G. Scott Boomer USFWS Harvest Management Working Group Meeting Buda, TX 29 November 2012 DMBM Mark Koneff, Bob Blohm, Paul Padding, Jim Kelley, Dave Sharp, Jim Dubovsky, Bob Trost, Bob Raftovich, Khristi Wilkins, Todd Sanders, and Ken Richkus USGS Fred Johnson Mike Runge Andy Royle Flyway Technical Sections Joe Fuller Steve Cordts Spencer Vaa Don Kraege 2 Brief History Annual Performance Status and Parameter Estimates Policy Harvest Results Revisiting Regulatory Alternatives? Process Methods 3 Bonus Bags Special Seasons SL: Bag: Points System Bonus Bags Special Seasons SL: Bag: SL : 30 Bag: SL: Bag: Bag: Bag: Bag: 2 Past Harvest Regulations (e.g., Mississippi Flyway) 2008 R (Hybrid) 2009 M 60 & M 60 & M 60 & L: 60 & thru 1987 Bonus Season: not to exceed 16 consecutive days (Oct 1 - Jan 31), bag limit of 5; OR, Bonus Bag: 2 bonus scaup in regular season 5 6 Year Mean2.50%Median97.50% 7 Year Mean2.50%Median97.50% 8 Year Mean2.50%Median97.50% 9 Year Mean2.50%Median97.50% 10 11 BPOP 3.2RRRRR 3.4RRRRR 3.6RRMMM 3.8RHRH MMMM 4.0MMMMM 4.2MMMMM 4.4MMMMM 4.6MMMMM 4.8MMMMM 5.0MMLMM 5.2MMLLL 5.4LLLLL 12 13 Target (M) Predicted (M) Target (R) Annual updates of population parameter estimates track changes in scaup status, suggesting modest increases in harvest potential Model predictions are consistent with observed population increases Scaup harvest policies have become more liberal as scaup status has improved Observed harvest levels were similar to Flyway specific harvest predictions (at least under the moderate alternatives), and on average, have remained under allowable harvest thresholds 14 Given that the Flyways have not voiced concern over current packages (although the Pacific Flyway may be an exception), how do we begin this conversation? Are there triggers that we should consider for pursuing changes to scaup regulatory packages? Important to recognize that regulatory alternatives ultimately have to be specified (i.e., they represent policy decisions - that may be informed with technical information). 15 1) Update technical information in 2007 scoping document Update all Flyway harvest models with recent information M: 3 years; R: 1 year; L: pending Reset thresholds for regulatory change based on updated simulation Re-calculate allowable harvest Define appropriate allocation? Work with individual Flyways to specify alternatives (e.g criteria) 16 2) Reconsider how we account for partial controllability of harvest: Specify the regulatory package (R, M, L) as the decision variable in the optimization (rather than harvest) We then have to specify a distribution of harvest expected under each regulatory alternative (R, M, L) based on past experience Consider closure rules? From a technical perspective, this may be a more efficient and practical method to updating packages. 3) Others? 17 Change in decision variable? Change in model set? Monitoring Needs? BPOP Banding needs recommendations What are the implications of SEIS preferred alternative? What is the relationships of scaup AHM to future changes in mallard AHM decision frameworks? When should we consider double-looping for scaup AHM? 18 19 20 Population Thresholds PackageHarvest RH < M0.25 H < LH BPOP RegRHRH MMML 21 Year BPOP2.50%Median97.50%