2021-2025 Shark Research Plan

Citation
Brouwer S, Hamer P (2020) 2021-2025 Shark Research Plan. In: WCPFC Scientific Committee 16th Regular Session. WCPFC-SC16-2020/EB-IP-01 Rev1, Electronic Meeting, p 221
Abstract

This document represents a proposal for the WCPFCs third Shark Research Plan (SRP) covering the years 2021-2025. The SRP was developed with input from an online Informal Working Group (SRP-IWG) comprised of Commission Members, Cooperating non-Members, and participating Territories (CCMs) and observers. This document includes a review of the previous plan (Appendix II). For each of the WCPFC Key Sharks, the plan summarises the available data; the current stock status; and presents report cards that summarise the assessment information and research requirements for each species. In addition, this proposal suggests guidelines for metrics to be included in assessments to ensure consistency in reporting and ease of comparison among species; and proposes a number of objectives for the SRP. The document outlines a proposal for the 2021-2025 SRP direction and tables a project plan. Finally we make the following recommendations for the Scientific Committee's consideration: 1. SC adopt objectives to direct the 2021-2025 SRP. 2. SC adopt standardised assessment reporting metrics for Data Rich Assessments, and as a minimum report F/FMSY and SB/SBMSY or B/BMSY or SB/SB0 or B/B0. 3. Where possible Data Rich Assessments should report depletion estimates (SB/SBF=0). 4. To improve our understanding of Medium Data Assessment metrics, Data Rich Assessments are encouraged to, in addition to the above metrics, report Fmsm, Flim and Fcrash, and present the ratios of Fmsm/Fcrash and Flim/Fcrash and F/Fcrash for comparison with conventional metrics. 5. Medium Data Assessments that are unable to estimate the F/FMSY due to a lack of fishery and/or biological data, are encouraged to report Fmsm, Flim and Fcrash, and present the ratios of Fmsm/Fcrash and Flim/Fcrash and F/Fcrash. 6. To facilitate future reporting, when undertaking the annual review of progress at the SC, the ISG should rate projects as complete, partial, ongoing and not done and provide a score to measure performance. 7. The SC develop an \agreed suite" of biological parameters (or upper and lower bounds) and units of measurement (e.g. total length) for use in WCPFC assessments and update the information sheets accordingly. 8. The SC review and agree on the data certainty criteria (Table 5) for the report cards and confirm a certainty rating for each species, when reviewing the report cards. 9. The SC review, and update annually if needed, the "agreed suite" of biological parameters; the report cards; and information sheets. 10. The SC is invited to consider the schedule of work outlined in Table 6 and Table 8 for 2021-2025. 11. The SC is invited to review the specific projects proposed in Table 6 and Table 8 for 2021 for finalisation prior to developing the SC budget.