Final report for CERF project ‘Ecosystem model analysis to
address fisheries management issues in south eastern
Australia and the implications of climate change’
R. Watson, C. Buxton, S. Frusher, A. Smith and R. Gales
Final report for CERF project ‘Ecosystem model analysis to address fisheries management
issues in south eastern Australia and the implications of climate change’
R. Watson1, C. Buxton2, S. Frusher2, A. Smith3 and R. Gales4
1.
2.
3.
4.
Ecomarres, PO Box 1086, Sandy Bay Tasmania 7006
Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania Private Bag 49, Hobart Tasmania 7001.
CSIRO Marine & Atmospheric Research, Castray Esplanade, Hobart Tasmania 7000.
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, GPO Box 44, Hobart Tasmania 7001.
© Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 2011
This work is copyright. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of this
publication may be reproduced by any process, electronic or otherwise, without the specific
written permission of the copyright owners. Neither may information be stored electronically in
any form whatsoever without such permission.
ISBN ??
Preferred way to cite:
Watson R, Buxton C, Frusher S, Smith A and Gales R (2011) Final report for CERF project
‘Ecosystem model analysis to address fisheries management issues in south eastern Australia
and the implications of climate change’. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and
the Arts, Australia.
DISCLAIMER
The authors do not warrant that the information in this report is free from errors or omissions.
The authors do not accept any form of liability, be it contractual, tortious or otherwise, for the
contents of this book or for any consequences arising from its use or any reliance placed upon
it. The information, opinions and advice contained in this report may not relate to, or be
relevant to, a reader's particular circumstances. Opinions expressed by the authors are the
individual opinions of those persons and are not necessarily those of the publisher or research
provider.
Contents
Objective ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
Summary of the major activities undertaken by the organisation ............................................................... 3
An outline of any demonstration/communication activities undertaken .................................................. 11
The benefits and outcomes of the Activity as a whole ............................................................................... 12
Degree to which the Activity has effectively achieved its objectives ......................................................... 12
The appropriateness of the approaches used in the development and implementation of the Activity .. 13
Future engagement .................................................................................................................................... 14
Budget ......................................................................................................................................................... 15
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
Objective
‘The Activity will focus on the development of a coastal ecosystem model using eastern and
southern Tasmania as an example. The Activity will bring together expertise from some of
the world’s leading marine ecosystem modelling groups to assemble existing datasets
across different Institutions, with the aim of developing and adapting ecosystem models for
the Australian marine environment.’
Summary of the major activities undertaken by the organisation
Initially the project focused on identifying the available models and datasets that existed to
assess their usefulness as inputs for the model. Several meetings with scientists in the
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE), Tasmanian
Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute (TAFI) and CSIRO occurred. These meetings identified
two existing models of marine ecosystems in waters around Tasmania, and examined their
similarities and differences from the proposed model for this project. A framework for the
proposed model was developed in relation to the area to be covered and the subdivision of
the marine areas. The boundaries of the areas were designed to be consistent with other
applications to ensure that data could be easily shared across projects in the different
organisations. The model geometry was agreed on (Figure 1) and the data fundamental to
the oceanographic and primary production required in the model was finalised in the first
phase of the project.
It was decided to cover the entire coastal waters surrounding Tasmania (down to about
300 m), although concentrating on the east coast, to enable as complete a picture as
possible to be developed. Different collaborators had different areas of interest. For
example, the DPIPWE representatives wanted to include all of Bass Strait because they
believed that this area will undergo the most significant changes, especially with regard to
marine mammals. Others wanted all commercial fishing areas including the west coast of
Tasmania included. No existing model had these elements. Regions within the model were
designed to accommodate issues such as the movement of seals in Bass Strait, the
bathymetry of the regions as they relate to bioregionalisation, and data recording areas for
research surveys and for the fishing industry.
Another fundamental decision related to the functional or biomass groups to be used in the
model. Several rounds of meetings and email exchanges involving robust discussion with
fisheries scientists at TAFI and CSIRO resulted in the identification of 46 functional or
biomass groups, close to the maximum that a viable model allows (Table 1). The selection
of functional groups was a compromise between the taxonomic, feeding/life history
behaviour of biota, and the commercial groupings in the case of fished species. Care was
taken to represent major fished and unfished groups, as well as those of conservation
interest such as marine mammals and seabirds. Organisms were grouped where they
3
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
occupied a similar ecological niche but separated where impacts of climate change may be
expected to be differentiated.
Finally, a range of habitat and fish survey datasets, as well as fisheries catch and effort data
(both commercial and recreational) were brought together to form the basis of the
description of the ecosystem at present (in the late 1990s). These were used to quantify the
density and distribution of the functional groups in the model, and the removal of biomass
by fishers (based on catch statistics).
Habitat information was based on Barrett et al.1 which primarily dealt with inshore areas
(less than 20 m). Spatial Analysis routines in ArcMap (ESRI version 9.3.1) were used to
extrapolate these results to the entire model area. For temperate reef habitat, a local depthbased attrition rate was used such that most reef habitat was assumed to occur within the
shallow inshore areas. Expert opinion from collaborators allowed reef estimates for the
deeper depths and other unsurveyed areas of the model.
Biomass estimates for fish and invertebrate species were based primarily on three sources
from TAFI research: shelf trawl surveys (January 1993 to January 1995), temperate reef
dive surveys (March 2006 to April 2007) and inshore beam trawl surveys (June 1995 to
March 1996). Point or transect area biomass estimates were extrapolated to the model
area based on Spatial Analysis (ArcMap) using an inverse distance-weighted model. The
model biomass estimates of reef associated or shallow-water groups were prorated
accordingly. For the marine mammals and birds, biomass estimates were obtained from the
scientific literature after consultation with marine mammal specialists from DPIPWE, and
calculated in units appropriate to the model.
Once the data had been collated and worked into a suitable format, a static Ecopath model
was developed. Such a model describes one representative period of time. The biomass
values extracted from survey data, representing average levels within the last decade, were
used to parameterise the model. Most groups were constrained to only a portion of the
model area because of their habitat or depth range associations. Production to Biomass
ratios from similar groups from existing Ecopath models were used to guide estimates of
these parameters. Some parameters needed to be estimated by the model to preserve mass
balance. The diets of predators were adjusted as the model was balanced, because
information on diets from the literature for many groups was mostly qualitative, and thus
with its inherent uncertainty, provided room for some adjustment. A proportion of biomass
was quantified to come from areas outside the model, to allow for immigration into and
emigration out of the model area. The balanced Ecopath model is represented
1
Barrett, N., Sanderson, J.C., Lawler, M., Halley, V., Jordan, A., 2001. Mapping of inshore marine habitats in southeastern Tasmania for marine protected area planning and marine management.
Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Technical Report Series 7, 74 pp.
4
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
diagrammatically in Figure 2, where the biomass groups and the major pathways in the
food web are illustrated.
The Ecopath model was further developed into a time dynamic model (EcoSim) for
hypothesis testing including simulation of expected climate-change induced differences.
For this model the time series of fisheries landings and the effort involved in their capture
for the 10 years to 2008 were included. This included data from both commercial and
recreational fisheries.
Given the general uncertainty about the environmental changes expected to the marine
environment around Tasmania under a range of possible future greenhouse gas abatement
scenarios, it was decided to concentrate on changes to primary productivity in algal groups
(often considered a first-order impact), and the subsequent impacts on the other functional
groups in the modelled system and its fisheries. To ensure that the ranges that have been
previously predicted were covered, a range of change from -30% to +30% in primary
productivity was simulated over a century from the model’s static values. Unfortunately
there is still much uncertainty about what change in primary productivity will be created
under various climate change scenarios.
The change in biomass of fish species and fisheries landings under the scenario of
increased primary productivity induced by climate change was an increase (usually nonlinear) in landings in all cases, although the scale of the increases was not the same. The
largest increase was in the arrow squid fishery, with more moderate increases in the
flathead and reef-associated species after about a 20% increase in primary productivity.
Those with the least response were the coastal demersal and coastal transitory species. On
the other hand, when primary productivity was decreased, many fisheries had their
landings collapse to zero when production fell by only between 10 and 20% of static levels.
For the marine mammals and birds, most showed little response to changes in the range of
primary productivity tested, with the exception of one group. The biomasses of little
penguins and shearwaters, fur seals and dolphins were relatively static with either and
increase or a decrease in primary productivity. The seabird group (shy albatross, gannets,
storm petrels and fairy prions) decreased in biomass with decreased productivity, and
increased when primary productivity increased (Figure 3).
5
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
Table 1: Functional groups used in the Ecopath model.c
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Group Name
Large phytoplankton
Small phytoplankton
Gelatinous zooplankton
Large zooplankton
Mesozooplankton
Small zooplankton
Soft sediment small benthic carnivores
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Benthic deposit feeders
Deep benthic filter feeders
Shallow filter feeders
Urchins
Reef mesograzers
Benthic grazers fished (Abalone)
Herbivorous macrozoobenthos
Carnivorous macrozoobenthos
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Carnivorous macrozoobenthos fished
< 200 m reef
Meiobenthos
all
Macroalgae
reef + drift areas kelp
Seagrass
some reefs
seagrass
Coastal squid fished
< 50 m depth calamari (southern calamari Sepioteuthis australis)
Transitory squid fished
all
arrow squid (Nototodarus gouldi)
Octopus fished
all
Octopus maorum, Octopus pallidus
Coastal soft sediment microcarnivorous
teleost
all
gobies, pipefish, seahorse
Coastal demersal reef herbivourous teleost
fished
reef
herring cale, marblefish, luderick
Coastal small demersal reef planktivore
southern hula fish, damselfish, cardinalfish, bullseyes, barber perch,
teleost
reef
butterfly perch
Coastal demersal reef carnivorous teleost
reef
magpie perch, leatherjacket, long snouted boarfish, purple wrasse, blue
23
24
25
26
Range
all
all
all
all
all
all
10%
all
> 100 m depth
< 100 m depth
reef
reef
< 30 m reef
< 100 m depth
reef
Members
large plankton (diatoms)
picophytoplankton
salps (pryosomes), coelentrates
krill (also chaetognaths etc)
copepods
heterotrophic flagellates
shrimps, small crabs, carnivorous polychaetes
polychaetes, some echinoderms incl holothurians (on shelf), infaunal
bivalves
sponges, corals, crinoids, bivalves, bryozoa
oysters, other shallow filter feeders (e.g. corals and sponges), ascidians
including Centrostephanus
amphipods, errant polychaetes,microgastropods
blacklip abalone, greenlip abalone
gastropods (including Turbo)
sea stars, dog whelks
southern rock lobster (Jasus edwardsii), velvet crabs, giant crabs
(Pseudocarcinus gigas)
6
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
fished
throat wrasse, banded morwong, bastard trumpeter
Transitory demersal reef carnivorous teleost
fished
reef + nearby striped trumpeter, jackass morwong
flounder, flatheads, stargazers, gurnard, latchet, rock cod, dories,
Shelf associated carnivorous teleost fished
non-reef
whitings
Coastal piscivores fished
all
barracouta, Australian salmon, pike
Coastal schooling omnivorous pelagic teleosts
fished
< 50 m depth mullets, sea garfish
Coastal schooling carnivorous pelagic teleosts
fished
< 100 m depth blue warehou, silver trevally
Oceanic planktivores
all
sauries, flying fish
Oceanic piscivores fished
all
tunas, swordfish, billfish
Small pelagic planktivorous teleost
all
sardine, pilchard, herring, sprats, anchovy
Small pelagics carnivorous teleost fished
all
redbait, yellowtail scad, jack mackerel, blue mackerel
Offshore carnivorous teleosts fished
> 100 m depth blue-eye trevalla, ling, blue grenadier, hapuka, whiptails, cardinalfish
Migratory mesopelagics
all
myctophids, frostfish, lancetfish, hatchetfish
Shelf associated demersal sharks
all
gummy shark, draughtboard shark, Port Jackson shark, saw shark, inshore
dog sharks, school shark
deepwater dogsharks (Owstons dogfish, golden dogfish, Plunket’s
Offshore demersal sharks
> 100 m depth dogfish, etc)
Pelagic sharks
all
bronze whaler, dusky whaler, blue shark, mako, white pointer, 7-gill shark
Skates and rays
all
angel shark, stingray, stingaree, fiddler, Tasmanian numbfish, skate
Dolphins
all
dolphins: longfin pilot whale Globicephala melaena , killer whale Orcinus
orca, false killer whale Pseudorca crassidens, common dolphin Delphinus
delphis, bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus
Fur Seal
all
Australian fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus) and New Zealand fur seal
little penguin (Eudpyptula minor), short-tailed shearwater (Puffinus
Little penguin, mutton birds
all
tenuirostris)
shy albatross (Thalassarche cauta cauta), gannets, storm petrels, fairy
Sea Birds
all
prions
Detritus
all
7
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
!!! !
!!!!!!! !
!!
!
!!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
40° S
!
! !
! !
!
!!
!
(
(
!!
!!
! !! !
! !!!!!!
!
!!
!
!
!!
! !! !
!
!
!
(
! !! !
! !
!!
!
!!
!!!!!
!
!
(
!
!!!
!!
Tasmania
!!!!
!
!
!!
!!
!! ! !
!!!
!!!!
!
!
E E EE
E
EEEE E
E
EE
E
!!
EE
EE
E
E EE
E
EE
EEE
EE
! ! !!!! !! E E
EE
EEE
EE E
E
! ! !! !! EE
EE
EEE
E
EEEE
E
EEE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
!EEEEE
E
EE
E EE
EEE
E
((
(
!
!
! !! !!!!! !!!
!! !
!
!
(
!
!
!
!!
!
!! !
!! !!
!!
(
E
E
!
E
E
E
E
E
EE
E
E
!!!!!E
!E ! EEE
EE
E
EEE
E
E
!EE
E EE
EE
EEE
! !!!!EEEEEEE
EE
E
E
E
! !! EE E
EEE
E
EEE
EE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
!EEE EEEEEEE
E
E
E
EEEE
EEEE
EE
E
E
E
E
E
EE
E
E
E
EE E
E EE
EEEE
E
E
EE
EE
EEEEEE
E E
E
EE
! EE
E
!
!!!
!!!!
!
! !
44° S
144° E
148° E
Figure 1: Map showing the modelled area (outlined with line) nearly 137,000 km2, the location of beam
trawl samples (open circles), trawl survey samples (crosses) and temperate reef dive survey sites (filled
circles) used in biomass estimates of functional groups. The 100 m (faint dashed) and 300 m (bold
dashed) depth contours shown.
8
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
Dolphins
Shelf
associated
demersal
sharks
Coastal small
demersal reef
planktivore
teleosts
Coastal
demersal reef
carnivorous
teleosts
Macrozoobenthos
Benthic
Carnivores
Penguins
Shearwater
Fur Seal
Offshore
demersal
sharks
Transitory demersal
reef carnivorous
teleosts
Macrozoobenthos
Benthic
Deposit
Feeders
Pelagic
sharks
Shelf
associated
carnivorous
teleosts
Meiobenthos
Skates &
Rays
Small pelagics
carnivorous
teleosts
Transitory
Squid
Macrozoobethos
Herbivores
Large
zooplankton
Offshore
carnivorous
teleosts
Coastal schooling
omnivorous
pelagic teleosts
Coastal
piscivores
Coastal
Squid
Deep Benthic
Filter Feeders
Gelatinous
zooplankton
Seabirds
Coastal schooling
carnivorous
pelagic teleosts
Small
invertebrate
feeders
Shallow
Filter
Feeders
Migratory
mesopelagics
Urchins
Octopus
Reef
Mesograzers
Oceanic
planktivores
Oceanic
piscivores
Seahorses
Pipefish
Goby
Abalone
Small pelagic
planktivorous
teleosts
Coastal demersal
reef herbaceous
teleosts
Macroalgae
Seagrass
Small
zooplankton
Mesoplankton
Detritus
Discards
Large
Phytoplankton
Small
Phytoplankton
Figure 2: A simplified diagram of the modelled food web with thick connection lines representing > 40% biomass flows, while thinner lines
represent smaller flows. For clarity flows of <10% are not shown. The size of boxes does not represent biomass. Shaded boxed represent fished
groups.
9
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
30
A
Abalone
Landings (kg km-2)
25
Recreational
20
15
Rock Lobster
Commercial
10
Small Pelagics
Southern Calamary
Reef-associated
5
0
2.0
-30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5
0
5
10
15
20
25
Shearwater
Coastal Transitory
30
B
Flathead
Rock Lobster
Recreational
1.8
Landings (kg km-2)
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
Giant Crab
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.6
Octopus
Shark
Coastal Demersal
30 Offshore
Arrow squid
-30 -25 -20 -15 -10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
C
Sea birds
Biomass (t km-2)
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
Little Penguin
& Shearwater
0.1
0
-30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0
5 10 15
Primary production change (%)
20
25
30
Fur seal
Dolphins
Figure 3: Changes in projected fisheries landings and the biomass of groups of special conservation
interest in response to changes in climate change induced rates of primary productivity over 100
years.
10
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
An outline of any demonstration/communication activities undertaken
During September 2008 Dr Watson participated in a workshop on ecosystem modelling
to address climate change, held at the University of Tasmania, involving scientists from
across Australia and overseas. The development and adaptation of models appropriate
for predicting and interpreting climate change impacts has become a rapidly expanding
area of discussion in Australia. These discussions provided an up-to-date synthesis and
review of a broad range of models in the Australian marine environment.
These scientists have developed or were involved in the development of Australian
marine ecosystem models. This work culminated in the publication of a paper in the
Global Change Biology journal entitled ‘Effects of climate driven primary production
change on marine food webs: implications for fisheries and conservation’2. Though the
CERF-funded model was not completed at the time of this workshop it was discussed
and valuable exchanges occurred.
Similarly Dr Watson has also been part of a team working on global climate change
impacts on fisheries which has culminated in another paper published with the Global
Change Biology journal. This work is entitled ‘Large-scale redistribution of maximum
catch potential in the global ocean under climate change’3.
Both these outcomes demonstrate the importance of collaboration between this CERF
project and work at both the national and international level. Importantly, knowledge
and skills developed elsewhere were used to add value to the CERF project and confirm
that the direction undertaken by the CERF project was on target. We are pleased to
report that the work on this project is at the forefront of model developments in climate
change.
Dr Watson made a presentation of the model at the CERF meeting in May 2010 in
Canberra. The work presented was favourably received by experts in attendance.
A talk was also presented at the Australian Society of Fish Biology conference (the
professional organisation for fisheries scientists) in July of 2010, exposing the work to
the wider Australian marine science community. The abstract is presented here:
Initial attempts to model the impacts of climate change on global marine resources have
indicated the potential for a large-scale redistribution of global catch potential with an
average of 30–70% increase in high-latitude regions and a drop of up to 40% in the
tropics, with socioeconomic consequences. Meanwhile a CERF-funded collaborative
attempt is underway to investigate climate change on the specific marine ecosystems of
2
Brown, C.J., Fulton, E.A., Hobday, A.J., Matear, R., Possingham, H., Bulman, C., Christnesen, V., Forrest, R., Gehrke, P.,
Gribble, N., Griffiths, S., Lozano-Montes, H., Martin, J.M., Metcalf, S., Okey, T.A., Watson, R., Richardson, A.J. (2010) Effects
of climate driven primary production change on marine foodwebs: implications for fisheries and conservation. Global
Change Biology, 16, p. 1194–1212.
3
Cheung, W.L., Lam, V.W., Sarmiento, J.L., Kearney, K., Watson, R., Zeller, D., Pauly, D. (2010) Large-scale redistribution of
maximum fisheries catch potential in the global ocean under climate change. Global Change Biology, 16, p. 24-35.
11
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
Tasmania using the Ecopath/Ecosim ecosystem modelling framework. Various
scenarios are being investigated including range shifts, increased primary production
and forced changes to diets. Impacts on biomass and fisheries landings will be
examined.
As the model progressed, meetings were held with the appropriate fisheries managers
and marine mammal scientists, both for input into the structure of the model and to
update them on progress. Undoubtedly, there will be considerable interest in CERFfunded modelling work and the model it produced for several years to come. The
exposure will likely lead to the model being further progressed through Commonwealth
and state agencies in collaboration, possibly with the involvement of a post-doctoral
student.
The benefits and outcomes of the Activity as a whole
The cooperation and collaboration of scientists, each normally working on their own
portion of the Tasmanian marine environment, has enabled the synergies of the
combined knowledge of the group and their scientific information to be realised to a
degree which has not been achieved before. The amount and variety of data sourced in
this project is more than was used in previous models and has enhanced its usefulness
for biodiversity conservation and fisheries ecosystem management.
The inclusion of a widely accepted spatial regime, and the carefully chosen functional
groups (both commercially fished or otherwise) allows this model to be rapidly taken
up and adapted by several agencies whose interests are in conservation of the fisheries
and wildlife. CERF has funded the difficult part of the process whereby the ground-work,
data-gathering and initial model construction was completed. Moreover, interest in the
initial results, and the collaboration involved in analysis and interpretation has forged
stronger cooperation between various Commonwealth and state agencies and their
marine researchers.
A scientific paper has been written, and Dr Watson is in the process of incorporating
comments from all the authors (which span multiple agencies) in readiness for
submission to an international ecological modelling journal. This will ensure that the
work has been peer reviewed and is available to a wide scientific audience. The model
(and the data contained within it) will be available to all via a web service available by
Ecopath.org.
Degree to which the Activity has effectively achieved its objectives
The project has successfully achieved, and exceeded, its objectives. A functioning
ecosystem model has been produced which models the current ecosystem of the marine
environment surrounding the entire coast on Tasmania (not just the eastern coast, as
originally promised). Importantly, this model has input from, and is accepted by, a range
of top marine scientists concerned with marine life and fisheries spanning
Commonwealth and state agencies, as well as university experts. The model was
12
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
extended to a time dynamic model to incorporate projections of possible scenarios
under climate induced changes and the consequences for biota and fisheries. Significant
collaborations were established throughout the community working on the Tasmanian
marine environment, including TAFI, CSIRO and DPIPWE (including both fisheries
managers and marine mammal scientists). As a result, many data sets were brought
together in this model, which had not been incorporated into models before.
A significant effort was made to ensure that the functional groups captured by the
model and the spatial and temporal scales of the model met the requirements of a broad
range of end-users. The amount and variety of data sourced in this project is more than
was used in most previous models and has enhance this model’s usefulness for
biodiversity conservation and fisheries ecosystem management.
The modelling framework used allows future users to change model assumptions
including climate change predictions and reassess what probable impacts on marine life
and fisheries will be. It is a dynamic tool.
The appropriateness of the approaches used in the development and
implementation of the Activity
Unlike many single agency approaches to modelling a marine system, which tend to be
limited in scope and not inclusive of other opinions, agencies and future uses, this
project took the much more challenging approach of involving a wide range of scientific
input from the planning stage and throughout. This has meant the process itself was
valuable in forging greater cooperation between what sometimes seem to be competing
groups of experts, but in addition, the model produced has both credibility and function
for the wider scientific community. Having a model which has collated a wide range of
scientific input and research data makes the process much more valuable. This
approach takes an incredible amount of negotiating and therefore proceeds more
slowly, but it is worth the cost.
The modelling framework used, Ecopath with Ecosim, is widely used around the world
so that experts everywhere can now examine and use the model. Further, the
preparation that went into making this model was extensive, so that a spatial version
(one where the impacts on specific parts of Tasmanian waters can be tested) can be
developed rapidly, as can the transfer of information to other modelling frameworks
such as Atlantis. Atlantis is also widely used and was developed at CSIRO.
In short, the preparation allows for the work to be rapidly assimilated by others using a
range of other modelling frameworks. The process allows for researchers in
Commonwealth and state agencies, and universities to enhance and build upon the
work completed. The presentation of results in scientific meetings and its publication in
a scientific journal will continue to attract attention and ensure that model results play
a role in decision making.
13
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
Future engagement
Outcomes from the project will continue to inform the management of the south eastern
Australian region through providing the baseline for understanding the impact of
climate change on marine resources. This will include the South East Australian
component of the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility’s Marine
Biodiversity and Resources Network and associated research plan. Outcomes will also
assist the recently released Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s
National Climate Change Action Plan for Fisheries and Aquaculture.
The modelling framework and collaborations established during this project will also
provide the basis for continual upgrading of the model as new information becomes
available.
14
CERF project report: Ecosystem model analysis and the implications of climate change – SE Australia
Budget
Financial statement:
Contribution
In-kind ($)
($)
CERF Grant (incl GST)
168,960
University of Tasmania
316,808
CSIRO
112,898
DPIPWE
TOTAL
38,614
168,960
468,320
All funds have been spent and all host institution and partner contributions have met
budgeted amounts.
15