and environmental disturbances that can impact ecosystem structure and functioning, and thus affect natural resource availability. Particularly, at coastal zones of the Southwestern Atlantic (SWA, 25° S - 41° S) the oceanographic dynamics is complex, their ecosystems are highly productive and diverse, representing high socio-economic relevance within the region. Despite this, the structure and functioning of the diverse coastal ecosystems occurring in the SWA is just beginning to been analyzed in the scientific literature. Here, we reviewed and discussed most ecotrophic models developed in different coastal zones of SWA: 1 - South Brazilian shelf; 2- Rio de la Plata estuary; 3- Reflective sandy beach; 4- Dissipative sandy beach; 5- Rocha coastal lagoon; 6- North of Argentina shelf 1983 and 7- North of Argentina 2005. Common features and model limitations are discussed. The models indicated that SWA ecosystems are highly productive and diverse, with relatively high trophic levels, and catches which impact their stability, structure and maturity. Strong differences in the ecosystem structure are showed by the species composition and the formation of functional groups. Sandy beach ecosystems and the coastal lagoon showed a reduced number of species contrasting with the estuarine and shelf ecosystems. In the simpler systems (e.g. sandy beaches) trophic aggregation was practically unnecessary and most groups were represented as single species.                                                  33 Cite as: Lercari, D. et al. 2014. Trophic models in the Southwestern Atlantic Ocean: evaluating structure and functioning of coastal ecosystem, p. 75-77. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 75. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 76 Most models (excepting beaches) basically showed the same fisheries target species, where the Sciaenidae (Micropogonias furnieri, Cynoscion guatucupa and Macrodon ancylodon) display strong dominance in the catches.  Regarding ecosystem growth and development (maturity) both the lagoon and coastal shelf models appear as mature, while sandy beaches are presented by an inmature state. Ecosystem attributes based on primary production (e.g. PP/B) result strongly influenced by the high PP found in all the ecosystems considered.  Table 1. Ecosystem and fisheries attributes represented by the trophic models of the SWA: 1 - South Brazilian shelf; 2- Rio de la Plata estuary; 3- Reflective sandy beach; 4- Dissipative sandy beach; 5- Rocha coastal lagoon; 6- North of Argentina shelf 1983 and 7- North of Argentina 2005. Parameter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UnitsTotal area 119000 70500 3,5 1,1 72,0 108000,0 108000 km²# groups 35 37 20 9 27 40 40Max trophic level 4,6 3,96 3,14 3,05 4,2 4,81 4,72Sum of all consumption 2341,8 3675,0 1514,0 1108,0 206,2 12197,1 6294,2 t/km²/yearSum of all exports 822,1 19521,0 19212,0 8041,0 34,6 408,9 380,8 t/km²/yearSum of all respiratory flows 1200,1 1989,0 828,0 541,0 130,5 6756,9 3343,5 t/km²/yearTotal system throughput (TST) 5436 45683 41208 18052 451 21851 11338 t/km²/yearSum of all production 2680 21760 20424 8925 389,0 10701 5696 t/km²/yearMean trophic level of the catch 3,37 2,95 -- -- 3,15 3,71 3,49Gross efficiency (catch/PP) 0,000234 0,000051 -- -- 0,001541 0,000193 0,000473Total primary production/total respiration (PP/R) 1,669 10,5 20,6 15,9 2,290 1,048 1,11Total primary production/total biomass (PP/B) 28,09 81,14 220,6 184,4 8,701 23,62 22,972Total biomass/total throughput (B/TST) 0,0131 0,005 0,002 0,003 0,076 0,014 0,014Total catches 0,4688 1,1 -- -- 0,461 1,369 1,755 t/km²/yearAscendency 43,4 53,4 68 59 27,4 41,5 54,3 %Overhead 56,6 46,6 32 41 72,6 58,4 45,7 %Primary production required (PPR) 27,7 3 -- -- 28,7 3,99 14,39 %Pedigree 0,386 0,526 0,51 0,52 0,681 0,636 0,687Mean Transfer efficiencies 11,8 9,4 2,3 1,2 16 23,6 26,1 %References1-Velasco, 2004. 2-Lercari & Bergamino, 2012. 3-Lercari et al., 2010 (Barra del Chuy). 4-Lercari et al., 2010 (Arachania). 5-Milessi et al., 2010. 6-Milessi, 2008. 7-Milessi, 2013.M    o    d    e    l    s  The lack of information about, production and consumption rates and food preferences of many biological components, are common constraints between models. Currently most of ecotrophic models are static, however, with the development of spatial-temporal dynamic models, will be possible to predict future scenarios about the potential ecosystem changes due to fishing effort (e.g. distribution and size of fishing fleets) or due to variability on climatic regimes (e.g. El Niño / La Niña, global warming) or by the use of marine space (e.g. oil exploration, marine protected areas). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS D.L and R.V acknowledge AUCI. A.C.M. and A.J.J. acknowledge to CIC for the financial support.  REFERENCES Bergamino, L., Lercari, D., Szteren, D., 2012. Trophic impacts of marine mammals and seabirds in the Río de la Plata estuary and the nearshore oceanic ecosystem. Estuaries and Coasts, 35, 1571-1582. Lercari, D., Bergamino, L., 2011. Impacts of two invasive mollusks, Rapana venosa (Gastropoda) and Corbicula fluminea (Bivalvia), on the food web structure of the Río de la Plata estuary and nearshore oceanic ecosystem. Biological Invasions 13, 2053-2061. Lercari, D., Bergamino L., Defeo, O., 2010. Trophic models in sandy beaches with contrasting morphodynamics: comparing ecosystem structure and biomass flow. Ecological Modelling, 221, 2751-2759. Milessi A.C., Calliari D., Rodríguez L., Conde D., Sellanes J.,Rodríguez-Gallego, L., 2010. Trophic mass-balance model of a subtropical coastal lagoon, including a comparison with a stable isotope analysis of the food-web. Ecological Modelling 221, 2859-2869.  Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 77 Milessi, A.C., 2008. Desarrollo de un modelo ecotrófico para el Ecosistema Costero Argentino (34º-41ºS) mediante la aproximación multiespecífica ECOPATH para los años ’80. Informe Técnico INIDEP, Nº 8, 55 p (www.inidep.edu.ar).  Milessi, A.C., 2013. Modelación ecotrófica en el Ecosistema Costero Argentino-Uruguayo (34º-41º s) años 2004-2005. Informe de Investigación INIDEP, Nº 6, 27 p. (www.inidep.edu.ar). Velasco, G. 2004. Modelo eco-trófico do ecossistema da plataforma continental do suldo Brasil e cenários de exploração pesqueirada anchoíta (Engraulis anchoita) e do peixe-lanterna (Maurolicus stehmanni). PhDThesis. Fundação Univ. Federal do RioGrande (FURG), Rio Grande, Brazil.154 p. Velasco G, Castello J. P. 2005. An ecotrophic model of southern Brazil continental shelf and fisheries scenarios for Engraulis anchoita (Pisces, Engraulididae). Atlântica, 27, 59-68. Scientific advice for management 78 ECOSYSTEM EVOLUTION AND CHALLENGES FOR MANAGEMENT: ORAL PRESENTATIONS CONFLICTING OBJECTIVES FOR ECOSYSTEM BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT34 Andersen KH Center for Ocean Life, National Institute of Aquatic Resources, Technical University of Denmark ABSTRACT Current fisheries management is oriented towards management of single fish stocks, considered largely as independent, isolated units.  However, management actions directed towards one stock, or one fishery, has implications for other parts of the ecosystem.  Accounting for such indirect effects in an ecosystem approach to fisheries management requires food-web models that can quantify how perturbations on one part of the ecosystem influences the entire ecosystem.  I will show how food-web models can be used to as tools to guide strategic fisheries management decisions through examples of trophic cascades and rebuilding strategies.  In particular I will show how, due to the intrinsic dynamics of a ecosystems, a management action may lead to an unfavourable outcome in the short time, while a favourable outcome will only happen after a certain time has elapsed.  Finally I will discuss fundamental challenges and obstacles that models need to overcome to provide a successful operational implementation of ecosystem-based advice. Model. The simulations are based on a trait-based size-spectrum model (Andersen and Beyer 2006; Andersen and Pedersen 2010). The model represents a generic fish community with rates calibrated to resemble the North Sea. The model does not resolve individual species but represents the fish community as a distribution of individuals as a function of size (weight, w) and asymptotic size (Winf). The central assumption in the model is that big individuals eat smaller individuals. This leads to food-dependent growth and reproduction of the predators and to a corresponding mortality on prey. Consumption follows a functional response type II. The stabilizing mechanism in the model is that reproduction is density-dependent following a Beverton-Holt type of stock-recruitment relationship. The driving force in the model is the fishing mortality which is specified as a function of individual size and asymptotic size. The type of fishing mortality used here is a “trawl-type” selectivity where fishing starts at 0.05 times the asymptotic size and quickly achieves the maxium fishing mortality. Basic simulation. As a base case consider a fish community where all species are exploited, such as the North Sea. All species are fished with the trawl selectivity and a fishing mortality of 0.5 year-1. This corresponds to a fully exploited system. The resulting biomass distribution is shown in Figure 1. Ecosystem recovery example. As an example consider a complete reduction of the fishing mortality on all species with an asymptotic size larger than 8 kg. This leads to increase in biomass of those species. This recovery triggers a trophic cascade which propagates down through all the trophic level (Figure 1). Those species just smaller than the recovered species decrease in biomass, those smaller increase, and the very small species again decrease (Figure 2a). The recovery takes some time. The fastest response is on the largest species that first have a strong recovery. This is followed by a reduction towards the steady state (Figure 2b). The initial strong recovery results in a large depletion of the medium-sized species, etc. The simulation illustrates three important points: 1) The recovery of the entire community takes longer time                                                  34 Cite as: Andersen, K.H. 2014. Conflicting objectives for ecosystem based fisheries management, p. 78-79. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 78. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 79 than the recovery of the directly affected species; 2) the initial response may be quite different from the final response; 3) the steady state is reached after around 20 years.  Figure 1. The biomass distribution of all individuals irrespective of species as a function of weight. Black line: fully exploited system; grey line system with no fishing on large species.   Figure 2. a: The change in the biomass distribution following the reduction of fishing on large species. This shows the spawning-stock biomass as a function of asymptotic size (thick line) relative to the fully exploited situation (dashed line). b: The change in the biomass of large species (thick line), medium species and small species (thin line) as a function of time. REFERENCES Andersen, K.H., Beyer, J.E., 2006. Asymptotic size determines species abundance in the marine size spectrum. The American Naturalist 168, 54–61. Andersen, K.H., Pedersen, M., 2010. Damped trophic cascades driven by fishing in model marine ecosystems. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 277, 795––802. Scientific advice for management 80 BEYOND ANECDOTAL INFORMATION: THE USE OF FISHERS´ KNOWLEDGE TO MODEL FISHERIES35 Bevilacqua AHV Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte – UFRN;Campus Universitário s/n, Lagoa Nova. Cx p 1524. CEP 59.098-970 Natal (RN) – Brazil; Email: anahelena.bevilacqua@gmail.com Carvalho AR, Lopes PFM Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte – UFRN. Department of Ecology;   Email: acarvalho.ufrn@gmail.com; pmacord@gmail.com  Ronaldo A Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte – UFRN. Department of Civil Engineering;  Email: ronangelini@gmail.com ABSTRACT Ecosystem modeling to inform fisheries management is still hampered by the lack of scientific information, mainly in developing countries and remote areas. In Brazil, small-scale fisheries have been always poorly sampled but in the last 5 years the political inability of institutions in charge of fisheries monitoring has undermined the registration of fish landings and, consequently, the acquisition of information on fishers, fish stocks, fishing fleet and catches. The situation is slightly worse in the Brazilian northeastern coast, where despite its importance, artisanal fisheries are historically poorly studied. In this region, there is not enough data available to perform fisheries modeling and design management plans, with the exception from Freire and co-workers (2008). Given that fishers’ knowledge has been used to complement scientific data and to provide information on biology and ecology of exploited fish stocks in other areas, here we recorded such knowledge with the principal aim to contribute data to elaborate an ecosystem model using Ecopath representing the marine exploited ecosystem of Formosa Bay, in Natal State, Brazil.  After one year recording landings (from Feb/13 to Feb/14), we identified the 10 most caught fish species and the most skilled fishers in catching those species, who were then interviewed. Fishers were selected by the gear used (11 used gillnets and 12 used hook and line), by fishing experience (>10yrs) and by age (>25yrs). The age of the interviewed fishers ranged from 25 to 57 yrs. These interviewees have been fishing from 13 to 45 yrs and together they represented 338 yrs of fishing experience. Each expert answered question about the main fish targeted, in average 4 to 5 fish species per fisher. Face-to-face interviews were conducted between February and April 2014. Data collection followed the Delphi methodology (MacMillan & Marshall, 2006), in which experts are consulted and results are submitted to their approval or revision until at least 51% of experts have reached consensus and agreed on the results. Accordingly, each fisher was provided with photos of their main species caught. Once a fisher had answered about the first species chosen, other species were presented and fishers could decide on answering or not about species depending on their knowledge. Pictures of food items were also presented to fishers to assist them when informing about diet items. A known quantity of corn seeds was used to represent the amount of each species caught by fisheries, and they were encouraged to add as many corn seeds as they wanted to coarsely represent the total size of each fish stock.                                                  35 Cite as: Bevilacqua, A.H.V. et al. 2014. Beyond anecdotal information: the use of fishers´ knowledge to model fisheries, p. 80-82. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 80. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 81 The information requested during interviews was the maximum weight (Wmax), modal weight (Wmodal), maximum length (Lmax), modal length (Lmodal), growth rate, longevity, diet, amount of food required per day and main predators for the ten most caught species. Fishers could use a piece of string to show their perception on Lmax and Lmodal, in cm. In some cases, fishers provided this information in kg and weight-length relationships were used to estimate the length (L). The Lmax provided by fishers was used to estimate L∞ using the empiric equation from Froese and Binohlan (2000). A t test was used to compare Q/B estimated using fisher’s W∞ with Q/B available in Fishbase. Afterwards, results from all answers and a trophic web elaborated using the Ecopath software taking into account fisher’s information was presented individually to each fisher and they could change or keep the information previously provided. An Ecopath model was then elaborated using the ten most caught species, their prey and predators, and using information found in Fishbase (fishbase.org) and SeaLifeBase (sealifebase.org), in additional to what was collected with the fishers’ interviews. Less than ¼ of fishers (22.7%) provided information about the size of the largest fish caught in cm, but all were able to provide the weight of the largest fish caught. Fishers were not able to provide information on life expectancy, total amount of fish of each species caught per year and stock size. Additionally, growth rates provided by fishers just about four fish species (Thunnus atlanticus, Scomberomorus brasiliensis, Euthynnus alletteratus e Scomberomorus cavala). Results showed that there was no statistical difference between L∞ provided by the fishers and L∞ estimated using the empirical equation for eight species. On the contrary, fishers underestimated L∞ for S. brasiliensis and overestimated the one for Seriola fasciata (Table 1), suggesting stock depletion for these species or selection by net sizes and fishing habitat. Table 1. Length at infinity estimated by Froese and Binohlan (2000) using Fishbase data and according to data provided by fishers for species with significant differences.  Species L∞Fishbase L∞Fishers N Fisher t test p-value Scomberomorus brasiliensis 131.25 95.38 6 18.14 0.000 Seriola fasciata 70.87 159.89 3 10.32 0.009 Bolded numbers indicate p<0.001. ¹ 5% beyond maximum length (Lmax)  With the exception of Mycteroperca bonaci and Scomberomorus cavala, fishers usually underestimated Q/B in relation to values found in the literature (Table 2).  Table 2. Comparison between Consumption per Biomass (Q/B) estimated using Palomares & Pauly (1998) equation with scientific data and Q/B estimated using Wmax provided by fishers. Fish species are ordered according to the abundance in landings. Species Common name Q/B Fishbase Q/B Fisher t-test p-value Thunnus atlanticus Blackfin tuna 7.22 9.5 26.42 0.000 Mycteroperca bonaci Black grouper 3.96 4.12 0.58 0.617 Scomberomorus brasiliensis Spanish mackrel 7.38 9.22 8.76 0.000 Lutjanus analis Mutton snapper 4.51 6.32 12.7 0.000 Rhizoprionodon lalandii Brazilian sharpnose shark 3.20 6.46 29.70 0.000 Seriola fasciata Lesser amber jack 8.39 5.54 NC NC Coryphaena hippurus Dolphinfish 4.01 5.34 10.38 0.009 Euthynnus alletteratus Atlantic little tuna 5.54 8.69 25.91 0.000 Cynoscion jamaicensis Jamaica weakfish 7.66 5.80 10.57 0.009 Scomberomorus cavala King mackerel 9.06 12.67 8.72 0.0129 Bolded numbers indicate significant values at p<0.001. NC = not calculated  Main predators quoted by fishers were sharks, dolphins and large pelagic fishes (such as Istiophorus albicans I. albicans; Xiphias gladius; Makaira nigricans; Scomberomorus. cavala; Sphyraena barracuda; Rachycentron canadum and Seriola fasciata). Sharks were considered to feed on all other species, while dolphins, according to fishers, mainly feed on species caught by gillnets, likely indicating competition among fishers and dolphins while fishing. Overall, fishers information regarding feeding habits for all species was similar to the one provided in the literature, and fishers were able to supply details on the diet for six predators, broadening their diet composition in 1 to >3 items in comparison with data previously available. Scientific advice for management 82 REFERENCES Freire, K., Christensen, V., Pauly, D., 2008. Description of the East Brazil Large Marine Ecosystem using a trophic model. Scientia Marina 72(3), 477-491. Froese, R., Binohlan, C., 2000. Empirical relationships to estimate asymptotic length, length at first maturity and length at maximum yield per recruit in fishes, with a simple method to evaluate length frequency data. Journal of Fish Biology 56(2), 758-773. MacMillan, D.C., Marshall, K., 2006. The Delphi process-an expert-based approach to ecological modelling in data-poor environments. Animal Conservation 9(1), 11-19. Palomares, M.L.D., Pauly, D., 1998. Predicting food consumption of fish populations as functions of mortality, food type, morphometrics, temperature and salinity. Marine and freshwater research 49(5), 447-453. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 83 THE IMPORTANCE OF LOCALLY SPECIFIC DATA IN ECOPATH MODELS36 Hernandez-Milian G Aquaculture & Fisheries Development Centre (AFDC), School of Biological,  Earth and Environmental Sciences, Distillery Fields, North Mall, Cork, Ireland;  Email: g.hernandezmilian@ucc.ie  Reid D Marine Institute, Rinville, Oranmore, Galway, Ireland;David.Reid@Marine.ie Rogan E Aquaculture & Fisheries Development Centre (AFDC), School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, Distillery Fields, North Mall, Cork, Ireland; Email: E.Rogan@ucc.ie ABSTRACT Ecopath food-web models have been use worldwide to examine and investigate food webs in different aquatic ecosystems. The information obtained from these models is very valuable, especially in the application of an ecosystem approach to fisheries management. However, data on appropriate spatial and temporal scales are often not available and data from elsewhere are inputted into the model, likely reducing accuracy of the model. Here we present a modified version of the Lees and Mackinson (2007) Irish Sea model using up-to-date information, in particular for top predators. Results of this model show an increase in   food-web complexity with an increase of trophic levels and a decrease in the net system production, suggesting that a trend to maturation might be occurring when comparing with the previous model. Also, the model showed that the fishery was targeting at higher trophic levels that the previous model indicating which might be related to a new fishing scenario.                                                   36 Cite as: Hernandez-Milian, G. et al. 2014. The importance of locally specific data in Ecopath models, p. 83. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 83. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Scientific advice for management 84 A DYNAMIC VERSION OF ECOTROPH TO ASSESS CHANGES IN MARINE ECOSYSTEMS - APPLICATION TO THE BAY OF BISCAY AND CELTIC SEA CASE STUDY37 Bentorcha A, Gascuel D Université Européenne de Bretagne, Agrocampus Ouest, UMR985 Ecologie et santé des écosystèmes, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes, France Colléter M Université Européenne de Bretagne, Agrocampus Ouest, UMR985 Ecologie et santé des écosystèmes,  65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes, France The Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6T1Z4 Gatty P Université Européenne de Bretagne, Agrocampus Ouest,  UMR985 Ecologie et santé des écosystèmes, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes, France Guénette S EcOceans, St Andrews, NB, Canada ABSTRACT EcoTroph is a steady-state ecosystem model where the functioning of aquatic ecosystems is considered as a flow of biomass surging up the food web from lower to higher trophic levels, through predation and ontogenic processes (Gascuel and Pauly 2009, Gascuel et al. 2011). The model deals with trophic spectra of biomass, production, catch, fishing mortalities, i.e. the continuous distribution of a parameter at the ecosystem scale and as a function of continuous trophic levels. Trophic spectra related to a particular ecosystem and associated fisheries, are commonly derived from a pre-existing steady-state Ecopath model. EcoTroph enables the simulation of various fisheries changes and their impacts on computed trophic spectra. Thus, it constitutes a powerful tool to analyze fishing impacts at the ecosystem scale. In this study, we developed a dynamic version of EcoTroph, ET-Dynamic (what is equivalent to the Ecosim dynamic extension of the steady-state Ecopath model). Such a dynamic tool allows both past-analyses and forecasts. It provides more confidence in the ecosystem modelling approach, allowing to better estimate some of the main parameters of the model, especially the strength of top-down controls. The model uses trophic spectra related to an initial state of the studied ecosystem as inputs, as well as time series of yearly primary productions and fishing patterns. Therefore, it can be used to simulate year to year changes in the ecosystem, and to identify drivers of these changes. Here, the model is tested analyzing the dynamic of the Celtic Sea and Bay of Biscay ecosystem, over the 1980-2012 period. First, an Ecopath model was built to represent the Celtic sea and Bay of Biscay area (330 000 km2) in 1980. It includes 38 trophic groups, with a detailed representation at the species level for all stocks targeted by fisheries and assessed by ICES working groups. Then, based on estimates from ICES assessments, and using recruitment and fishing mortalities as forcing functions, an Ecosim model was fitted to time series of catch and biomass (Figure 1). Like many European seas, this ecosystem is characterized by very high fishing mortalities applied on demersal stocks during the 1990s. The fishing                                                  37 Cite as: Bentrocha,  A. et al. 2014. A dynamic version of EcoTroph to assess changes in marine ecosystems – Application to the Bay of Biscay and Celtic sea case study, p. 84-85. In: Steenbeek, J., Piroddi, C., Coll, M., Heymans, J. J., Villasante, S., Christensen, V. (eds.), Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Extended Abstracts, pp. 84. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. 236 p. Ecopath 30 Years Conference Proceedings: Abstracts 85 pressure decreased over the last decade, but the total biomass of assessed stocks continues to decline. Total catches were especially, high during the 1990s, mainly due to large landings of horse mackerel. Biomass trophic spectra computed for years 1980 and 2012, highlighted changes which have occurred during the very last years in the species composition, with an increase in high trophic levels, and a decrease for low trophic levels. 0,00,10,20,30,40,50,61980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010Fish mortalityF PelagicF Demersal 05001000150020002500300035001980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010Biomass (thousand tonnes) 01002003004005001980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010Catch (thous. tonnes) 0,00,11,010,02,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0 4,5 5,0 5,5Biomass (t/Km²)Trophic levelEcosim 1980Ecosim 2012 Figure 1. Trends in the Celtic sea and Bay of Biscay ecosystem. Top-left: mean fishing mortality of assessed stocks; Top-right: biomass observed (diamonds) and simulated (line) using Ecosim, for all assessed stocks; Bottom-left: total catch observed (diamonds) and simulated (line) using Ecosim; Bottom-right: Biomass trophic spectra in 1980 and 2012. The dynamic EcoTroph model, developed under the R environment, was also used to simulate the 1980-2012 period, using yearly catch trophic spectra as input. The model provides yearly biomass and fishing mortalities tropic spectra, which can be compared either to estimates derived from ICES assessments or to Ecosim results. Sensitivity analyses show that the trophic flow kinetics and the strength of the top down control (α parameter) have significant effects on simulations. Using appropriate parameters, the model is able to simulate changes observed in the biomass of high trophic levels, while for low trophic levels we have to assume that the flow kinetics and the transfer efficiencies have changed over time. The first one can be affected by environmental conditions, while the latter one would be impacted by fisheries-induced changes in the global functioning of the ecosystem.  We concluded that the dynamic EcoTroph model provides new insight into the functioning of marine ecosystems and a useful tool to analyze dynamics and drivers of change. The next step will be to run forecast simulations according to various fishing scenarios and using results of the past-analysis to better estimate the model parameters. REFERENCES Gascuel D, Guénette S, Pauly D., 2011. The trophic-level based ecosystem modelling approach: theoretical overview and practical uses. ICES J Mar Sci 68, 1403−1416. Gascuel, D., Pauly, D., 2009. EcoTroph: modelling marine ecosystem functioning and impact of fishing. Ecological Modelling 220, 2885–2898. Scientific advice for management 86 SIMULATION OF ZEBRA MUSSEL INVASION AND EVALUATION OF IMPACTS ON THE MILLE LACS LAKE, MINNESOTA: AN ECOSYSTEM MODEL38 Kumar R, Varkey D, Pitcher TJ Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada Email: r.kumar@fisheries.ubc.ca ABSTRACT In less than a decade after being first noticed in 2005, Zebra mussels Dreissena polymorpha became fully-established in Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota, USA. To explore the ecosystem-wide impact of this potentially damaging species in the premier walleye Sander vitreus lake, an ecosystem model with 51 functional groups was built using Ecopath and Ecosim modeling suite. The model was tuned to observed time series of fish abundance and fisheries catch data from 1985 to 2006. We setup zebra mussel with a high initial biomass, and an adequate fishing pressure was applied on it with an aim to neutralize the effect on ecosystem caused by the inclusion of zebra mussel. At the onset of 2005, the fishing pressure was released with different trajectories so that we could mimic the non-nutritional challenges the species could have faced during its irruption in the lake. The fitted model were simulated to the year 2036; the simulation results indicated system-wide collapse of major predators including walleye due to the effect of bottom-up cascading as zebra mussel efficiently filters out the phytoplankton from the system. The result also indicated that the population of zebra mussel in the lake stabilized after attaining the maximum density within few years. Furthermore, the model predicted a significant boost in smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui population when zebra mussel was incorporated in the diet of the