State of the Ecosystem
[Mid-Atlantic] or [New England] 2025

MAFMC
January 12, 2026

Abigail Tyrell, lead editor, NEFSC

State of the Ecosystem (SOE) reporting

Improving ecosystem information and synthesis for fishery managers

  • Ecosystem indicators linked to management objectives (DePiper et al., 2017)

    • Contextual information
    • Report evolving since 2016
    • Fishery-relevant subset of full Ecosystem Status Reports

  • Open science emphasis (Bastille et al., 2020)

  • Used within Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council’s Ecosystem Process (Muffley et al., 2020)

IEA process from goal setting to assessment to strategy evaluation with feedbacks

The IEA Loop1

State of the Ecosystem: Maintain 2024 structure for 2025

2025 Report Structure

  1. Graphical summary
    • Page 1 report card re: objectives →
    • Page 2 risk summary bullets
    • Page 3 2024 snapshot
  2. Performance relative to management objectives
  3. Risks to meeting management objectives
    • Climate and Ecosystem risks
    • Offshore wind development
  4. 2024 Highlights

State of the Ecosystem page 1 summary table

State of the Ecosystem page 2 risk bullets

State of the Ecosystem page 3 highlights

Updated Objectives and Risks tables aligning with indicators



Objective categories

Indicators reported

Objectives: Provisioning and Cultural Services

Seafood Production

Landings; commercial total and by feeding guild; recreational harvest

Commercial Profits

Revenue decomposed to price and volume

Recreational Opportunities

Angler trips; recreational fleet diversity

Stability

Diversity indices (fishery and ecosystem)

Social & Cultural

Community fishing engagement and social vulnerability status

Protected Species

Bycatch; population (adult and juvenile) numbers; mortalities

Potential Drivers: Supporting and Regulating Services

Management

Stock status; catch compared with catch limits

Biomass

Biomass or abundance by feeding guild from surveys

Environment

Climate and ecosystem risk indicators listed in Table 2



Risk categories

Observation indicators reported

Potential driver indicators reported

Climate and Ecosystem Risks

Risks to Managing Spatially

Managed species (fish and cetacean) distribution shifts

Benthic and pelagic forage distribution; ocean temperature, changes in currents and cold pool

Risks to Managing Seasonally

Managed species spawning and migration timing changes

Habitat timing: Length of ocean summer, cold pool seasonal persistence

Risks to Setting Catch Limits

Managed species body condition and recruitment changes

Benthic and pelagic forage quality & abundance: ocean temperature & acidification

Other Ocean Uses Risks

Offshore Wind Risks

Fishery revenue and landings from wind lease areas by species and port

Wind development speed; Protected species presence and hotspots

Ecosystem synthesis themes

Characterizing ecosystem change for fishery management

  • Societal, biological, physical and chemical factors comprise the multiple system drivers that influence marine ecosystems through a variety of different pathways.
  • Changes in the multiple drivers can lead to regime shifts — large, abrupt and persistent changes in the structure and function of an ecosystem.
  • Regime shifts and changes in how the multiple system drivers interact can result in ecosystem reorganization as species and humans respond and adapt to the new environment.

State of the Ecosystem report scale and figures

NEFSC survey strata used to calculate Ecosystem Production Unit biomass

A glossary of terms (2021 Memo 5), detailed technical methods documentation and indicator data are available online.

Key to figures

Long-term trends assessed only for 30+ years: more information

Short-term trends assessed for last 10 years of data OR a full time series <30 years

Orange line = significant increase

Purple line = significant decrease

No color line = not significant or < 30 years

Grey background = last 10 years

2025 State of the Ecosystem Request tracking memo: updates noted along the way

Need to add the files

Mid Atlantic State of the Ecosystem Summary 2025:

Performance relative to management objectives

Seafood production decreasing arrow icon, below average icon icon

Profits no trend icon, below average icon icon

Recreational opportunities: Effort increasing arrow icon above average icon icon Effort diversity decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon

Stability: Fishery not stable; Ecological not stable

Social and cultural:

  • Fishing engagement and social vulnerability status by community

  • Revenue climate vulnerability no trend icon, majority high risk

Protected species:

  • Maintain bycatch below thresholds (harbor porpoise, gray seals) mixed trend icon meeting objectives icon

  • Recover endangered populations (NARW) decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2025:

Risks to meeting fishery management objectives

Climate: risks to managing spatially, managing seasonally, and catch specification

  • Fish and protected species distribution shifts

  • Changing spawning and migration timing

  • Multiple stocks with poor condition, declining productivity

Other ocean uses: offshore wind development

  • Current revenue in proposed areas
    • 1-46% by Mid-Atlantic port
    • 2-16% by MAFMC managed species
  • Overlap with important right whale foraging habitats, increased vessel strike and noise risks

New England State of the Ecosystem Summary 2025:

Performance relative to management objectives - Georges Bank

Seafood production Total no trend icon, Managed decreasing arrow icon, Both below average icon icon

Profits no trend icon, below average icon icon

Recreational opportunities: Effort no trend icon near average icon icon Effort diversity no trend icon near average icon icon

Stability: Fishery not stable; Ecological not stable

Social and cultural:

  • Fishing engagement and social vulnerability status by community

  • Revenue climate vulnerability mixed trend icon, majority medium risk

Protected species:

  • Maintain bycatch below thresholds (harbor porpoise, gray seals) mixed trend icon meeting objectives icon

  • Recover endangered populations mixed trend icon, NARW below average icon icon Gray seal above average icon icon

New England State of the Ecosystem Summary 2025:

Performance relative to management objectives - Gulf of Maine

Seafood production decreasing arrow icon, below average icon icon

Profits Total no trend icon, near average icon icon; NEFMC managed decreasing arrow icon, below average icon icon

Recreational opportunities: Effort no trend icon near average icon icon Effort diversity no trend icon near average icon icon

Stability: Fishery not stable; Ecological not stable

Social and cultural:

  • Fishing engagement and social vulnerability status by community

  • Revenue climate vulnerability mixed trend icon, majority medium risk

Protected species:

  • Maintain bycatch below thresholds (harbor porpoise, gray seals) mixed trend icon meeting objectives icon

  • Recover endangered populations mixed trend icon, NARW below average icon icon Gray seal above average icon icon Salmon below average icon icon

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2025:

Risks to meeting fishery management objectives

Climate: risks to managing spatially, managing seasonally, and catch specification

  • Fish and protected species distribution shifts

  • Changing spawning and migration timing

  • Multiple stocks with poor condition, declining productivity

Other ocean uses: offshore wind development

  • Current revenue in proposed areas
    • 1-32% by New England port
    • 1-20% by NEFMC
  • Overlap with important right whale foraging habitats, increased vessel strike and noise risks

State of the Ecosystem Summary 2025: 2024 Highlights

Notable 2024 events and conditions

  • 2024 warmest year on record globally. Again.

  • BUT

  • Cooler conditions across the coast

  • Well established Mid Atlantic Cold Pool

  • Multiple summer upwelling events off NJ

  • Extreme ocean acidification measured off NJ

  • Many fishery observations of different spatial and timing patterns, changed abundance

  • Good scallop recruitment in Nantucket lightship

  • More red drum in Chesapeake Bay

  • Arctic copepods in GOM

  • Cocolithophore bloom off NY

  • Large whale aggregations

We welcome your observations!

2025 Performance relative to management objectives

Fishing icon made by EDAB       Fishing industry icon made by EDAB       Multiple drivers icon made by EDAB       Spiritual cultural icon made by EDAB       Protected species icon made by EDAB

Objective: Mid Atlantic Seafood production decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon   Risk elements: ComFood and RecFood, unchanged

Indicators: Commercial landings, climate risk

Mid-Atlantic region total climate vulnerability of commercial landings (sum of Mid-Atlantic port landings weighted by species climate vulnerability from Hare et al. 2016).

Indicators: Recreational harvest

Multiple potential drivers: ecosystem and stock production, management, market conditions, and environmental change.

Mid Atlantic Landings drivers: Stock status? TAC?   Risk elements: Fstatus, Bstatus, MgtControl

Indicator: Stock status

Indicators: Total ABC or ACL, and Realized catch relative to management target

Few managed species have binding limits; Management less likely playing a role

Implications: Mid Atlantic Seafood Production Drivers

Biomass does not appear to drive landings trends

Key:

  • Black = NEFSC survey

  • Red = NEAMAP survey

  • Declining aggregate planktivores, benthos?

  • Recreational drivers differ: shark fishery management, possibly survey methodology

Monitor:

  • climate risks including warming, ocean acidification, and shifting distributions

  • ecosystem composition and production changes

  • fishing engagement

Objective: New England Seafood production decreasing arrow icon no trend icon below average icon icon

Indicators: Commercial landings, climate risk

Indicators: Recreational harvest

Multiple drivers: ecosystem and stock production, management actions (stock rebuilding), market conditions (including COVID-19 disruptions), and environmental change

New England drivers: Stock status? Survey biomass?

Indicator: Stock status

GB Haddock & Plaice now have B/Bmsy >. GOM Haddock now has F/Fmsy < 1. Stock status and required management actions still likely playing large role in seafood declines.

Indicators: Survey biomass

Biomass availability still seems unlikely driver

Implications: New England Seafood Production

Drivers:

  • Decline in commercial landings is most likely driven by actions to rebuild individual stocks (lower quotas) as well as market dynamics
  • other drivers affecting recreational landings: tighter shark fishery regulations, changing demographics and preferences of anglers

Monitor:

  • Climate risks including warming, ocean acidification, and shifting distributions
  • Ecosystem composition and production changes
  • Fishing engagement

Objective: Mid Atlantic Commercial Profits no trend icon below average icon icon   Risk element: CommRev, unchanged

Indicator: Commercial Revenue; profit indicators under SSC review

Mid-Atlantic region total climate vulnerability of commercial revenue (sum of Mid-Atlantic port revenue weighted by species climate vulnerability from Hare et al. 2016).

Indicator: Bennet–price and volume indices

Objective: New England Commercial Profits mixed trend icon below average icon icon

Indicator: Commercial Revenue; profit indicators under SSC review

Both regions dependent on single climate-vulnerable species

Indicator: Bennet–price and volume indices

GOM high revenue despite low volume

Objective: Mid Atlantic Recreational opportunities increasing arrow icon above average icon icon; decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon Risk elements: RecValue, RecDiv

Indicators: Recreational effort and fleet diversity

Implications

  • Adding 2023 data, recreational effort (angler trips) retains the long term increase.

  • The increasing long term trend changed the risk category for the RecValue element back to low-moderate (previously ranked low risk).

  • New risk element: Decline in recreational fleet diversity suggests a potentially reduced range of opportunities.

  • Driven by party/charter contraction and a shift toward shore based angling.

Objective: New England Recreational opportunities no trend icon near average icon icon

Indicators: Recreational effort and fleet diversity

Implications

  • Absence of a long-term trend in recreational effort suggests relative stability in the overall number of recreational opportunities in New England

Objective: Mid Atlantic Fishery Stability: Not Stable   Risk elements: FleetDiv and FishRes1

Fishery Indicators: Commercial fleet count, fleet diversity

Fishery Indicators: commercial species revenue diversity, recreational species catch diversity

Objective: New England Fishery Stability: Not Stable

Fishery Indicators: Commercial fleet count, fleet diversity

Fishery Implications:

  • Commercial fishery diversity driven by small number of species; less capacity to respond to new opportunities

Fishery Indicators: commercial species revenue diversity, recreational species catch diversity

  • Recreational diversity increase due to increase in ASFMC and MAFMC managed species

Fishery Stability: Discussion

  • Feedback from social scientists & councils to focus on
    • Volatility - how much do fishery landings/profits/effort fluctuate year to year?
    • Adaptive Capacity - how well can fishery participants adapt to change?
  • Do our indicators address this definition?
  • Are there others used elsewhere that are useful?

Ecosystem Stability: Discussion

In 2025 we move from increasing/decreasing stability to stable/not-stable

“Not-stable” doesn’t mean:

  • we are experiencing a regime shift necessarily
  • we are experiencing negative impacts

“Stable” doesn’t mean:

  • There are no changes in the system
  • All is well

“Not Stable” does mean:

  • There are large changes in multiple ecosystem components
  • These changes are altering the structure or function of the ecosystem

Objective: Mid Atlantic Ecological Stability mixed trend icon above average icon icon

Ecological Indicators: zooplankton communities and total primary production

Objective: Mid Atlantic Ecological Stability (Cont.)

Ecological Indicators: fish richness and traits

  • Declines in species trophic level & other life history traits suggests changing ecology

Objective: New England Ecological Stability mixed trend icon above average icon icon

Ecological Indicators: zooplankton communities and total primary production

Objective: New England Ecological Stability (Cont.)

Ecological Indicators: fish richness and traits

  • Declines in species trophic level & other life history traits suggests changing ecology

Mid Atlantic Community Social and Climate Vulnerability   Risk element: Social

Indicators: Commercial fishery engagement, social vulnerability, revenue climate vulnerability

Community

personal_disruption_rank

pop_composition_rank

poverty_rank

Ocean City,MD

2

1

1

Barnegat Light,NJ

1

1

1

Cape May,NJ

1

1

1

Point Pleasant Beach,NJ

1

1

1

Brick,NJ

1

1

1

Hampton Bays/Shinnecock,NY

1

3

1

Montauk,NY

1

1

1

Newport News,VA

2

3

2

Community Social and Climate Vulnerability   Risk element: Social

Indicators: Commercial fishery revenue climate vulnerability

The Community Climate Change Risk Indicators are calculated by multiplying the percent contribution of species to the total value landed in a community by their respective Total Vulnerability scores (based on NOAA’s Climate Vulnerability Assessment) for different sensitivity and exposure factors and then summing the resulting values by year.

CCCVR map total vulnerability

Community Social and Climate Vulnerability   Risk element: Social

Indicators: Recreational fishery engagement, social vulnerability

Recreational engagement and population relative engagement with labels for the top recreationally engaged fishing communities in the Mid-Atlantic.

Community

personal_disruption_rank

pop_composition_rank

poverty_rank

Bivalve, MD

low

med

Nanticoke, MD

med high

low

low

Ocean City, MD

med

low

low

Stevensville, MD

low

low

low

Solomons Island/Solomons/Lusby, MD

low

low

low

Avon, NC

med high

low

Morehead City, NC

med

low

med high

Nags Head, NC

low

low

low

Rodanthe, NC

low

low

low

Topsail Beach, NC

low

low

low

Hatteras township, NC

low

low

low

Atlantic Highlands, NJ

low

low

low

Barnegat Light, NJ

low

low

low

Cape May, NJ

low

low

low

Point Pleasant Beach, NJ

low

low

low

Babylon, NY

low

low

low

Montauk, NY

low

low

low

Orient, NY

low

low

low

Point Lookout, NY

med

low

low

Virginia Beach, VA

low

med

low

Wachapreague, VA

low

low

low

Cape May, NJ

Montauk, NY

Point Pleasant Beach, NJ

Barnegat Light, NJ

Ocean City, MD

Virginia Beach, VA

Morehead City, NC

Hatteras township, NC

Wachapreague, VA

Avon, NC

Atlantic Highlands, NJ

Babylon, NY

Nags Head, NC

Point Lookout, NY

Nanticoke, MD

Orient, NY

Bivalve, MD

Rodanthe, NC

Topsail Beach, NC

Solomons Island/Solomons/Lusby, MD

Stevensville, MD

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

BIVALVE, MD

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

NANTICOKE, MD

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

STEVENSVILLE, MD

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, NJ

BABYLON, NY

BARNEGAT LIGHT, NJ

CAPE MAY, NJ

MONTAUK, NY

OCEAN CITY, MD

ORIENT, NY

POINT LOOKOUT, NY

POINT PLEASANT BEACH, NJ

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

WACHAPREAGUE, VA

New England Community Social and Climate Vulnerability

Indicators: Commercial fifishery engagement, social vulnerability, revenue climate vulnerability

Community

personal_disruption_rank

pop_composition_rank

poverty_rank

Chatham,MA

1

1

1

Gloucester,MA

1

1

2

New Bedford,MA

4

3

3

Boston,MA

2

3

3

Portland,ME

1

1

1

Stonington,ME

1

1

1

Friendship,ME

1

1

1

Narragansett/Point Judith,RI

1

1

1

Implications: Highlighted communities may be vulnerable to changes in fishing patterns due to regulations and/or climate change. When also experiencing social vulnerabilities, they may have lower ability to successfully respond to change.

New England Community Social and Climate Vulnerability

Indicators: Commercial fishery revenue climate vulnerability

The Community Climate Change Risk Indicators are calculated by multiplying the percent contribution of species to the total value landed in a community by their respective Total Vulnerability scores (based on NOAA’s Climate Vulnerability Assessment) for different sensitivity and exposure factors and then summing the resulting values by year.

New England communities shifting towads High/Very High climate vulnerability. Consolidating Species

CCCVR map total vulnerability

New England Community Social and Climate Vulnerability

Indicators: Recreational fishery engagement, social vulnerability

Community

personal_disruption_rank

pop_composition_rank

poverty_rank

Clinton, CT

med

low

med

Old Saybrook, CT

low

low

low

Waterford, CT

low

low

low

Bourne, MA

low

low

low

Dennis, MA

low

low

low

Duxbury, MA

low

low

med

Falmouth, MA

med

low

med high

Gloucester, MA

low

low

med

Harwich Port, MA

low

low

low

Newburyport, MA

low

low

low

Provincetown, MA

low

low

med high

Barnstable Town, MA

low

low

low

Sandwich/East Sandwich/Forestdale, MA

low

low

low

Truro, MA

low

low

low

Westport, MA

low

low

low

Plymouth, MA

low

low

low

Ogunquit, ME

low

low

low

Hampton, NH

low

low

low

Newington, NH

low

low

low

Seabrook, NH

med

low

med

Narragansett/Point Judith, RI

low

low

low

New Shoreham, RI

med

low

low

Narragansett/Point Judith, RI

Gloucester, MA

Newington, NH

Barnstable Town, MA

Westport, MA

Plymouth, MA

Hampton, NH

Sandwich/East Sandwich/Forestdale, MA

Provincetown, MA

Seabrook, NH

Duxbury, MA

Harwich Port, MA

Truro, MA

Bourne, MA

New Shoreham, RI

Newburyport, MA

Dennis, MA

Falmouth, MA

Ogunquit, ME

Waterford, CT

Old Saybrook, CT

Clinton, CT

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

BOURNE, MA

CLINTON, CT

DENNIS, MA

DUXBURY, MA

FALMOUTH, MA

GLOUCESTER, MA

HAMPTON, NH

HARWICH PORT, MA

NARRAGANSETT/POINT JUDITH, RI

NEW SHOREHAM, RI

NEWBURYPORT, MA

NEWINGTON, NH

OGUNQUIT, ME

OLD SAYBROOK, CT

PLYMOUTH, MA

PROVINCETOWN, MA

SEABROOK, NH

TRURO, MA

WATERFORD, CT

WESTPORT, MA

Objectives: Coastwide Protected species Maintain bycatch below thresholds mixed trend icon meeting objectives icon

Indicators: Harbor porpoise and gray seal bycatch

Implications:

  • Currently meeting objectives, but uncertainty in gray seal estimates

  • Risk element: TechInteract, evaluated by species and sector: 14 low, 7 low-mod, 2 mod-high risk

  • The downward trend in harbor porpoise bycatch can also be due to a decrease in harbor porpoise abundance in US waters, reducing their overlap with fisheries, and a decrease in gillnet effort.

  • Gray seal among the highest bycatch of any U.S. marine mammal. The increasing trend in gray seal bycatch may be related to an increase in the gray seal population (U.S. pup counts).

Objectives: Coastwide Protected species Recover endangered populations decreasing arrow icon below average icon icon

Indicators: North Atlantic right whale population, calf counts

Implications:

  • Signs the adult population stabilized 2020-2023

  • Population drivers for North Atlantic Right Whales (NARW) include combined fishery interactions/ship strikes, distribution shifts, and copepod availability.

  • Additional potential stressors include offshore wind development, which overlaps with important habitat areas used year-round by right whales, including mother and calf migration corridors and foraging habitat.

  • Unusual mortality events continue for 3 large whale species.

2025 Risks to meeting fishery management objectives

Climate icon made by EDAB Wind icon made by EDAB

Hydrography icon made by EDAB       Phytoplankon icon made by EDAB       Forage fish icon made by EDAB       Apex predators icon made by EDAB       Other human uses icon made by EDAB

Revised Risks: Climate and Ecosystem Change



Risk categories

Observation indicators reported

Potential driver indicators reported

Climate and Ecosystem Risks

Risks to Managing Spatially

Managed species (fish and cetacean) distribution shifts

Benthic and pelagic forage distribution; ocean temperature, changes in currents and cold pool

Risks to Managing Seasonally

Managed species spawning and migration timing changes

Habitat timing: Length of ocean summer, cold pool seasonal persistence

Risks to Setting Catch Limits

Managed species body condition and recruitment changes

Benthic and pelagic forage quality & abundance: ocean temperature & acidification

Other Ocean Uses Risks

Offshore Wind Risks

Fishery revenue and landings from wind lease areas by species and port

Wind development speed; Protected species presence and hotspots

Risks to Managing Spatially

Potential Impacts: Spatial misallocation of quotas within and across jurisdictions, leading to unmet quotas and/or increased discards. Specification of gear management areas may not utilize quotas and minimize bycatch.

Risks to Managing Seasonally

Potential Impacts: Spawning closures are less effective if peak spawning occurs outside the seasonal closure. Seasonal openings of exemption areas may be inconsistent with species presence. Seasonal quota allocations may be misaligned with availability.

Risks to Setting Catch Limits

Potential Impacts: Changes in environmental conditions can affect stock reference points and short-term stock projections. When productivity changes are not accounted for, they can lead to misspecified quotas and rebuilding plans.

Risks to Managing Spatially: Coastwide

Indicators: Fish distribution shifts

Cetacean distribution shifts

Risks to Managing Spatially: Coastwide

Drivers: Forage shifts, pelagic and benthic

Eastward (left) and northward (right) shifts in the center of gravity for 20 forage fish species on the Northeast U.S. Shelf, with increasing trend (orange) for fall eastward and northward center of gravity.

Eastward (left) and northward (right) shifts in the center of gravity for macrobenthos species on the Northeast U.S. Shelf

New Spatial Shift Indicators: Benthos, Zooplankton

Drivers: changing ocean habitat

Northeast US annual sea surface temperature (SST, black), with increasing trend (orange).

Index representing changes in the location of the Gulf Stream north wall (black). Positive values represent a more northerly Gulf Stream position, NO LONGER HAS increasing trend.

Cold pool temperature and spatial extent

Seasonal cold pool mean temperature (left) and spatial extent index (right), based on bias-corrected ROMS-NWA (open circles) and GLORYS (closed circles), with declining trends (purple).

New Spatial Shift Indicators: Benthos, Zooplankton

Benthos center of gravity from fish stomachs

Copepods center of gravity from ECOMON

Risks to Managing Spatially: Coastwide

Future considerations

Distribution shifts caused by changes in thermal habitat and ocean circulation are likely to continue as long as long-term trends persist. Episodic and short-term events (see 2024 Highlights) may increase variability in the trends, however species distributions are unlikely to reverse to historical ranges in the short term. Increased mechanistic understanding of distribution drivers is needed to better understand future distribution shifts: species with high mobility or short lifespans react differently from immobile or long lived species.

Long-term oceanographic projections forecast a temporary pause in warming over the next decade due to internal variability in circulation and a southward shift of the Gulf Stream. Near-term forecasts are being evaluated to determine how well they are able to predict episodic and anomalous events that are outside of the long-term patterns.

Adapting management to changing stock distributions and dynamic ocean processes will require continued monitoring of populations in space and evaluating management measures against a range of possible future spatial distributions. Processes like the East Coast Climate Scenario Planning, and subsequent formation of the East Coast Climate Coordination Group, can help coordinate management.

Risks to Managing Seasonally: Coastwide

Indicators: spawning timing, migration change

Percent resting stage (non-spawning) mature female fish (black) with significant increases (orange) and decreases (purple) from two haddock and three yellowtail flounder stocks: CC = Cape Cod Gulf of Maine, GOM = Gulf of Maine, GB = Georges Bank, SNE = Southern New England.

  • Recreational tuna fisheries 50 days earlier in the year in 2019 compared to 2002.

  • In Cape Cod Bay, peak spring habitat use by right and humpback whales has shifted 18-19 days later over time.

  • Baseline information on large whale seasonal presence has been collected.

Risks to Managing Seasonally: Mid-Atlantic

Drivers: thermal transition, habitat persistence, bloom timing

Ocean summer length: the annual total number of days between the spring thermal transition date and the fall thermal transition date (black), with an increasing trend (orange).

Cold pool seasonal persistence

Cold pool persistence index based on bias-corrected ROMS-NWA (open circles) and GLORYS (closed circles).

Bloom timing

Monthly median chlorophyll a concentration in the MAB (black) with significant increase in January (orange line) and decrease in September (purple line).

Future considerations

  • Management actions that rely on effective alignment of fisheries availability and biological processes should continue to evaluate whether prior assumptions on seasonal timings still hold.

  • New indicators should be developed to monitor timing shifts for stocks.

Risks to Managing Seasonally: New England

Drivers: thermal transition, habitat persistence, bloom timing

Future considerations

  • Management actions that rely on effective alignment of fisheries availability and biological processes should continue to evaluate whether prior assumptions on seasonal timings still hold.

  • New indicators should be developed to monitor timing shifts for stocks.

Bloom timing

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: Mid-Atlantic

Indicators: fish productivity and condition

Fish productivity measures. Left: Small fish per large fish survey biomass anomaly in the Mid-Atlantic Bight. Right: assessment recruitment per spawning stock biomass anomaly for stocks mainly in the Mid-Atlantic. The summed anomaly across species is shown by the black line, drawn across all years with the same number of stocks analyzed.

Condition factor for fish species in the MAB based on fall NEFSC bottom trawl survey data. MAB data are missing for 2017 due to survey delays, and no survey was conducted in 2020.

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: Mid Atlantic Drivers

Drivers: Forage Quality and Abundance

Forage fish energy density mean and standard deviation by season and year, compared with 1980s (solid line) and 1990s (dashed line) values.

Forage fish index in the MAB for spring (blue) and fall (red) surveys, with a decline (purple) in fall. Index values are relative to the maximum observation within a region across surveys.

New indicators: benthos abundance

Changes in spring (blue) and fall (red) benthos abundance in the MAB for megabenthos (left) and macrobenthos (right).

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: Mid Atlantic Drivers

Drivers: Low trophic levels

Total areal annual primary production for the MAB. The dashed line represents the long-term (1998-2024) annual mean.

Changes in zooplankton abundance in the MAB for large (top left) and small (top right) copepods, Cnidarians (bottom left), and Euphausiids (bottom right), with significant increases (orange) in small copeods and Cnidarians.

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: New England

Indicator: Fish productivity

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: New England

Indicator: Condition

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: New England Drivers

Drivers: Forage Quality and Abundance

New indicators: benthos abundance

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: New England Drivers

Drivers: Low trophic levels

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: Coastwide

Drivers: Environmental

2024 Thermal habitat area by depth

Risks to Setting Catch Limits: Coastwide

Drivers: Environmental Potential Ocean Acidification Impacts: Scallops and Longfin squid

Locations where bottom aragonite saturation state ($\Omega_{Arag}$; summer only: June-August) were at or below the laboratory-derived sensitivity level for Atlantic sea scallop (left panel) and longfin squid (right panel) for the time periods 2007-2022 (dark cyan), 2023 only (magenta) and 2024 only (cyan). Gray circles indicate locations where bottom $\Omega_{Arag}$ values were above the species specific sensitivity values.

Drivers: Predation
Seals increasing, mix of population status for HMS

Risks to Setting Catch Limits

Future considerations

  • Processes that control fish productivity and mortality are dynamic, complex, and are the result of the interactions between multiple changing system drivers.

  • There is a real risk that short-term predictions in assessments and rebuilding plans that assume unchanging underlying conditions will not be as effective, given the observed change documented in the prior sections in both ecological and environmental processes.

  • Assumptions for species’ growth, reproduction, and natural mortality should continue to be evaluated for individual species.

  • With observations of system-wide productivity shifts of multiple managed stocks, more research is needed to determine whether regime shifts or ecosystem reorganization are occurring, and how this should be incorporated into management.

Risks: Offshore Wind Development Mid Atlantic   Elements: OSW1 and OSW2

Indicators: fishery and community specific revenue in lease areas

Council request: New England ports relying on Mid-Atlantic managed species

Risks: Offshore Wind Development New England

Indicators: fishery and community specific revenue in lease areas

Council request: Mid-Atlantic ports relying on New England managed species

Risks: Offshore Wind Development: Implications

Implications:

  • Current plans for buildout of offshore wind in a patchwork of areas spreads the impacts differentially throughout the region.

  • Lease areas overlap with North Atlantic right whale habitat. Development may alter local oceanography and prey availability, increase vessel strike risk, and result in pile driving noise impacts.

2024 Highlights: Methods

Observations solicited from:

  • SOE contributors
  • NEFSC colleagues
  • Academic colleagues
  • Management partners
  • Fishing industry

We welcome your observations!

Observations included if:

  • Record high or low observations
  • Different from recent conditions
  • Reported by multiple sources
  • Affecting fishery operations
  • Newsworthy

Not exhaustive list; Full impacts remain to be seen

Reprinted from Cape Cod Commercial Fisherman’s Alliance February 2025 Newsletter →

2024 Highlights: generally cooler, fresher Northeast Shelf

February 2024 sea surface temperature difference compared to the February 2000-2020 long-term mean from the NOAA Advanced Clear-Sky Processor for Ocean (ACSPO) Super-collated SST.

Globally, 2024 warmest year on record (above previous record 2023)

BUT, nearly all NE shelf seasonal surface and bottom temperatures back to longer term average

2023-2024 data suggest more Labrador slope water into the GOM (Record et al., 2024)

The proportion of Warm Slope Water (WSW) and Labrador Slope Water (LSW) enter the Gulf of Maine through the Northeast Channel. The orange and teal dashed lines represent the long-term proportion averages for the WSW and LSW, respectively.

Linked to well-developed 2024 Mid Atlantic Cold Pool

2024 Highlights

Locations where bottom aragonite saturation state ($\Omega_{Arag}$; summer only: June-August) were at or below the laboratory-derived sensitivity level for Atlantic sea scallop (left panel) and longfin squid (right panel) for the time periods 2007-2022 (dark cyan), 2023 only (magenta) and 2024 only (cyan). Gray circles indicate locations where bottom $\Omega_{Arag}$ values were above the species specific sensitivity values.

Extreme observation of ocean acidification risk off NJ

Multiple summer upwelling events off NJ

Unusual timing, location, abundance:

  • Fishery observations

    • Delayed migration of longfin squid, black sea bass, haddock
    • Unusual locations for pollock, bluefin tuna, Atlantic mackerel, longfin squid, bluefish, and bonito
    • Local abundance of Atlantic mackerel
    • Record catches of red drum in Chesapeake Bay

  • Good scallop recruitment in Nantucket lightship

  • Arctic copepods in GOM

  • Cocolithophore bloom off NY

  • Large whale aggregations

An OLCI Sentinel 3A true color image with enhanced contrast captured on July 2, 2024. Coccolithophores shed their coccolith plates during the later stages of the bloom cycle, which results in the milky turquoise water color (Image credit: NOAA STAR, OCView and Ocean Color Science Team).

Take Home

Mostly meeting individual stock objectives.

Species distributions, timing, and productivity have changed. Ocean conditions highly variable year to year.

Ecosystem level management objectives worrying?

Declining seafood production

Historically low revenue

Declining range of recreational opportunities

Most community level revenue has high climate vulnerability

Discussion


Objective categories

Indicators reported

Objectives: Provisioning and Cultural Services

Seafood Production

Landings; commercial total and by feeding guild; recreational harvest

Commercial Profits

Revenue decomposed to price and volume

Recreational Opportunities

Angler trips; recreational fleet diversity

Stability

Diversity indices (fishery and ecosystem)

Social & Cultural

Community fishing engagement and social vulnerability status

Protected Species

Bycatch; population (adult and juvenile) numbers; mortalities

Potential Drivers: Supporting and Regulating Services

Management

Stock status; catch compared with catch limits

Biomass

Biomass or abundance by feeding guild from surveys

Environment

Climate and ecosystem risk indicators listed in Table 2

Review objectives: maximum benefit to the Nation in first 3 categories

  • Is the list complete?

  • Does the Council have reference points, desired states, or other performance metrics we should address for each objective?

Stability objective: are current indicators addressing Council needs?

Forecasts: what decisions or contexts would ocean forecasts be most useful for?

THANK YOU! SOEs made possible by (at least) 88 contributors from 20+ institutions

Andrew Applegate (NEFMC)
Kimberly Bastille
Aaron Beaver (Anchor QEA)
Andy Beet
Brandon Beltz
Ruth Boettcher (Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries)
Mandy Bromilow (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office)
Joseph Caracappa
Samuel Chavez-Rosales
Baoshan Chen (Stony Brook University)
Zhuomin Chen (UConn)
Doug Christel (GARFO)
Patricia Clay
Lisa Colburn
Jennifer Cudney (NMFS Atlantic HMS Management Division)
Tobey Curtis (NMFS Atlantic HMS Management Division)
Art Degaetano (Cornell U)
Geret DePiper
Bart DiFiore (GMRI)
Emily Farr (NMFS Office of Habitat Conservation)
Michael Fogarty
Paula Fratantoni
Kevin Friedland

Marjy Friedrichs (VIMS)
Sarah Gaichas
Ben Galuardi (GAFRO)
Avijit Gangopadhyay (SMAST UMass Dartmouth)
James Gartland (VIMS)
Lori Garzio (Rutgers University)
Glen Gawarkiewicz (WHOI)
Laura Gruenburg
Sean Hardison
Dvora Hart
Cliff Hutt (NMFS Atlantic HMS Management Division)
Kimberly Hyde
John Kocik
Steve Kress (National Audubon Society’s Seabird Restoration Program)
Young-Oh Kwon (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution)
Scott Large
Gabe Larouche (Cornell U)
Daniel Linden
Andrew Lipsky
Sean Lucey (RWE)
Don Lyons (National Audubon Society’s Seabird Restoration Program)
Chris Melrose
Anna Mercer

Shannon Meseck
Ryan Morse
Ray Mroch (SEFSC)
Brandon Muffley (MAFMC)
Robert Murphy
Kimberly Murray
NEFSC staff
David Moe Nelson (NCCOS)
Chris Orphanides
Richard Pace
Debi Palka
Tom Parham (Maryland DNR)
CJ Pellerin (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office)
Charles Perretti
Kristin Precoda
Grace Roskar (NMFS Office of Habitat Conservation)
Jeffrey Runge (U Maine)
Grace Saba (Rutgers University)
Vincent Saba
Sarah Salois
Chris Schillaci (GARFO)
Amy Schueller (SEFSC)
Teresa Schwemmer (URI)
Tarsila Seara
Dave Secor (CBL)
Emily Slesinger

Angela Silva
Adrienne Silver (UMass/SMAST)
Talya tenBrink (GARFO)
Abigail Tyrell
Rebecca Van Hoeck
Bruce Vogt (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office)
Ron Vogel (University of Maryland Cooperative Institute for Satellite Earth System Studies and NOAA/NESDIS Center for Satellite Applications and Research)
John Walden
Harvey Walsh
Sarah Weisberg
Changhua Weng
Dave Wilcox (VIMS)
Timothy White (Environmental Studies Program BOEM)
Sarah Wilkin (NMFS Office of Protected Resources)
Mark Wuenschel
Qian Zhang (U Maryland)

References

Bastille, K. et al. (2020). “Improving the IEA Approach Using Principles of Open Data Science”. In: Coastal Management 0.0. Publisher: Taylor & Francis _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2021.1846155, pp. 1-18. ISSN: 0892-0753. DOI: 10.1080/08920753.2021.1846155. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2021.1846155 (visited on Dec. 09, 2020).

DePiper, G. S. et al. (2017). “Operationalizing integrated ecosystem assessments within a multidisciplinary team: lessons learned from a worked example”. En. In: ICES Journal of Marine Science 74.8, pp. 2076-2086. ISSN: 1054-3139. DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsx038. URL: https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/article/74/8/2076/3094701 (visited on Mar. 09, 2018).

Muffley, B. et al. (2020). “There Is no I in EAFM Adapting Integrated Ecosystem Assessment for Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management”. In: Coastal Management 0.0. Publisher: Taylor & Francis _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2021.1846156, pp. 1-17. ISSN: 0892-0753. DOI: 10.1080/08920753.2021.1846156. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2021.1846156 (visited on Dec. 09, 2020).

Record, N. R. et al. (2024). “Early Warning of a Cold Wave in the Gulf of Maine”. In: Oceanography 37.3, pp. 6-9. DOI: 10.5670/oceanog.2024.506. URL: https://tos.org/oceanography/article/early-warning-of-a-cold-wave-in-the-gulf-of-maine (visited on Mar. 04, 2025).

Additional resources