NOAA FISHERIES 

CLIMATE SCIENCE STRATEGY

Jason S. Link, Roger Griffis, Shallin Busch (Editors)

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Marine Fisheries Service

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-155

August 2015

NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy

Jason S. Link, Roger Griffis, Shallin Busch (Editors)

Contributors 

Karen Abrams, Jason Baker, Rusty Brainard, Michael Ford, 

Jon Hare, Amber Himes-Cornell, Anne Hollowed, Kenric Osgood, 

Nate Mantua, Sam McClatchie, Michelle McClure, Mark Nelson,

Mike Rust, Vincent Saba, Mike Sigler, Valerie Termini, Chris Toole,

Eric Thunberg, Robin Waples, Seth Sykora-Bodi

U.S. Department of Commerce

Penny S. Pritzker, Secretary 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Kathryn D. Sullivan, Administrator

National Marine Fisheries Service

Eileen Sobeck, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-155

August 2015
ii

Recommended citation:

Jason S. Link, Roger Griffis, Shallin Busch (Editors). 2015. NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy. U.S. 

Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-155.

Copies of this report may be obtained from:

NOAA Fisheries, Office of Science and Technology

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

1315 East-West Highway, SSMC 3, 12th floor

Silver Spring, MD 20910

http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/ecosystems/climate

Or online at:

http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/tm/
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword ...................................................................................................................... iv 

Executive Summary .................................................................................................... vi

List of Acronyms ......................................................................................................... ix

Chapter 1: NOAA Fisheries Mission and the Need for Climate-Related Science 1

Chapter 2: Increasing the Production, Delivery, and Use of Climate-Related 

Information................................................................................................................... 15

Objective 1:Identify appropriate, climate-informed reference points for managing living 

marine resources (LMRs).

Objective 2:Identify robust strategies for managing LMRs under changing climate 

conditions.

Objective 3: Design adaptive decision processes that can incorporate and respond to 

changing climate conditions.

Objective 4:Identify future states of marine and coastal ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR 

-dependent human communities in a changing climate.

Objective 5:Identify the mechanisms of climate impacts on ecosystems, LMRs, and 

LMR-dependent human communities.

Objective 6:Track trends in ecosystems, LMRs and LMR-dependent human communities and provide early warning of change.

Objective 7: Build and maintain the science infrastructure needed to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mandates with changing climate conditions.

Chapter 3: Moving Forward....................................................................................... 44

Summary ...................................................................................................................... 48

Glossary ....................................................................................................................... 49

Tables ...........................................................................................................................53

References ................................................................................................................... 61
iv

FOREWARD

For some people, climate change is just a theoretical possibility. But ask fishermen, and many will 

tell you that climate-related changes in marine and coastal ecosystems are well underway. 

Along the Atlantic Coast, many species of commercially valuable species of fish are moving north 

or deeper to stay within their preferred temperature range. In 2012, lobsters in the Gulf of Maine, 

spurred by high temperatures, started their summer migration a month early and grew to market 

size faster than usual. The result was a saturated market and a price collapse for Maine lobstermen. From shrinking Arctic sea ice to west coast droughts, bleaching corals and rising seas, our 

world is changing and we need to respond to help safeguard these valuable ecosystems and the 

people who depend on them.

Climate-related changes are happening all along our coasts. These changes could significantly 

impact people, businesses, communities and the nation. There is much at risk. Many coastal 

communities depend on fishing and tourism, and climate-related changes are projected to affect 

jobs, impact economies and disrupt traditional ways of life.

Climate change affects every aspect of the NOAA Fisheries mission from fisheries management to 

protected species conservation. Climate change and the associated problem of ocean acidification 

are increasing the vulnerability of fish stocks and protected species, from seals and whales to sea 

turtles and salmon. These dual stressors are also impacting habitats from coastal watersheds and 

rivers to estuaries and oceans. And nowhere is the challenge of both using and protecting marine 

ecosystems so starkly revealed as in the pristine but fast-changing Arctic ecosystems.

The oceans are dynamic systems. That’s why striking the right balance between use and protection 

of marine and coastal resources has always been a complicated process, whether its setting fishing 

levels, reducing by-catch, recovering endangered species, or considering permits for oil and gas 

exploration. Incorporating climate change into decision-making makes these efforts more challenging than ever before. Increased information, tools and action are essential to meeting these 

challenges.

This NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy (Strategy) was developed to meet the growing demand for information to better prepare for and respond to climate-related impacts on the nation’s 

living marine resources and resource-dependent communities. The Strategy is part of a proactive 

approach to increase the production, delivery and use of climate-related information to fulfill 

NOAA Fisheries mandates in a changing climate. Implementing this Strategy will help reduce 

impacts and increase the resilience of our valuable living marine resources, and the people, businesses and communities that depend on them. 

Eileen Sobeck, Assistant Administrator

National Marine Fisheries Service
v

Acknowledgements

This Strategy was produced based on significant input from the Contributors and many other colleagues. It 

benefited from input received during internal NOAA review and a public review period. The Office of Science and Technology Communications Team provided outstanding support in development of the Strategy. 

Special thanks go to NMFS Leadership for their vision, commitment and support for this Strategy and a 

climate-ready NOAA Fisheries Service.

For more information please visit

http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/

or contact NOAA Fisheries Office of Science and Technology
vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Oceans and coasts are among the nation’s most treasured and valuable resources. These resources are at 

risk from a variety of impacts including a changing climate. Climate-related changes in ocean and coastal 

ecosystems are impacting the nation’s living marine resources (LMRs), the important services they provide, 

and the many people, businesses, communities and economies that depend on them. These changes 

increase the information and actions necessary to fulfill the National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA

Fisheries) mission to sustain LMRs and their ecosystems for the benefit of the nation. To fulfill this mission, 

NOAA Fisheries needs more information on the impacts of climate changes on LMRs, and science-based 

approaches for sustaining LMRs and resource-dependent communities in a changing climate.

The goal of the NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy (’Strategy’) is to increase the production, delivery, and use of the climate-related information required to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mandates. Although the 

information needed to understand, prepare for, and respond to climate change impacts on LMRs is diverse, 

this Strategy identifies seven common objectives to meet the science information requirements needed to 

fulfill NOAA Fisheries stewardship mandates in a changing climate. These are: 

Objective 1: Identify appropriate, climate-informed reference points for managing LMRs.

Objective 2: Identify robust strategies for managing LMRs under changing climate conditions.

Objective 3: Design adaptive decision processes that can incorporate and respond to changing 

climate conditions.

Objective 4: Identify future states of marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems, LMRs, and 

LMR-dependent human communities in a changing climate.

Objective 5: Identify the mechanisms of climate impacts on ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent human communities.

Objective 6: Track trends in ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent human communities and 

provide early warning of change.

Objective 7: Build and maintain the science infrastructure needed to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mandates under changing climate conditions.

This Strategy provides a nationally consistent blue-print to guide efforts by NOAA Fisheries and partners 

that address the seven science objectives. NOAA Fisheries will work with partners to develop Regional 

Action Plans (RAPs) to identify strengths, weaknesses, priorities, and actions to implement the Strategy in 

each Region over the next 3-5 years. The Strategy is designed to be customized and implemented through 

RAPs that focus on building regional capacity and partnerships to address the seven objectives listed 

above.
vii

The Strategy is organized around the seven priority science objectives (see Chapter 2). The Strategy also 

identifies a series of immediate and near-term actions that address urgent common challenges across the 

objectives and that would produce high and immediate returns on investment across multiple regions and 

mandates (see Chapter 3). 

The immediate actions are:

1. Conduct climate vulnerability analyses in each region for all LMRs to better understand what is at risk 

and why.

2. Establish and strengthen ecosystem indicators and status reports in all regions to better track, prepare for and respond to climate-driven changes. 

3. Develop capacity to conduct management strategy evaluations regarding climate change impacts on 

management targets, priorities, and goals.

The recommended near-term actions are: 

1. Strengthen climate-related science capacity regionally and nationally to fulfill NOAA Fisheries information requirements in a changing climate.

2. Develop RAPs to customize and execute this Strategy in each region over the next 3 to 5 years, 

through NOAA Fisheries regional Science Centers, Regional Offices and many partners.

3. Ensure that adequate resources are dedicated to climate-related, process-oriented research to better 

understand how climate impacts LMRs, how to reduce impacts and how to increase resilience of 

LMRs and LMR-dependent communities.

4. Establish standard, climate-smart terms of reference to apply to all of NOAA Fisheries LMR management, environmental compliance requirements, and other processes that cross multiple mandates 

and core policy areas.

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Robust Management Strategies

Adaptive Management Processes

Project Future Conditions

Understand Mechanisms of Change

Track Change and Provide Early Warnings

Build and Maintain Adequate Science Infrastructure

Interdependent

Climate Science Strategy Objectives
viii

Implementation of the Strategy over the next 3 to 5 years is crucial for the effective fulfillment of the NOAA 

Fisheries mission and mandates in a changing climate. By implementing these recommendations with our 

science and management partners (e.g. federal, state and tribal agencies, academia, fishery management 

councils, commissions, businesses, communities and others), NOAA Fisheries will increase the production, 

delivery, and use of climate-related information in LMR management, and thereby reduce impacts and 

increase resilience of LMRs and the communities that depend on them.
ix

LIST OF ACRONYMS

BRP – Biological Reference Point 

CWA – Clean Water Act

EBM – Ecosystem-Based Management

ESA – Endangered Species Act

ESR – Ecosystem Status Report

FATE - Fisheries and the Environment 

FMP – Fisheries Management Plan

FTE – Full-Time Employee

FWCA – Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act

IEA – Integrated Ecosystem Assessment

LME – Large Marine Ecosystem

LMR – Living Marine Resource

MMPA – Marine Mammal Protection Act 

MSE – Management Strategy Evaluation

MSA – Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act

NEPA – National Environmental Policy Act

NOAA Fisheries – National Marine Fisheries Service

NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

RAP – Regional Action Plan
x
1

CHAPTER 1

NOAA Fisheries Mission and the Need for Climate-Related Science

The climate and oceans are changing, and these changes are already affecting the nation’s valuable 

marine, estuarine, and diadromous living resources (hereafter termed living marine resources, or LMRs1) 

and their habitats. Changes in the climate system (including climatic changes and other impacts such as 

ocean acidification and alterations of aquatic systems; hereafter referred to as climate change) are affecting 

the services LMRs provide and the many people, businesses, and communities that depend on them (e.g., 

Osgood 2008; Doney et al. 2012; Melillo et al. 2014). 

Even at current concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases, these changes are affecting the products, services, uses, and benefits people derive from these ecosystems. And these impacts are expected 

to continue for centuries and even increase with continued changes in the planet’s climate system (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013; Melillo et al. 2014). These impacts will affect NOAA’s LMR 

management efforts and LMR-dependent sectors at local, state, regional, national, and international levels. 

Given the scale of U.S. dependence on LMRs and the scope and pace of climate-related changes in 

marine and coastal ecosystems, immediate action is needed to better understand, prepare for, and respond to these changes in ways that reduce impacts and increase resilience of LMRs for current and future 

generations (Osgood 2008; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013; Melillo et al. 2014; Pinsky 

and Mantua 2014). Meeting this need requires increased production, delivery, and use of science-based 

information related to climate change in nearly all aspects of LMR stewardship. And addressing these 

information needs is critical to fulfilling the NOAA Fisheries mission to sustain LMRs and their ecosystems 

for the benefit of the nation through science-based conservation and management. 

NOAA Fisheries and other resource managers face increasingly complex challenges in fulfilling resource 

stewardship mandates in a changing climate. This NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy (Strategy) 

outlines a clear path for NOAA Fisheries and partners to deliver the science enterprise, information and 

tools needed for climate-ready decision-making. The Strategy identifies seven key objectives that, if met, 

will provide the climate-related information and tools needed to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mission in a changing 

climate. 

1

 Living marine resources are defined as species under NOAA Fisheries responsibility, including species 

that spend part of their life cycle in estuarine or freshwater, such as diadromous fishes. These include 

federally-managed fish and shellfish, protected marine mammals and other species listed as threatened or 

endangered.
2

What is climate change?

The difference between natural variability and multi-decadal climate change

Natural variability is an inherent part of the Earth’s climate system, and this variability acts over a 

range of time and space scales. At shorter time scales, this natural variability is termed weather: 

one day it is raining and the next day it is sunny. Seasonal natural variability occurs at the scales of 

months and is pronounced across temperate and boreal latitudes, where temperatures can vary by 

10 to 50 oC and precipitation can vary from rain to snow. Climate also varies naturally on the inter-annual scale: one winter is mild and the next is harsh. Furthermore, there is natural climate variability 

at the scale of decades: El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) represents multi-year variability in the 

surface temperature of the tropical eastern Pacific Ocean. ENSO variability has global effects; for 

example, it causes changes in rainfall patterns across parts of North America, Africa, and the Indian 

subcontinent. Other forms of inter-annual and decadal natural climate variability include the Pacific 

Decadal Oscillation, the North Pacific Gyre Oscillation, and the North Atlantic Oscillation, each with 

known basin-scale effects on weather, pelagic food webs, and fisheries.

All of these forms of natural variability in the Earth’s climate system act simultaneously and in association with ongoing climate change, which is defined as a long-term change in the climate system (>50 

years). Recent climate change involves global warming, ocean acidification, and changes in precipitation, winds, and ocean circulation patterns. These long-term changes will affect the average climate, 

but they may also change the frequency and magnitude of the processes responsible for natural 

variability, such as ENSO events. 

The climate we experience is a combination of natural variability and long-term change. Climate 

change is not detectable day-to-day or year-to-year. It is detectable in the long-term trends in daily 

and annual temperatures. These long-term changes in the Earth’s climate system pose challenges 

for the management of LMRs. Information on the impacts of both climate variability and change on 

LMRs is very important to developing effective management approaches across multiple time scales. 

Figure 1: Illustrations of short-term variability (left) combining with long term change (center) in climate 

observations (right).
3

Impacts of a Changing Climate on Marine and Coastal Ecosystems

The impacts of both climate variability and change on the physical, chemical, biological, and even social 

components of marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems are well documented (e.g., Doney et al. 2012; 

Griffis and Howard 2013; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013; Melillo et al. 2014). Some 

of the major observed and expected changes to the physical and chemical characteristics of marine and 

coastal environments are illustrated in Figure 2 and include the following (Doney et al. 2012; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013; Melillo et al. 2014): 

• Warmer ocean temperature

• Reduced sea-ice thickness and extent

• Altered storm tracks and intensity

• Precipitation changes

• Altered freshwater input

• Sea level rise

• Reduced ocean pH (i.e., acidification)

• Reduced dissolved oxygen 

Figure 2: Schematic diagram illustrating current and/or projected impacts of climate changes on major components of marine and coastal ecosystems.
4

These changes can result in a variety of altered conditions, including the following (Rykaczewski and Dunne 

2010; Doney et al. 2012; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013; Melillo et al. 2014):

• Salinity

• Ocean circulation

• Mixed layer depth

• Upper-ocean stratification

• Wind mixing

• Intensity of upwelling and downwelling

• Ecosystem connectivity

• Nutrient availability

• Structural habitat loss, alteration, and degradation 

These changes to the marine and coastal physical and chemical environments are known to be occurring, 

and their cascading effects on species, habitats, and biodiversity in these systems are expected to increase 

with continued changes in the climate system (Figure 2). The variety of observed or expected effects include 

changes to ecosystem productivity (Polovina et al. 2008; Polovina et al. 2011; Hollowed et al. 2013); the timing 

and magnitude of phytoplankton blooms (Steinacher et al. 2010; Behrenfeld 2011; Sigler et al. 2013); thermal 

tolerance and habitat volumes available for LMRs (Baker et al. 2007; Nye et al. 2009; Baker et al. 2012; Hazen et al. 2013; Pinsky et al. 2013; Lynch et al. 2015); vital rates (reproductive rate, emigration, immigration) 

and life history characteristics (Hare et al. 2010; Saba et al. 2012). These effects can have direct or indirect 

impacts on species’ survival, abundance, distribution, fecundity, reproductive success, and function in an ecosystem, and thereby modify the provision of ecosystem goods and services (Ruckelshaus et al. 2013). These 

factors may influence the frequency, intensity, and duration of interactions among species, species phenology, 

distributions and abundance, and the dynamics of invasive and endangered species. We are already witnessing species range and distribution shifts (Nye et al. 2009; Cheung et al. 2010; Kotwicki and Lauth 2013; 

Pinsky et al. 2013), and these shifts are expected to continue, posing challenges and perhaps opportunities for 

resident and shifting species as they enter or leave an ecosystem. 

Climate-related alterations to freshwater and estuarine systems—such as changes in the amount, location, 

and timing of precipitation or changes to air or sea temperatures—can affect riverine-dependent diadromous 

species and the many species that use estuarine habitats (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013; 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2014; Melillo et al. 2014). For example, along the U.S. West 

Coast, the combination of more extreme events coupled with higher temperatures causes more precipitation to 

fall as rain rather than as snow, which significantly changes habitat conditions for multiple Pacific salmon and 

steelhead populations that are managed as commercial and recreational fisheries and also as threatened and 

endangered species. These impacts (Mote et al. 2014) include: 

• More flooding and scouring flows in winter (increasing sedimentation, erosion, and potentially washing out 

deposited eggs).

• Earlier spring freshet (likely to change juvenile migration timing with potential mismatch to estuarine and 

ocean conditions).

• Higher water temperatures and lower stream flows in summer and fall (reducing juvenile rearing habitat 

quality and quantity, potentially increasing predation and disease transmission).

• More frequent exceedance of lethal/sublethal temperature thresholds for juveniles and adults.
5

• Modified riparian vegetation (contributing to higher stream temperatures) by factors including drought, 

greater fire frequency, and insect infestation. 

In many coastal areas, transformation of shorelines (e.g. erosion, or development) and estuarine habitats 

by sea level rise, more frequent storms and coastal inundation can also impact coastal-dependent species. Threats also arise for corals and shellfish species such as shrimp, crabs, lobster, clams, and oysters 

whose calcareous (composed of calcium carbonate) shells or exoskeletons are highly susceptible to ocean 

acidification (Cooley and Doney 2009; Bednaršek et al. 2014). These fisheries currently comprise about 

two-thirds of U.S. marine aquaculture production2 and more than half of U.S. domestic fishery landings by 

value (National Marine Fisheries Service 2014) and provide habitat for many species (e.g., coral and oyster 

reefs). 

Climate-related changes will also interact with other stressors, such as pollution, eutrophication, fishing, 

bycatch, and changes in human use of these systems (e.g., rapid increase in human use of the Arctic) to 

affect LMRs. Some examples of climate-related impacts on LMRs and the people who depend on them are 

included as case studies throughout this document. In some circumstances, reducing other stressors that 

are under local or regional control (e.g., fishing impacts and pollution) may help increase the persistence 

of species sensitive to climate change, by increasing overall resilience and reducing synergistic impacts 

between climate-related and non-climate-related stressors.

Climate-related changes in physical and chemical conditions are expected to have a variety of impacts on 

LMRs across a range of spatial and temporal scales (Stock et al. 2011; Melillo et al. 2014). To assume 

that the effects of climate change will be uniform and consistent across species and ecosystems is imprudent and inconsistent with our scientific understanding. Several studies (e.g., Mueter et al. 2011; Howella 

and Austerb 2012; Wilderbuer et al. 2013) suggest that, in any one region, some species will experience 

improving environmental conditions that may result in increased available habitat and increased species 

productivity, while other species will experience the opposite and perhaps decline in abundance. Furthermore, the sensitivity of species to climate change and the nature of the effect may vary with life stage. 

Understanding how climate change will affect wide-ranging species is challenging, as they may experience positive effects of climate change in one habitat during one life stage and negative effects in another 

distantly located habitat in another life stage. Because not all climate changes will affect LMR species in 

the same way, there is an urgent need for careful evaluation of the impacts of climate as well as non-climate stressors in the design, implementation, and evaluation of LMR management efforts. For example, 

changes in species abundance, productivity, distribution, and diversity due to a changing environment may 

require changes to the biological reference points and socio-economic benchmarks used in LMR management. 

The combined physical, chemical, and biological effects of climate change on LMRs will modify the products 

and services people derive from marine ecosystems, including food, jobs, recreation, medicinal products, 

aesthetics, tourism, regional culture and sense of place, and even health benefits (Ruckelshaus et al. 2013). 

For example, the species available for harvest or culture in a given region could change in space and time, requiring fishermen to develop new harvesting strategies (e.g., switching their target species and gear types) or 

developing strategies for reducing bycatch of species new to their fishing grounds (Heenan et al. 2013). Shifts 

2

 http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/faqs/faq_aq_101.html#11whatkinds
6

in the distribution and/or abundance of species may affect where fishermen target fish, the location of fishing 

industries, working waterfronts, supply chains, and the social and economic dynamics of LMR-dependent 

coastal communities, cultures, and industries. Changes in target species and fishing methods will likely pose 

challenges for shore-side support services from ports to processing plants, which will also be significantly influenced by climate-related factors such as sea level rise, coastal storms, and inundation (i.e.. flooding). Shifts in 

aquaculture practices may be needed, including rethinking what species may be best suited to meet societal 

demands under changing climate and ocean conditions. These and many other climate-related effects will 

impact NOAA Fisheries stewardship of LMRs (e.g., for ESA-related issues see special section on climate 

change and NOAA Fisheries ESA work in December 2013 issue of Conservation Biology: Boughton and Pike 

2013; Brainard et al. 2013; Busch et al. 2013; Gregory et al. 2013; Jorgensen et al. 2013; McClure et al. 2013; 

Seney et al. 2013; Snover et al. 2013; Wainwright and Weitkamp 2013; Walters et al. 2013). 

NOAA Fisheries Stewardship Mandates

NOAA Fisheries is responsible for the stewardship of the nation’s LMRs and their habitats, interactions, 

and ecosystems. As discussed above, climate change is expected to have a variety of impacts on marine, 

coastal, and freshwater ecosystems, LMRs, and their uses, which will affect both the information and the 

actions required to fulfill this mission. NOAA Fisheries main mandates are derived from numerous statutes, 

including the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), National 

Aquaculture Act, Coral Reef Conservation Act, Federal Power Act, Clean Water Act (CWA), and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (Table 1). 

• Under the MSA, NOAA Fisheries assesses and predicts the past, current, and future status of fishery 

stocks and harvest rates; evaluates the implications of proposed catch on the sustainability of marine 

resources; and identifies, protects, and restores essential fish habitat. This information is used to maintain, conserve, and rebuild fishery resources. A primary objective of the MSA is to use the best scientific 

information available to optimize yield on a continuing basis. 

• The MMPA directs NOAA Fisheries to assess marine mammal stocks, reduce fisheries bycatch of marine mammals, protect key habitats, and conduct stranding response and other activities. This includes 

the estimation of abundance, distribution, and mortality. 

• Under the ESA, NOAA Fisheries works to identify, protect, and recover threatened and endangered 

species, including marine mammals, sea turtles, marine and anadromous fishes, marine invertebrates, 

and marine plants, and their critical habitat. 

• Under the National Aquaculture Act, NOAA Fisheries provides for the development of aquaculture in the 

United States. Under the Coral Reef Conservation Act, NOAA Fisheries facilitates local action strategies for preserving coral reef habitat. 

• Under NEPA and the National Ocean Policy, NOAA Fisheries evaluates environmental and socio-economic impacts of a variety of federally permitted activities in marine and coastal systems. This places 

particular emphasis on the evaluation of cumulative impacts to LMRs and their habitats, connections, 

and ecosystems. Under the FWCA as well as the CWA, Rivers and Harbors Act, and Water Resources 

Reform Development Act NOAA Fisheries consults with other federal agencies providing habitat conservation recommendations on their proposed actions, such as issuing permits for discharges to waterways 

or coastal infrastructure projects that could affect fish habitats.

• Under the Federal Power Act, NOAA Fisheries prescribes fish passage requirements for non-federal 
7

hydropower project licenses that last for 30 to-50 years.

In designing management approaches to meet the LMR objectives listed above, NOAA Fisheries is required under many of the mandates (and others) to consider how these decisions may affect human sysSocial and economic impacts of a changing 

climate on ocean based industries

Pacific Northwest oyster hatcheries and ocean acidification

The first known case of an industry being directly affected by 

ocean acidification occurred in the Pacific Northwest’s oyster 

hatcheries. Ocean acidification along the U.S. West Coast has 

been well documented, including its effects on aragonite saturation 

state of upwelled waters (a proxy used to estimate calcification 

rates) (Feely et al. 2008). In 2006, the mortality rate of cultured 

larvae of Pacific oyster (Crassostrea pacifica) at Oregon’s Whiskey 

Creek shellfish hatchery was 80 percent greater than usual (Kelly 

et al. 2013). High larval mortality rates persisted at the Whiskey 

Creek hatchery and occurred at other hatcheries in Washington 

State for a few years. Wild recruitment of Pacific oysters was below levels needed to support commercial harvest in Washington’s 

Willapa Bay during the same time period (Dumbauld et al. 2011). 

Hatchery managers and scientists explored a variety of possibilities for the high oyster larvae mortality, but turned their attention to 

ocean acidification when all of the typical causes of mortality could 

be ruled out. NOAA and other scientists collaborated with Pacific 

Northwest hatcheries to monitor the carbon chemistry of the seawater used to grow oysters and explored the link between ocean 

carbon chemistry and larval mortality in the hatchery. At the Whiskey Creek Hatchery, scientists found that larval production was 

directly correlated with aragonite saturation state of the seawater 

in which larval oysters were spawned and reared for the first 48 

hours of life (Barton et al. 2012). Using data from carbon chemistry 

monitoring equipment, this hatchery and others have since successfully adapted their practices to mitigate the effects of ocean 

acidification on production. For example, they can now avoid 

drawing low pH water into the hatchery during spawning events. 

The shellfish industry, in collaboration with NOAA and other scientists, is exploring other adaptation practices for hatcheries, and 

the scientific community is exploring the feasibility of adaptation 

practices that could support oyster harvest from wild recruitment. 

Both are necessary to support the viability of the Pacific Northwest 

oyster industry.

Larvae of Pacific oysters at 4 

days after hatching when reared 

in pH 8.0 (top) and pH 7.4 

(bottom) seawater. Credit: E. 

Brunner and G. Waldbusser, 

Oregon State University.
8

tems, including coastal communities and economic and social impacts. Fulfilling these mandates requires a 

range of science-based information and services to provide the foundation for management action. NOAA

Fisheries responsibilities under the MSA, ESA, MMPA, NEPA, and other mandates include a set of common science activities such as documenting, assessing, and projecting past, present, and future abundance, distribution, production, mortality, and utilization of LMRs and their habitats. Briefly, this sequence 

can be described as follows (Figure 3): 

• Providing observational and experimental data to build an understanding of LMR abundance and 

dynamics given past and current environmental and socio-economic conditions.

• Modeling and synthesizing data to understand patterns in ecosystem and LMR population dynamics 

and make projections about how they will respond to action.

• Reviewing model outputs to validate the science. 

• Providing management advice, typically in the form of biological reference points, such as biomass 

at maximum sustainable yield, fisheries harvest recommendations, habitat and protected species 

conservation measures, potential biological removal, population viability or similar quantities.

Up-to-date science is essential for effective LMR management, and it becomes even more important as climate change alters the historical characteristics of marine ecosystems. Currently, NMFS lacks key scientific 

information and tools needed to inform LMR management decisions in a changing climate. 

With changing climate and LMR conditions, there are a variety of increasing information needs to inform 

and fulfill NOAA Fisheries LMR stewardship mandates (Osgood 2008). Some of the major climate-related 

information needs (Figure 3) for effective LMR management in a changing climate are: 

• WHAT IS CHANGING? Standardized data on past and current changes in marine, coastal, and 

freshwater ecosystems.

• WHY IS IT CHANGING? Studies to develop a mechanistic understanding of contemporary and 

historical climate impacts on LMRs.

• WHAT IS AT RISK? Assimilation and synthesis of climate information into models used to determine 

stock and ecosystem status and monitoring systems.

• WHAT WILL CONDITIONS BE IN THE FUTURE? Future projections of the state and expected 

human use of marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems (based on contemporary and historical 

climate sensitivities).

• HOW TO RESPOND? Evaluation of alternative management strategies to reduce current and future 

impacts of climate change on LMRs, habitats, the goods and services they provide, and the communities that depend on them.

Figure 3: General science framework used by NOAA Fisheries to provide information and advice for use in 

LMR management. 
9

Endangered species and habitats in a changing climate

Coral habitat sensitivity to climate change 

In 2006, two Atlantic species of coral were listed under the ESA. In 2009, NOAA Fisheries was petitioned to list 83 species of coral as threatened or endangered under the ESA based on widespread 

degradation of coral reefs over the past three decades (Gardner et al. 2003; Pandolfi et al. 2003; De’ath 

et al. 2012) and on predicted declines in available habitat for the coral species (Hoegh-Guldberg et 

al. 2007; Carpenter et al. 2008), citing anthropogenic climate change and ocean acidification as the 

lead factors. An extensive NOAA Fisheries literature review and analyses of the status and extinction 

risk of the 83 candidate coral species (Brainard et al. 2011) considered ocean warming, disease, and 

ocean acidification to be the most influential threats in posing extinction risks to coral species. Over the 

past three decades there have been numerous widespread mass coral bleaching and mortality events 

around the globe associated with anomalously warm water temperatures (Eakin et al. 2009; Burke et al. 

2011), and it is expected that these coral bleaching events will continue, likely with increased frequency 

and severity, with ocean warming driven by climate change (Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007; Eakin et al. 

2010; Hoeke et al. 2011). In addition to mortality caused directly by the bleaching, incidences of coral 

disease increase as a function of rising temperature (Bruno and Selig 2007; Harvell et al. 2007). Corals 

and coral reefs are also considered to be among the most vulnerable taxa and ecosystem types to the 

impacts of ocean acidification, as numerous experiments have demonstrated significantly reduced ability of reef-building corals and crustose coralline algae (red algae in the order Corallinales) to calcify and 

create their calcium carbonate skeletons (reefs) under low pH and low aragonite and calcite saturation 

states (Langdon and Atkinson 2005; Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007; Kuffner et al. 2007). Finally, additional studies have indicated that thermal and acidification stresses often act synergistically, resulting in 

even greater impacts to corals and coral reefs (Anthony et al. 2008). 

In August 2014, NOAA Fisheries made a final decision to list 20 of the 83 petitioned coral species as 

threatened, this listing includes all major reef-building species in the Atlantic and Caribbean with climate 

change being one of the primary drivers for listing (Federal Rule [Docket No. 0911231415-4826-04]).

This ESA decision-making process has demonstrated the need for both field and experimental time-series observations, and projections of climate and ocean changes and the resulting ecosystem impacts 

of those changes. Improvements in our ability to quantify the environmental factors, their variability, and 

their influence on survival and reproduction of living marine resources are essential for ESA decision-making. 

Monitoring of coral reefs. Credit: NOAA
10

Meeting these changing science requirements will be challenging given the scale and scope of NOAA Fisheries mission and expected climate-related impacts on marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems. For 

example, NOAA Fisheries is responsible for providing a range of science-based assessments and management advice for the stewardship of more than 449 regulated stocks/stock complexes,3

 102 threatened 

or endangered species, and 117 marine mammal species, and their habitats.4 NOAA Fisheries provides 

science-based information to conduct more than 2,000 habitat restoration projects nationwide5 and protect 

hundreds of thousands of square kilometers of habitat. NOAA Fisheries also oversees research and siting 

for a growing number of sustainable marine aquaculture activities, including some designed to mitigate for 

climate change. To meet NEPA requirements, in 2012 alone, NOAA Fisheries conducted 106 environmental assessments, wrote 12 environmental impact statements, and issued hundreds of categorical exclusions.6

 Under the MSA, in 2011, NOAA Fisheries provided conservation recommendations to federal and 

state agencies on more than 4,500 individual projects. 

Overall, NOAA Fisheries has direct stewardship responsibilities for LMRs in 11 Large Marine Ecosystems, 

comprising 16.5 million km2, (an area 1.7 times the land area of the continental United States and roughly 

5 percent of the world ocean’s surface area7) plus other stewardship responsibilities for the ESA-listed 

species that occur throughout the world’s Large Marine Ecosystems. NOAA Fisheries also has stewardship 

responsibilities on the high seas and for operation of U.S. fishing vessels in other countries’ EEZs through 

international treaties and regional fishery management organizations. 

Due to complex trophic interactions of marine ecosystems, climate change is expected to affect the distribution, abundance and composition of many coastal and marine species. These changes could have significant effects on species conservation and management, as well as human uses of these resources. 

Effective stewardship of LMRs will require information related to climate change for use in the design and 

execution of a broad range of management actions (Figure 4). In addition, effective stewardship will require 

an understanding of how fisheries, ocean industries (e.g., shipping, military activities, and shoreline development), and other human activities might modify their use of LMRs in the face of projected and actual 

climate-related changes in marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems over time.

3

 https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/sisPortal/sisPortalMain.jsp

4

 http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/index.htm

5

 http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/restoration/restorationatlas/index.html

6

 Categorical exclusion refers to a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and for which, therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor 

an environmental impact statement is required.

7

 http://www.lme.noaa.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=41&Itemid=53
11

Figure 4: NOAA Fisheries provides science information and management advice to fulfill multiple stewardship mandates including fisheries management, protected species conservation, habitat conservation, aquaculture and others. Ecosystem-based management approaches (EBM) are used to improve consideration of 

cumulative effects and trade-offs. 

NOAA has adopted a policy of ecosystem-based management (EBM) to more efficiently and effectively fulfill its mandates and promote consideration of cumulative effects, and of trade-offs across various management regimes and human uses, as well as the impacts of these management decisions on human systems 

(Executive Order 13547 of July 19th 2010; Ocean Research Advisory Panel 2013). 

EBM is a national priority and leading business practice within NOAA Fisheries, NOAA, U.S. natural resource management agencies, and many leading international natural resource management organizations 

(MacLeod and Leslie 2009; Executive Order 13547 of July 19th 2010; National Ocean Council 2013; Ocean 

Research Advisory Panel 2013; U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy 2013). It is an idea that has 

existed for decades in the literature (Slocombe 1993), but has only recently begun to be widely implemented. Within each of NOAA Fisheries mandates, the need and benefits of considering a broad range 

of factors that can influence LMRs is clear. But even more so, across all of these mandates, the need to 

implement EBM is apparent; otherwise, NOAA Fisheries will be unable to consider the full range of tradeoffs, interactions, and cumulative effects required across all of the mandates under a changing climate (MacLeod and Leslie 2009; Link 2010). Climate and ocean change impacts are a critical part of this discussion, 

and adopting common approaches to climate change science that are applicable across all NOAA Fisheries 

LMR mandates is an important area to leverage resources and gain efficiencies via this Strategy.
12

Without adequately incorporating climate change, NOAA Fisheries conservation and management efforts 

are likely to be ineffective, produce negative results, or miss opportunities. Any of these could have a 

variety of environmental, social, economic, cultural, and legal consequences. For example, the commercial 

and recreational fishing industry is important to the U.S. economy (added $199 billion to the U.S. economy 

in 2012) and to social systems (generated 1.7 million jobs in 2012) (NMFS 2014). The recreational fishing 

industry alone contributes $56 billion a year to the U.S. economy and 364,000 jobs (NMFS 2014). Furthermore, subsistence and personal-use fisheries are known to be vital to families and households across 

the nation, including tribal communities. Beyond fisheries, healthy marine ecosystems help protect coastal 

communities from storm waves and tsunamis, support the existence of imperiled and charismatic species, 

regulate climate, and mitigate climate change effects (e.g., carbon sequestration and storage by coastal 

habitats). 

Although the value of these ecosystem services is challenging to quantify, they are vital natural capital and 

impossible to replace (Ruckelshaus et al. 2013). The social, cultural, and economic consequences are 

vast. Given the pace and scope of expected climate impacts on marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems, the ability to understand, plan for, and respond to climate impacts on the nation’s valuable LMRs 

and the people that depend on them is fundamental to fulfilling NOAA Fisheries mandates in a changing 

climate. 

The Need for a NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy

The demand for more information related to climate change is high and increasing among LMR managers, scientists, users and stakeholders. Many other sectors are already taking significant action to better 

understand, plan for, and respond to climate impacts (e.g., defense, transportation, land management, 

water management, public health, and others). This includes development of strategies/plans to advance 

climate-related science by other natural resource agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service (Solomon et al. 

2009), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2010), National Park Service (National 

Park Service 2010; National Park Service 2012), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA 2011), U.S. Geological Survey (Burkett et al. 2013), and the U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers (USACE 2014).

This Strategy responds to increasing demands for information and clear directives for action by NOAA

Fisheries and other federal agencies. For example, in 2012 NOAA and other federal, state and tribal 

government agency partners released the National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy 

to help safeguard the nation’s valuable natural resources and the communities that depend on them in 

a changing climate (NFWPAS 2012). In June 2013, President Obama unveiled a Climate Action Plan to 

reduce carbon pollution, create more clean energy sources, and minimize the impacts of climate change on 

the nation. Executive Order 13653 directed federal agencies to take action to implement the Climate Action 

Plan including updating agency Climate Adaptation Plans and identification of specific actions to increase 

resilience of the nation’s valuable natural resources (Priority Agenda to Enhance the Climate Resilience of 

America’s Natural Resources (2014)). The NOAA Fisheries strategy responds to these and other direct 

calls for action to better understand, prepare for and respond to climate-related impacts on NOAA Fisheries 

mission.

Increasing the production, delivery, and use of climate-related information in fulfilling NOAA Fisheries stewardship responsibilities is a significant challenge. Fortunately, some quantitative tools needed to incorpo-
13

rate climate change into NOAA Fisheries scientific advice already exist, though improvements are needed 

in the production, use and application of these tools. There are major gaps in our ability to track and provide 

early warnings of climate-related changes in marine and coastal ecosystems. Similarly there are major 

gaps in our understanding of the mechanisms of climate-impacts on LMRs, and our ability to forecast or 

project future climate impacts and incorporate this information into management strategies and actions. 

NOAA Fisheries has a network of internal and external partnerships that can be mobilized to help address 

many of these needs, and in fact, partners are critical to filling some of the science and information needs 

(Table 2). However, many challenges remain. For example, many of the data-sets needed for models 

that project climate impacts on LMRs and their habitats are not available. Additional efforts are needed to 

collect relevant climate-related data as a regular part of the information base supporting LMR management 

(Osgood 2008; Hollowed et al. 2009; Stock et al. 2011). Additional action is also needed to effectively structure and employ models and other tools that utilize climate, biological, and ecological information and further link these parameters to community well-being. Research to better understand key mechanisms and 

processes linking climate-induced changes to LMRs is also needed to make better projections of possible 

future conditions. And there is a need to identify and test how to effectively insert and apply climate-related 

information into LMR management processes (Figure 3). 

All of these endeavors require adequate science infrastructure, coordination, and financial support in both 

the near and long term. Given that many of NOAA Fisheries mandates have common needs for climate-related information, this Strategy identifies a variety of key products and responses that are needed and 

useful to meeting multiple mandates. 
14

1. How can climate-related effects be incorporated into LMR reference points?

2. What are robust LMR management strategies in the face of climate change?

3. How can climate-related effects be incorporated into adaptive LMR management processes?

4. How will the abundance and distribution of LMRs and marine ecosystems change in the future, and 

how will these changes affect LMR-dependent communities?

5. How and why does climate change alter LMRs, ecosystems, and LMR-dependent human communities?

6. What are the observed trends in climate, LMRs and LMR-dependent communities?

7. What science infrastructure is needed to produce and deliver this information?

Figure 5: This Strategy identifies seven Priority Objectives based on the following questions that need to be 

addressed to ensure effective LMR management in a changing climate 

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Robust Management Strategies

Adaptive Management Processes

Project Future Conditions

Understand Mechanisms of Change

Track Change and Provide Early Warnings

Build and Maintain Adequate Science Infrastructure

Interdependent

Climate Science Strategy Objectives
15

CHAPTER 2

Increasing the Production, Delivery, and Use of Climate-Related Information 

The goal of this Strategy is to increase the production, delivery, and use of the climate-related information 

needed to fulfill the NOAA Fisheries LMR stewardship mission. The Strategy is designed to provide a national framework that can be regionally tailored and implemented through NOAA Fisheries Science Centers, 

Regional Offices, and partners over the next 3-5 years. 

This Strategy is intended to address the key climate-related information needs and ways to address them 

(Table 1). These needs were derived from existing assessments and related sources (e.g., Murawski and 

Matlock 2006; Osgood 2008; Griffis and Howard 2013), then generalized across mandates to identify analytical products and the science enterprise required to address them. Finally, consideration was given to 

the infrastructure needed to produce and deliver the needed science.

While each NOAA Fisheries mandate has specific requirements, four main findings played a key role in 

shaping the content of this Strategy: 

1. There are common information needs that exist across all major mandates. 

2. The science-to-management process is relatively consistent across mandates, making advances in 

climate-related science and information applicable across multiple mandates.

3. Advances in the science and practice of ecosystem-based management are considered the most 

effective approach to achieve the desired objectives of all the respective mandates simultaneously.

4. There are common, climate-related tools, approaches, or information that can efficiently and effectively inform all of NOAA Fisheries mandates. 

While it is clear that there are also mandate- and region-specific needs, this Strategy is designed to provide 

a nationally consistent blueprint that can provide tangible solutions for a variety of priority common needs 

and also help address the more unique science and information needs of each mandate and region. This 

Strategy capitalizes on these common elements and suggests an over-arching framework for action to build 

the needed science enterprise.

This Strategy includes seven priority science objectives needed to meet NOAA Fisheries climate-related 

information needs in a changing climate (Figure 5). The objectives are highly complementary and interdependent; the output from any one objective contributes to or is essential to one or more of the others. The 

first three are objectives related to providing climate-informed advice for use in LMR management (management-oriented objectives), and the final four are more closely related to generating the climate-related 

information needed to produce that management advice (science-oriented objectives):
16

Objective 1: Identify appropriate, 

climate-informed 

reference points for 

managing LMRs. 

Objective 2: Identify robust strategies 

for managing LMRs under 

changing climate 

conditions.

Objective 3: Design adaptive decision 

processes that can 

incorporate and respond to 

changing climate 

conditions.

Objective 4: Identify future states of marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems, LMRs, and 

LMR-dependent human communities in a changing climate.

Objective 5: Identify the mechanisms of climate impacts on ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent 

human communities.

Objective 6: Track trends in ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent human communities and 

provide early warning of change.

Objective 7: Build and maintain the science infrastructure needed to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mandates 

under changing climate conditions.

To meet these seven priority objectives, NOAA Fisheries needs to identify and fill information gaps; bolster 

ongoing efforts that are climate-relevant; explore novel ways to produce and deliver salient information; and 

develop climate-smart management approaches. This chapter describes the information needed to address each of our objectives, plus the germane products, strategies, and delivery of each (Table 3). 

These seven priority objectives were ordered according to the main mandated responsibility areas (Table 

1), deriving known management needs, generalizing across mandates, identifying analytical products and 

the science enterprise to support those management needs, and finally noting the infrastructure needed to 

support that science. Thus, all subsequent objectives support the objectives above it (Figure 5). Building 

this nested and interdependent science foundation is the core of this Strategy. 

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Management Strategies

Management Processes

Future Projections

Mechanisms of Change

Status,Trends and Early Warnings

Science Infrastructure

Interdependent
17

Increasing understanding and planning for changing ocean conditions

Projections of the response of leatherback turtles to changing climate and ocean conditions

Leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) population dynamics are differentially sensitive to changes 

in climate and ocean conditions. Population projections under an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change emissions scenario indicate a 7 percent decline per decade when both ocean and nesting 

beach climate conditions change. A 2 to 3 oC warming of the nesting beach was the primary driver of 

the decline through reduced hatching success and hatchling emergence rate. Adjusting nesting phenology or changing nesting sites may not entirely prevent the decline, but could offset the decline rate. 

However, if future observations show a long-term decline, mitigation efforts such as shading and irrigation of nests may be able to preserve the nesting population (Saba et al. 2012). Predicted sea level 

rise could significantly impact nesting beaches through impacts from ocean inundation, loss of suitable 

habitat, and increased competition for best nesting sites.

Figure 6: Leatherback turtle nesting population projections at Playa Grande, Costa Rica in the Eastern 

Pacific Ocean. Colored lines are population projections based on individual global climate models and 

the solid black line is the projection ensemble. From Saba et al. 2012.
18

Fisheries management implications from a changing climate

Changing fisheries behavior in response to climate-induced changes to LMRs 

Climate-forced changes in species distributions are causing changes in both fishery operations and 

fisheries management. These changes are currently reactions; i.e., unplanned changes that are made 

as a result of climate change. This Strategy seeks to enable fisheries adaptation to climate change; 

i.e., planned changes that reduce the vulnerability of social and biological systems to climate change 

(Quentin Grafton 2010). Fisheries along the Northeast United States serve as an example of reactions 

to climate change. Fish and shellfish populations are shifting predominantly northward or to deeper 

waters, consistent with expected biological responses to warming waters (Nye et al. 2009b; Pinsky 

et al. 2013). These changes in species distribution have led to changes in the distribution of landings 

(Pinsky and Fogarty 2012); landings of lobster, yellowtail flounder, summer flounder, and red hake shifted northward but at a slower rate than species distributions, which suggests an increasing disconnect 

between fishing and species distributions. 

Many fishery species are managed in part with spatial allocation systems. Along the Northeast, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission uses a state allocation system based on historical patterns 

in landings. As species distributions change, landings distribution change, and the state allocation system can become out of sync with the distribution of landings, fishing effort, and the distribution of the 

resource. NOAA Fisheries scientists are providing products to the Commission to inform their discussions about potential changes in the state allocation system. These products include maps of species 

distribution when the allocations were set and analyses documenting the extent and examining the 

case of distribution changes (Bell et al. 2014 ). This support is ongoing and is an initial effort to develop 

climate adaptation for fisheries in the region.

Figure 7: Distribution of black sea bass in the fall over the period when state allocations were set (1988–

1997) and more recently (2000–2008). A black sea bass pictured in Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary in 2001. Photo Credit: NOAA Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary.
19

Objective 1: Identify appropriate, 

climate-informed reference 

points for managing LMRs.

Reference points are the thresholds upon 

which LMR management decisions are 

made. Determining how climate-related 

effects should be incorporated into LMR 

reference points is critical to advance climate-ready fisheries. As stocks, protected 

species, habitats, aquaculture, and 

ecosystems are expected to respond to 

climate change, the reference points for 

these species, systems, and human uses may need to change to reflect those different conditions. Ongoing 

scrutiny of these reference points has already indicated the need for and benefits of bolstering the use of 

climate-related information in LMR reference points and assessments. 

Development of biological reference points (BRPs) is a primary objective for much of the science conducted 

by NOAA Fisheries to meet its mandates. Be they single-species measures of maximum sustainable yield, 

thresholds for habitat designations, potential biological removal of marine mammals, multispecies fishing rates, 

thresholds for ecosystem-level indicators, protected species recovery criteria, or a host of others (Table 1), 

these reference points are used as limits or decision criteria to guide sustainable management of LMRs and 

their habitats. These reference points are typically developed via modeling exercises that synthesize a broad 

suite of observational and experimental information and are peer-reviewed. This careful vetting ensures that 

decision criteria are effective at achieving sustainable management, species recovery, or other stewardship 

goals. Strengthening NOAA Fisheries ability to incorporate consideration of climate change into all the steps 

that lead to providing reference points is critical. 

A number of products can be routinely created to meet this objective. Novel or updated LMR management 

plans and documents are typically produced for each management action. Usually, documents such as Fishery 

Management Plans, Fishery Ecosystem Plans, Biological Opinions, Species Recovery Plans, Environmental 

Impact Assessments, and Social Impact Assessments inform Ecosystem Assessments, ESA Status Assessments, MMPA and MSA Stock Assessment Reports, habitat assessments, restoration reports, and EFH designations. These plans and documents provide the scientific basis for the management of LMRs (Table 1). They are 

regularly used in decision making, by NOAA Fisheries, Regional Fishery Management Councils; Regional Ocean 

Councils; Regional Planning Boards; State Fishery Commissions; Regional Fishery Management Organizations; 

many federal, state, and local agencies and organizations; and other managers. 

Most current assessments, and the reference points produced by them and included in management plans, 

assume that future natural variability will reflect the range of conditions observed in the past. Such reference 

points often do not account for the fact that ecosystems and the LMRs in them will change with the directional 

forcing of climate change. Therefore, stock assessments, biological reference points, and fisheries management plans based on these assessments may not adequately capture the future population dynamics in a 

changing ocean. In other situations, mandates allow managers to shift their reference points in response to 

shifts in the environment, such as regime shifts (large, abrupt, persistent changes in the structure and function 

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Management Strategies

Management Processes

Future Projections

Mechanisms of Change

Status,Trends and Early Warnings

Science Infrastructure

Interdependent
20

of an eco-system). However, unlike regime shifts—for which estimates of past and current conditions exist—

climate change is expected to create novel conditions not captured by past datasets, making identification of 

baseline conditions and reference points more difficult. In these circumstances, the key is to establish reference points that are robust to shifting status of managed species (Punt et al. 2013) and associated ecosystems.

Moving forward, LMR management plans (e.g., Fishery Management Plans, Fishery Ecosystem Plans, Species Recovery Plans, etc.) need to document that decision criteria explicitly to include climate-related considerations. Accounting for and, where appropriate, including the best available climate-related science to inform 

reference points is a necessity to avoid misaligned management targets. Additionally, many of these plans 

need to include socio-economic analyses that show the consequences of neglecting climate change in establishing biological reference points. Such analyses are challenging but feasible. Moreover, they are critical to 

demonstrating the value (both biologically and socio-economically) of managing LMRs using reference points 

that consider the effects of climate change. Misaligned reference points may result in foregone revenue or 

missed opportunities (e.g., biological, social, economic, cultural) due to climate-induced changes in production, 

distribution, or other dynamics of LMRs that have been unaccounted for in the analysis.

Finally, a reporting tool accessible to all stakeholders, which simultaneously tracks the status of stocks, ecosystems, and social and economic conditions over time would provide useful products for adequately achieving this objective. NOAA Fisheries has the building blocks for developing such a reporting tool, but does not 

currently collect and communicate the information in such a comprehensive way. 

Important strategies to bolster and better deliver climate-smart reference points include:

• Identify ecosystem-based reference points that include climate change and ecosystem information 

for all LMR management plans and strategies and their habitats.

• Modify existing biological reference points that fail to include ecosystem considerations and assume 

that environmental conditions of the past will persist into the future.

• Communicate that ecosystem-based biological reference points improve accuracy, especially under 

climate change. 

• Foster innovation in climate-smart scenario testing.

• Elucidate the positive opportunities associated with emerging LMRs.

• Develop scientific underpinning for Environmental Impact Statements for climate change in each 

region, including comprehensive socio-economic impact analyses.
21

Tools for fisheries management in a changing climate

Management Strategy Evaluations

There are many forms of management strategy evaluations to identify robust management measures 

in the context of a changing climate. They range from qualitative assessments of the implications of 

a proposed change in management, to highly technical simulations of the performance of a proposed 

strategy relative to a suite of performance metrics (e.g., maintaining a stock above a suite of biological 

reference points). In the context of climate change, the full range of management strategy evaluations is 

relevant. For example, in the near term, considerable insight can be derived from a qualitative assessment of the vulnerability of a suite of stocks to the combined impacts of climate change and fishing. 

NOAA Fisheries can use these vulnerability assessments to prioritize research on adaptation strategies 

for the most vulnerable resources. 

The more formal simulation modeling approach is emerging as a primary tool for delivery of adaptation 

strategies for the sustainable management of LMRs. Management strategy evaluations vary in complexity and biological realism, ranging from fully coupled bio-physical models of regional ecosystem 

responses to climate forcing, to climate-enhanced single- or multi-species projection models. These 

approaches incorporate bottom-up and top-down forcing through time. 

Figure 8: Schematic of a typical stock-focused MSE. Taken, with permission, from Punt et al. (in press), 

and adapted from Smith et al. (1999), Schnute et al. (2007), and Szuwalski and Punt (2012).
22

Management Strategy Evaluations continued

The fully coupled ecosystem models formally capture species interactions in space and time through 

first principles of bio-energetics, predation, and probability of encounter with prey. Examples include 

size spectrum models, food-web models, full life-cycle individual-based models, and gradient tracking spatial models that incorporate predator-prey interactions and bio-energetics. Climate-enhanced 

single- or multi-species projection models use time trajectories of physics (reproductive success), prey 

availability (growth and survival), predation (mortality), and bioenergetics (growth and maturation) to inform functional responses, model parameterizations, model structure, and even covariates for modeled 

stocks into the future.

Figure 9: Schematic of many factors that can go into ecosystem-level management strategy evaluations. 

Adapted from Smith et al. 1999, Fulton et al. 2013.
23

Objective 2: Identify robust strategies for managing LMRs under 

changing climate 

conditions.

There is a critical need to identify and 

evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of 

alternative LMR management approaches 

in the face of a changing climate. This is 

particularly important because the best 

management practices for LMRs today may 

not be the best management practices in 

the future. 

To identify management strategies that are 

robust to future change, various ecosystem, 

socio-economic, and LMR models can be 

coupled with scenarios of climate change to test the performance of current and alternate management 

practices under future conditions (Battin et al. 2007; Crozier et al. 2008; Ianelli et al. 2011; Boughton and 

Pike 2013; Nye et al. 2013; Szuwalski and Punt 2013; Wilderbuer et al. 2013). Such Management Strategy 

Evaluations (MSE) will assist in the design and evaluation of management options and adaptive management strategies for LMRs, and should help identify management options that are robust to a wide range 

of predicted future conditions. Additionally, they could be used to identify the time scale of change and 

adaptation, allowing us to better focus resources and emphasis. Similar models for cultivated LMRs exist 

for aquaculture and can be used to predict changes in production due to changing ocean conditions and 

consumptive and non-consumptive uses (Shelton 2014). Conversely, models of shellfish and seaweed 

physiology could be used to evaluate the potential for aquaculture systems to provide refuge to LMRs from 

changing climate and to remove carbon from the coastal ocean.

NOAA Fisheries has considerable experience in designing and evaluating strategies for sustainable management of LMRs. Incorporation of expected climate-related changes to marine, coastal, and freshwater 

ecosystems, as well as human uses of those ecosystems, will help identify management practices and 

mitigation strategies that may be necessary in the future. Through these processes, NOAA Fisheries can 

provide information on the effectiveness of current management practices and the design and performance 

of alternative management practices that may be superior. 

For example, management strategy evaluations for fisheries management practices, recovery plans for 

ESA-listed species, management practices for aquaculture, use of aquaculture as mitigation, and designation of essential or critical habitat should incorporate understanding of the impacts of climate change 

into the design of effective management strategies. Such management strategy evaluations would support 

development of sound adaptive management practices.

A number of products could be routinely created to meet this objective. Reports of such management 

strategy evaluation efforts that cover the full range of climate, harvest, mitigation, and adaptation scenarios 

are needed. Within these reports, documented changes to biological reference points across a range of 

scenarios warrants examination, including a catalog of associated LMR and socio-economic responses. 

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Management Strategies

Management Processes

Future Projections

Mechanisms of Change

Status,Trends and Early Warnings

Science Infrastructure

Interdependent
24

Reports generated from these management strategy evaluations need to clearly identify the most robust 

strategies that will not weaken LMR sustainability. Management strategy evaluation reports should also 

identify protection and mitigation measures, harvest control rules, and related management options that 

are compulsory to best manage across a suite of LMRs or systems. The best levels of these biological 

reference points, reflective of a range of possible risk tolerances, need to be examined to better inform riskbased policies. 

Many LMRs and ecosystems are experiencing changes in realized production or shifting distributions 

(Pinsky and Fogarty 2012). Exploration of these situations warrants particular attention. Some LMRs will 

move into ecosystems with more favorable environmental conditions. Management strategy evaluations to 

determine how to handle these opportunities also warrant exploration.

Important strategies to bolster and better deliver climate-ready management strategies include:

• Conduct management strategy evaluations and generate other information to allow risk-based policies to be re-evaluated under a changing climate.

• Establish science-based approaches and policies for determining biological reference points and 

LMR and ecosystem productivities with changing climate and ecosystem conditions. 

• Establish science-based thresholds and policies for dealing with the immigration and emigration of 

LMRs to/from ecosystems. 

• Conduct more routine and regular LMR management strategy evaluations with NOAA Fisheries partners and constituents to provide science-based assessments of management options in a changing 

climate. 

• Examine efficacy of proposed mitigation strategies.

• Include human behavioral response or motivations into management design, execution, and evaluation. 
25

Objective 3: Design adaptive decision processes that can incorporate 

and respond to changing climate conditions.

The procedures used to examine, vet, and 

provide scientific advice to support management strategies and decisions can be as 

important as the management advice itself. 

Answering how climate-related effects 

can be incorporated into adaptive LMR 

management processes is a key question 

that NOAA Fisheries must address. As 

depicted simply in Figure 3, the science 

and information delivery process for any of 

the main NOAA Fisheries mandates (Table 

1) follows a similar sequence: collecting 

data, synthesizing available information, 

reviewing outputs, and providing information to determine the status of LMRs, habitats, or ecosystems. 

The resulting management advice provided at the end of the process is only as strong as the weakest link 

in that process. If climate-related information is not included in this management advice process, decisions 

based on it may not result in sustainable management (e.g., Beechie et al. 2013; McClure et al. 2013).

Copious works have documented, described, and evaluated management systems for LMRs and natural 

resources (Holling 1978; Walters 1986; Hilborn and Mangel 1998). We do not repeat that work here; rather we 

build on it and note one key point: climate-related information may need to be incorporated into the management process to effectively achieve management and conservation goals. Doing so would require a number 

of steps. Clearly an openness to incorporate considerations of climate-related information is a huge first step. 

Second, knowing where the best insertion points are for specific types of climate-related information is critical. 

Third, building adaptability into the management process is necessary to allow inclusion of new understanding 

related to climate change and information related to the rate of environmental change. 

Easing the integration of climate science into the management process may necessitate some changes to 

the management process itself, requiring close collaboration between managers and scientists. For example, robust strategies for managing LMRs under climate change may require both regular updates in the 

short term based on performance tracking and periodic evaluation against rigorous management strategy 

evaluations that employ fully coupled sets of system models. In this example, both the close interaction between managers and scientists and the need for managers to be able to adapt on a routine basis (without 

scientists having to execute detailed analyses each time) are highlighted. Recent scientific inquiry suggests 

that detailed analyses are needed to assess whether current management strategies are robust to climate 

change. Research also suggests that LMR management strategies that are successful under climate 

change include adaptive management cycles with control rules for changing conditions and monitoring 

programs to develop and track necessary status indicators. 

The primary output for this objective would be scientific support for management processes that are 

adaptive and flexible in both the short and long term under the various NOAA Fisheries mandates. These 

processes would need to be measured by key performance metrics related to their timeliness and accuracy 

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Management Strategies

Management Processes

Future Projections

Mechanisms of Change

Status,Trends and Early Warnings

Science Infrastructure

Interdependent
26

with respect to the ecosystem, LMR, and socio-economic impacts of climate change. 

Further, identification of where in the management process climate-smart information could best be incorporated is needed, recognizing that there may be multiple insertion points (e.g, Sutton-Grier et al. 2014). 

This could be established under different management strategy evaluations.

Important strategies to bolster and better deliver climate-smart, adaptive management processes include:

• Design scientifically sound review-evaluation protocols that could ensure consideration of climate 

change as a standard part of LMR management advice.8

• Develop and document the scientific basis for the need for climate change considerations in legislation or technical guidance. 

• Identify the many ways that information and understanding related to climate change can be inserted 

into the management process. 

• Establish climate-ecosystem and socio-economic criteria that could become a standard part of review 

of LMR advice.

• Recognize and involve resource-dependent communities whose future depends on adapting to 

dynamic marine resources to minimize impacts and help foster resilience (tribes, coastal dependent 

communities and stakeholders).

8

 Developing review-evaluation protocols that ensure consideration of climate change could be quite involved, 

but initially could take the form of changing the standing terms of reference in the management process to 

include consideration of a dynamic climate. Making this change in stock assessments, recovery plans, biological opinions, and other NOAA Fisheries management contexts would ensure that any resultant biological 

reference points include considerations of climate change. This change in criteria would also hold for external 

review panels, such as Scientific and Statistical Committees and Scientific Review Groups; for permitting, 

siting, and review of essential fish and critical habitat, aquaculture, and NEPA consultations; and for Integrated 

Ecosystem Assessment scoping and reviews.
27

Endangered species and a changing climate

Arctic seals and the ESA 

In 2007–2008, NOAA Fisheries was petitioned to list ribbon, spotted, bearded, and 

ringed seals under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based primarily on concerns about loss of sea ice in a disrupted, warming Arctic climate. All four of these 

seal species are strongly associated with sea ice as habitat for critical functions 

such as whelping and nursing of pups, and annual molting. 

• In 2008 and 2013, NOAA Fisheries determined that the ribbon seal did not 

warrant listing under the ESA. 

• In 2010, NOAA Fisheries determined that listing spotted seals in the Distinct Population Segments 

(DPSs) of the Bering Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk was not warranted. However, the Southern DPS of 

spotted seals (in the Yellow Sea and Sea of Japan) was listed as threatened under the ESA.

• In 2012, NOAA Fisheries determined that the bearded seal subspecies E. b. barbatus, which occupies the Atlantic sector of the Arctic, did not warrant ESA listing. The subspecies E. b. nauticus, 

which occupies the Pacific sector, was further divided into the Okhotsk DPS (Sea of Okhotsk) and 

the Beringia DPS (Bering, Chukchi, Beaufort, and East Siberian Seas), both of which were listed 

as threatened because sea ice is projected to decline dramatically during this century in substantial 

areas of shallow water that are important for benthic foraging. However, these listings were vacated 

by a federal judge in Alaska in July 2014 (Alaska Oil and Gas Association v. Pritzker, 13-18-RRB, D. 

Alaska). 

• Also in 2012, NOAA Fisheries determined that the ringed seal subspecies P. h. saimensis (Lake Saimaa, Finland) should retain its 1993 listing 

as endangered under the ESA and that P. h. ladogensis (Lake Ladoga, 

Russia) should also be listed as endangered. Ringed seal subspecies P. 

h. botnica (Baltic Sea), P. h. ochotensis (Sea of Okhotsk), and P. h. hispida 

(Arctic Ocean and surrounding seas) were listed as threatened. In addition 

to a loss of sea-ice habitat, these subspecies were listed because snow 

depth on sea ice during the early spring is projected to diminish during this 

century below the critical depth required for birthing and nursing lairs that 

shelter ringed seal pups from polar bear predation and hypothermia. 

ESA decisions such as these depend heavily on observations and projections of 

climate-driven change in sea ice, snow, ocean chemistry, and other key environmental factors. Too often, the best available scientific information is sufficient 

to support only qualitative assessments of extinction risk. Improvements in our 

ability to quantify the environmental factors, their variability, and their influence on 

survival and reproduction of living marine resources are paramount for rational 

ESA decision-making. 

These examples show how climate change effects are being considered in an 

ESA context, how such effects are going to differ across species and locations, 

and the challenges of incorporating climate change for such arctic species in 

future years.

Spotted Seal 

Dave Withrow NOAA

Bearded seal, ring seal 

pup, ribbon seal. Photo 

credit: Michael Cameron, 

NOAA Fisheries.
28

Looking into the Crystal Ball: Improved Projections of Climate 

Impacts on Marine Resources

Collaborations on modeling are necessary for developing projections of the future 

Models play an important role in understanding climate change and projecting future climate conditions 

given different scenarios of human behavior (e.g., different trajectories of CO2 emissions). NOAA, 

through the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), is a global leader in climate modeling 

and provides advice to the United States and the international community in the form of understanding, 

attribution, and the consequences of climate change to various aspects of the Earth’s system. NOAA, 

through NOAA Fisheries, is responsible for providing advice regarding the management of the nation’s 

LMRs. Much of this advice is based on assessments of current status and then the forecasting of future 

status given different scenarios of human behavior (e.g., fishing levels). This advice is then used to set 

catch levels, develop species recovery plans, or determine the effect of a specific action on LMRs (e.g., 

fishing effort impacts on sea turtles). The challenge is to couple these two operational infrastructures to 

incorporate climate information into the advice that NOAA Fisheries is legally mandated to provide to 

numerous partners and stakeholders. 

NOAA Fisheries and OAR researchers have worked closely together for the past decade to develop and 

demonstrate potential links. Climate effects have been coupled into single-species models (Fogarty et 

al. 2008; Hollowed et al. 2009; Hare et al. 2010); these studies show that climate will affect the reference points used in management. Earth system models themselves have moved into simulating basic 

biological components of the Earth system (Stock et al. 2014); these models suggest that ocean biomes 

may shift and change in size, with potential implications for many LMRs (Polovina et al. 2011). These 

examples show paths forward for greater linkages between climate models and fisheries advice.

NOAA Fisheries scientists have also been working with a group of end-to-end models that link changes 

in the physical environment to changes in LMRs to changes in the socio-economics of fisheries (Fulton 

et al. 2011). These models represent the trophic interactions of ecosystems as well as the physics and 

human pressures. As examples, work on the West Coast demonstrates the potential cascading effects 

of ocean acidification on groundfish species (Kaplan et al. 2010) and, on the East Coast, the potential 

effect of warming on large predators ( Nye et al. 2013). These models accommodate the interactive effects of climate change and fishing to be evaluated together and offer a powerful tool for examining the 

complexity of climate change and LMR dynamics. The next steps are to further improve these models 

and to develop greater integration between climate models and population and ecosystem models. This 

integration will allow the impacts of climate change on LMRs to be regularly incorporated into the 

scientific advice for management practices developed by NOAA Fisheries. 
29

Objective 4: Identify future states of marine, coastal, and freshwater 

ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent human communities in a 

changing climate.

Simulations of LMR dynamics using climate 

forecasts are needed to develop management protocols that can adapt to climate 

change. For example, how will the abundance and distribution of LMRs and marine 

ecosystems change in the future, and how 

will these changes affect LMR-dependent 

communities? Forward-looking management of LMRs depends on robust projections of future ocean conditions; marine, 

coastal, and freshwater ecosystems and 

LMR responses; and human socio-economic systems and their responses to changing climatic conditions 

and related LMR responses. Linking changes in the physio-chemical system to marine resources and 

ecosystems represents a major challenge. Making additional linkages to climate effects on human communities and economies is a second major challenge. 

Robust, model-based projections of the effects of climate change on marine, coastal, and freshwater 

ecosystems, LMRs, and human communities have the potential to provide useful information for natural 

resource decision-making on appropriate temporal and spatial scales. However, coupling across these 

models is not trivial.

Key projection considerations include:

• A capability to downscale and bias-adjust global climate and earth system models to better resolve 

regional responses of marine, coastal and freshwater ecosystems to large-scale climate changes.

• Different climate scenarios to examine the effect of management choices on population dynamics, population viability, bioenergetics, multispecies interactions, biodiversity, and species distributions, as well 

as primary and secondary production, habitat structure, energy budgets, food webs, and ecosystems. 

This requires coupling a full suite of models.

• Social and economic models can predict how future change in LMRs may affect working waterfronts; 

commercial, recreational, and subsistence fishermen; aquaculture operations; the seafood industry; 

seafood consumers; and preferences for consumptive and non-consumptive uses of LMRs, but warrants further development and coupling with other LMR and ecosystem models. Coupling these full 

suites of models is also needed.

• Hotspots for change in marine, coastal, and freshwater physical and bio-chemical condition can be 

identified from data as well as via projections with coupled models.

• Indicators that provide early warnings of rapid or impending change to LMRs, marine habitats, and ecosystems (e.g., large shifts in species phenology and distribution) need to be developed, and routinely 

monitored and projected as outputs of models.

This list provides a sense of the magnitude, scope, and types of data-driven modeling efforts required to better 

understand projections of LMRs under future conditions. Any such projections need to be downscaled appropriClimate-Informed 

Reference Points

Management Strategies

Management Processes

Future Projections

Mechanisms of Change

Status,Trends and Early Warnings

Science Infrastructure

Interdependent
30

ately and temporally resolved to achieve robust projections of the state of future marine ecosystems. These projections should focus on short-, medium-, and longer-term time scales. Many NOAA Fisheries mandates require 

projections of population status, and working with climate scientists to provide the climate-related projections is 

increasingly needed to help fill these needs. Earth system models and global climate models do not project best 

at scales of days to weeks, but rather at scales of multiple decades to centuries (Stock et al. 2011). The 3–to 10-

year projections often needed for LMR management fall between the time scales that climate models predict well, 

and this poses a challenge for the future.

In addition to these model-based needs, other important products can be routinely created to meet this objective. 

One of the key outputs from these projections should be the identification of realistic future scenarios and feasible 

management strategies. These can set the stage for management actions by bounding future ranges of probable 

climate conditions. Doing so can minimize exploration of unrealistic scenarios and, thus, ineffective strategies.

NOAA Fisheries and partners should increase efforts to enhance the production, delivery and use of climate-related models/projections in LMR management. Establishing regional and national modeling teams 

focused on improved projections of climate impacts on LMRs and LMR management could help meet these 

needs. Regional modeling teams could, for example, develop and refine models, linkages among models, and 

scenarios that allow end-to-end modeling exercises to project the impacts of changes to climate condition on 

LMRs and ultimately how human communities then modify and adapt their uses of LMRs and ecosystems. 

They could also provide technical advice on the quality and applicability of modeling output. National teams of 

NOAA Fisheries experts could develop best practices for integrating changing climate conditions into modeling 

exercises (e.g., ensemble approach) and help the regions tackle climate change related efforts in a coordinated and consistent way. These teams would also serve as the experts for linking new research and understanding into the development of advice.

Vulnerable Coastal Communities

Assessing climate change vulnerability in Alaska’s fishing communities

Himes et al. 2014 developed a framework of indicators to assess three basic constituents of community vulnerability (exposure, adaptive capacity, and dependence) to climate change. 

Figure 10: Residents of rural Alaska report changes to the geographic distribution and abundance of 

marine resources, increases in storms in the Bering Sea, changes in the distribution and thickness 

of sea ice, and increases in river and coastal erosion. When combined with ongoing socio-economic 

change, climate, weather, and changes in the biophysical system interact in a complex web of feedbacks and interactions that make life in rural Alaska challenging.
31

Important strategies to bolster and better deliver climate-smart projections include:

• Develop a standard modeling toolbox (or at least documented best practices) to link future ocean and 

freshwater states and LMRs, with ability to couple models across types. 

• Establish best practices for modeling under uncertainty (e.g., multi-model inference).

• Research socio-economic consequences of future climate scenarios and LMR, and explore a range of probable 

human LMR-use responses.

• Build on past National Ecosystem Modeling Workshops (NEMoWs).

• Identify ways to integrate research with existing systems and communicate information to 

stakeholders.
32

Objective 5: Identify the mechanisms of climate impacts on ecosys- tems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent human communities.

Understanding how and why changing 

climate can affect LMRs and LMR-dependent human communities can improve 

responses to current impacts, strengthen 

projections of future impacts, and help 

identify strategies to increase resilience. 

This type of process research - as well as 

vulnerability assessments - are key tools 

for identifying which LMRs and ecosystems 

may be most at risk in a changing climate, 

the reasons and mechanisms behind these 

risks, and what actions might reduce risks 

and increase resilience. 

Salmonid Adaptations

How Will Species Adapt? Migration of Adult Sockeye Salmon

Sockeye salmon, like other anadromous fishes, lay eggs in freshwater, migrate to the ocean as juveniles, 

and return to their natal waters to spawn 2 to 4 years later. Like other salmonids, they tend to be highly 

locally adapted to the combination of conditions in their freshwater and marine environments. The Columbia River basin was historically home to many populations of lake-spawning sockeye salmon; several 

populations of these remain, with the largest population found 

in the Okanogan Basin, Canada. Since the Columbia River 

was dammed, however, these fish have faced changes in 

temperature and flow that have altered the natural environment. 

Currently, the Columbia River reaches biologically important 

temperatures more than 2 weeks earlier than it did in the 1950s, 

and experiences a mean temperature in June and July, when 

sockeye migrate, that is about 1.5 oC warmer. In addition, 

mean flow during migration periods is over 50 percent lower 

than it was historically (Quinn and Adams 1996; Quinn et al. 

1997). In response, sockeye salmon have changed both the 

speed and timing of their migration–arriving nearly 11 days earlier at dams along the Columbia than they 

did in the 1950s. Crozier and colleagues (2011) used a modeling approach to determine that an evolutionary response to thermal selection explained up to two-thirds of this trend in earlier arrival time, translating to a shift of about 0.3 days per generation. Most of the remainder of this trend appears to be due 

to a plastic response to changes in flow. The increase in temperature in this system is attributable to both 

impoundments (e.g., dams) and climate change; it is likely to continue as global temperatures increase. 

Importantly, these fish are subject to selective pressures in all of their environments, which may impose 

constraints on the species’ ability to adapt to ongoing rises in temperature. 

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Management Strategies

Management Processes

Future Projections

Mechanisms of Change

Status,Trends and Early Warnings

Science Infrastructure

Interdependent
33

Evaluating Climate Risk for Living Marine Resources

Vulnerability assessments 

Vulnerability assessments identify LMRs, habitats, or human communities that are especially sensitive 

(or especially resilient) to climate change. Such assessments combine exposure to physical conditions 

with sensitivity to these conditions and aim to identify vulnerability. Vulnerability assessments should 

be viewed as iterative, with an update frequency linked to the International Panel on Climate Change 

Assessment Reports (4 to 5 years). They have been developed for fisheries stocks (Mueter et al. 2011; 

Wainwright and Weitkamp 2013) and communities (Gaichas et al. 2014), marine mammals (Boveng et 

al. 2009), highly migratory species, habitats, ecosystems, and human social and economic systems. 

These assessments essentially utilize globally established best practices in risk assessment, particularly 

considering multiple criteria. They are a robust, feasible approach to help “triage” species and habitats 

in an ecosystem.

Figure 11: Methodology used by the NOAA Fisheries Fish Stock Vulnerability Assessment project
34

Shifting Fish Stock Distributions

Marine fisheries distributions are changing in response to climate change. Pinsky et al. (2013) found 

that, in general, changes in species distributions around North America tracked changes in environmental conditions. However, they identified important regional differences. For example, species in 

the Northeast United States shifted northeast on average, but species in the Gulf of Mexico shifted 

southwest; the Gulf Coast precludes a northward shift. These results demonstrate how regional geomorphology and oceanography influence how a species or stock responds to climate change. 

In the Northeast region specifically, Nye et al. (2009) found that approximately two-thirds of the stocks 

investigated shifted distribution. A majority of observed shifts were northward (~80%) and into deeper 

water (~85%). However, some stocks moved to the south and some moved into shallow water. These 

results demonstrate the importance of the interaction between climate change and individual species 

life history and ecology. 

Changes in fishery distributions can result from shifts in individuals or spatial changes in population 

productivity. For example, the distribution of Atlantic surfclam has changed on the northeast U.S. 

shelf (Weinberg et al. 2005). Surfclams are sessile as adults, and the changes in distribution have 

been linked to increased mortality (decreased productivity) at the southern end of the range owing 

to increasing temperatures. In contrast, the distribution of Atlantic mackerel has changed, and this is 

at least partially linked to a change in migration and in overwintering habitats as a result of warming 

(e.g., changes in individual distribution; Overholtz et al. 2011; Radlinski et al. 2013). 

Changes in distribution can be caused by any one of several stressors; the two primary stressors are 

climate change and fishing. Bell et al. (2014) found that the northward movement of summer flounder 

was related to increasing age-class structure over time, which is likely a result of decreased fishing 

and stock rebuilding. In contrast, the northward movement of scup and black sea bass was related to 

warming. These results emphasize the importance of documenting trends in distribution, studying the 

mechanisms that cause changes in distribution, and then transitioning this information into advice for 

use by LMR managers (see Link et al. 2011a; Link et al. 2011b). 

Atlantic surfclam, Atlantic mackerel, summer flounder, scup (Credit: NOAA)
35

Vulnerability assessments are important tools to help identify species at higher risk in a changing climate, 

some reasons for these risks, and key information needs to better understand risks and adaptive capacity. 

The information from these assessments helps inform where additional science is needed and would be 

most beneficial. It can also suggest where management efforts may need to be focused to help reduce 

risks and increase resilience. Vulnerability assessments should be conducted for LMRs in all regions to 

help guide more specific research and possible management actions. Vulnerability assessment tools for 

LMR-dependent communities should also be developed to track and assess vulnerability under current and 

projected climate conditions. 

Laboratory or field process research is critical to understanding the mechanisms underlying how and why 

species, ecosystems, habitats, and human systems are affected by climate related changes. Process 

research provides the information needed to design effective observing systems to track change, build early 

warning systems and strengthen models that project future conditions. Process research can also provide 

the information needed to develop effective management strategies that increase adaptive capacity and 

resilience to climate-related changes. 

In short, climate change can affect LMRs via changes in:

• Genotype (natural selection, selective breeding).

• Vital rates (reproductive rate, emigration, immigration).

• Physiology rates (growth, consumption, respiration, metabolism, thermal tolerance).

• Susceptibility to disease.

• Trophic interactions.

These changes can result in a variety of subsequent changes to:

• Mortality.

• Productivity. 

• Species distribution.

• Nutritional value of prey.

• Movement of migratory species. 

• Habitat structure and location.

And those changes can in turn impact other parameters, such as: 

• Species relative abundance. 

• Community composition and predator-prey overlaps.

• Food web structure. 

• Energy and matter fluxes.

• Invasive species.

• Life history. 

Because of the sensitivity of species physiology to environmental conditions, changing environmental 

conditions may affect the distribution, migration, depth, and behavior of some species (see text boxes). 

Improving our understanding of how and why this change may occur provides mechanistic understandings 

needed for development and implementation of robust NOAA Fisheries management strategies. 

Laboratory and field investigations can be targeted to reduce uncertainty about species tolerance,
36

response, and adaptive capacity to changing climate conditions and to the rate of change of environmental 

conditions. Laboratory experiments can examine the direct effects of single climate factors, the direct combined effect of multiple climate factors, and the indirect effects of changing climate conditions on species 

interactions, energetics, and resilience. 

Field studies on the response of managed and ecologically important species to different environmental conditions can range from targeted, hypothesis-driven work to analysis of long-term survey data with relevant environmental parameters. Studies of ecological communities build knowledge on the functional role of biodiversity in 

maintaining ecological and ecosystem resilience. 

Likewise, ethnographic fieldwork can be done to capture the processes that fishing-dependent communities 

use to respond and adapt to changing environmental conditions. Socio-economic analysis of LMR-user 

behavior over time can help explain historical patterns in resource use and how that use may change given 

future conditions. Additionally, enhancing social science capabilities can help elucidate patterns of vulnerability and promote community resilience in the face of climate change. Particularly needed are the data and 

analyses of changes in LMR-dependent communities, including both coastal communities and fisheries-related industries that will lead to improved understanding and prediction of social and economic changes 

resulting from the ecological effects of climate change.

NOAA Fisheries current capacity to conduct process-based research will not meet the demand for understanding how aquatic species, ecosystems, and LMR-dependent human communities may respond, 

acclimate, or adapt to climate change. Developing this capacity will require significant financial investment 

in state-of-the-art experimental facilities for rearing organisms under expected future conditions, the equipment needed to conduct research in field settings, and the up-to-date laboratory equipment required to 

process samples rapidly. In some cases, NOAA Fisheries has the needed assets, but will need to reprioritize them to most efficiently apply these assets to process studies related to climate change. 

NOAA Fisheries needs to articulate the need for process-based research throughout the organization and 

beyond, then incorporate new understanding from this research into management advice. Strong partnerships with research institutions and funding agencies (e.g., National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Energy, Department of the 

Interior, and other NOAA Line Offices; Table 2) are critical to helping fill these needs.

A number of products should be routinely created to meet this objective. To properly target research, an 

assessment that identifies the major gaps in the research useful for generating data to inform management 

under climate change is needed for each region. The items above should be compiled into a national inventory of data gaps. Any such research pursuit would be in relation to one of the main climate-change-induced 

pressures on the physio-chemical environment noted in Figure 2. This would need to be followed by research 

into the socio-economic responses of human communities to such changes.

Research undertaken to meet this objective can be used to develop updated parameters for LMR and 

ecosystem models. Providing revisions to model functional form, structure, and parameterization will afford 

better predictive capabilities of LMR responses to a changing climate and ocean. Additionally, targeted 

process research can be used to develop mitigation strategies for either reducing climate impacts on LMRs 

or providing for lost value and services to human communities due to climate change. For example, 
37

development and/or restoration of kelp forests and eel grass beds may provide some protection from ocean 

acidification, low oxygen, and storms. Similarly, researchers are testing whether seaweed and shellfish 

farms may provide similar ecosystem services important in a changing climate if expanded over a larger 

area of the ocean than natural beds (e.g., Chung et al. 2013). Aquaculture provides an opportunity to 

explore human intervention to reduce climate change impacts to vulnerable life stages and species. 

Important strategies to bolster and better deliver climate-related process research include:

• Identify process research gaps in each region.

• Develop additional NOAA process research capacity internally and through competitive funding 

opportunities. 

• Develop and maintain partnerships to conduct climate-LMR-related research. 

• Organize and host regular national climate workshops with LMR emphasis for NOAA employees 

across line-office and external partners to advance research efforts and promote collaboration.

• Develop and maintain partnerships with international and other organizations to conduct LMR-climate 

workshops. 

• Organize and host regional thematic workshops related to LMR response to climate change (regime 

shift, distribution shift, vital rates, etc.). 

• Conduct research to identify a suite of proposed mitigation strategies, including those targeted at 

LMR-dependent human communities.

• Strengthen core science partnerships with formal mechanisms, especially with academic institutions, 

NASA, USGS, NSF, EPA, etc.

Although more process research could be conducted to inform management decisions, and although copious uncertainty about species performance in a changing climate context persists, common themes and 

consistent patterns related to climate change could provide the basis upon which NOAA Fisheries can act. 

Not knowing a particular functional form, mechanistic detail, or relationship between LMR responses and 

climate variables should not preclude NOAA Fisheries from acting in situations that have generally known 

LMR and ecosystem response trajectories.
38

Partnerships Are Critical To Understanding and Responding to 

Changing Conditions

One of NOAA Fisheries’ key sources and partners for climate-related information is the NOAA Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Research (OAR). NOAA Fisheries and OAR scientists have 

collaborated successfully for decades to better understand past, 

current and possible future impacts of climate variability and 

change in marine and coastal ecosystems. Sustaining and expanding these cross-NOAA partnerships is essential for addressing multiple objectives in this Strategy. 

An outstanding example of this collaboration is the EcoFOCI (Ecosystems & Fisheries-Oceanography 

Coordinated Investigations) program. EcoFOCI is a joint venture between the Alaska Fisheries Science 

Center and the OAR Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory to provide information on current and 

possible future climate impacts on the Bering Sea marine ecosystem for use in fisheries management 

and protected species conservation. 

EcoFOCI researchers work to track changes climate-related changes in ocean conditions, improve 

understanding of how changes in ecosystem functioning (atmospheric, oceanographic, biological) 

impact fish stocks (recruitment, abundance, distribution) and food webs for use in management considerations. To do this, the EcoFOCI maintains the region’s longest running climate/ocean monitoring 

program - a system of moored bouys that has provided critical information on past and current Bering 

Sea climate/ocean conditions for over 20 years. The system has been providing year-round measurements of temperature, salinity, nitrite, chlorophyll, and currents in this highly productive area since 1994. 

These measurements are used in annual report cards and stock assessments provided to the North 

Pacific Fishery Management Council. Long-term time-series at this site are a critical tool for adapting to 

climate change and guiding sustainable management of living resources in the Bering Sea. 

EcoFOCI combines these monitoring efforts with research initiatives to better understand the implications of climate/ocean changes on fish stocks. For example, in the Bering Sea, studies are underway 

that connect climate-mediated oceanographic shifts to energy transfer through the food web and 

ultimately to fisheries population fluctuations. In the Arctic ecosystems (Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea), 

research on changes in sea ice, oceanography, plankton, fish and marine mammals are supplemented 

with data derived from long-term oceanographic mooring arrays to identify the mechanisms of climate 

impacts in these systems. By combining long term monitoring with targeted research, this collaborative 

program is providing decision makers with much needed information on current and possible future 

conditions that is being actively used in fisheries management and protected species conservation. 

For more information see:

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/project/ecosystem-fisheries-oceanography-coordinated-investigations
39

Objective 6: Track trends in ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent 

human communities and provide early warning of change.

Information on the status and trends of 

ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent 

human communities is essential to tracking 

and providing early warning of the impacts 

of climate change. This information is the 

foundation of sound science advice and 

sustainable management of LMRs under 

changing conditions. NOAA Fisheries has 

excelled at producing data-based assessments of LMR status and trends for science-based management. Some of these 

assessments explicitly incorporate climate 

change data, but most do not. NOAA Fisheries has three main needs related to this objective:

• Monitoring programs to track LMRs, ecosystem dynamics, and LMR-dependent human communities.

• Development of good physical, biological, and socio-economic indicators for tracking trends related 

to climate change and early warning signals of change.

• Regular reports to present and interpret monitoring data while considering the effects of climate 

change.

Climate change related biophysical data—such as observed trends in water temperature, upwelling indices, 

sea level height, biogeochemistry, food web structure, or regional hydrology—need to be regularly incorporated into LMR, ecosystem, and habitat status reports. These form the basis from which links between 

change in physical conditions and biotic variables can be established (Figure 2). Information on the status 

and trends of ecosystems, LMRs, and resource-dependent communities is needed to modify management 

reference points for LMRs, habitats, ecosystems, and human communities to incorporate climate change 

and its impacts (e.g., NOAA Office of Coastal Management 2014). 

An important and regular product should be ecosystem status reports (ESRs and related ecosystem 

advisories, chapters, etc.). ESRs provide multi-dimensional examination of the ecosystem from physical 

and habitat condition to trends in LMR abundance and resource use by fleets and communities.9 Typically 

they include brief narratives describing trends within the numerous time series analyses presented. Even 

apart from formal modeling through to specific biological reference points, the information provided in these 

ESRs has been useful for providing broader context and as leading indicators to inform LMR management. 

ESRs are critical tools for tracking and preparing for change in marine and coastal ecosystems. ESRs 

should be fully developed in all NOAA Fisheries regions to provide managers with up to date information on 

current conditions and early warnings of impending changes in ecosystem conditions. Building on existing 

efforts, ESRs should be enhanced by interpreting detected changes within the current understanding of 

ecological processes of each large marine ecosystem. Adding climate change projections to these status 

9

 http://www.noaa.gov/iea/

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Management Strategies

Management Processes

Future Projections

Mechanisms of Change

Status,Trends and Early Warnings

Science Infrastructure

Interdependent
40

Changing climate implications on the food web

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation, Food Chain Structure, and Salmon Returns to the Columbia River

Mantua et al. (1997) showed that changes in the sign of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO, a basin scale 

climate indicator) translate into changes in salmon returns (a local response) throughout the North Pacific. 

When the PDO is in a warm phase, returns are relatively low for salmon that spawn in the Columbia River 

system and other rivers that discharge into the California Current. The opposite is true during the cool phase 

of the PDO. This is illustrated below, where it is shown that from 1980 through 1998, the PDO was in warm 

phase (red bars) and salmon returns were below average (blue bars). When the PDO turned negative (to 

cool phase) in late 1998, salmon returns rebounded with a 2-year lag for spring Chinook (which spend 2 

years at sea) and with a 3-year lag for fall Chinook (which spend 3 years at sea). The PDO changed sign 

again in 2003 (warm phase) and 2008 (cool phase), and salmon again responded predictably to these changes. (http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/ and click on “Salmon Forecasts”) 

A mechanism for these sudden changes in salmon returns was offered recently by Hooff and Peterson (2006) 

and Keister et al. (2011). They showed that changes in zooplankton (copepod) community composition were 

closely linked with the PDO. Further, they pointed out that cold-water copepod communities are dominated 

by species that are relatively large and enriched with lipids, especially omega-3 fatty acids, which are needed 

and desired by young salmon. 

Hooff and Peterson (2006) and Keister et al. (2011) hypothesized that the mechanism linking the PDO with 

salmon returns is related to the source waters that feed the northern California Current and the species composition of copepods in these source waters. During negative PDO, the bulk of the water entering the northern California Current is from the coastal Gulf of Alaska and the zooplankton are dominated by large lipid-rich 

copepods; when the PDO is in positive phase, the source waters are from offshore and small subtropical 

copepods (which lack 

significant amounts 

of lipids) are transported to the northern 

California Current. 

Salmon returns are 

high during the cool 

phase of the PDO because the food chain 

is bio-energetically 

enriched with lipids 

from the cold-water 

copepods and these 

lipids are transferred 

up the food chain, 

through the krill and 

forage fish upon which 

salmon feed. 

Figure 12: (Left) PDO and returns of Columbia River spring and fall Chinook 

over time (NOAA Northwest Fisheries Science Center 2014).(Right) PDO and 

copepod community composition index anomaly over time (from Keister et 

al. 2011; Batchelder et al. 2013, with updated data from B. Peterson, NOAA 

NWFSC). 
41

reports is an important need and will provide information about the projected future states of the ecosystem. 

Integrating data-sets of climate change that are current, are specific to the management tasks, and represent state-of-the-art understanding requires that synthesis products be developed and regularly updated. 

ESRs are high return on investment products that meet shared information requirements of multiple NOAA

Fisheries stewardship mandates. They are an essential tool for providing customized information and early 

warnings of climate impacts on LMRs in each region, and provide the foundation for synthesizing information across regions to assess nation-wide changes and impacts. 

Deciding on which indicators to include in an ecosystem status report requires knowledge of ecosystem 

structure and function, the biogeochemical processes that influence the ecosystem, human use of and 

impacts on the ecosystem, and vulnerability of the ecosystem and LMR-dependent communities to climate 

change. Investing time and resources into the evaluation and development of useful indicators is an important task to undertake when designing ecosystem-climate observing systems and ecosystem status reports 

(Peterson et al. 2014). Necessary new indicators of change could be identified as the impacts of climate 

change develop. 

Further, the biological and physical indicators developed from ESRs can be used to establish future thresholds and decision criteria (Samhouri et al. 2010; Fay et al. 2013; Large et al. 2013). This empirical exploration of ecosystem, habitat, and aggregate groups of LMR BRPs has been solidly rooted in such indicators. The full suite of multidimensional data can be noisy and typically incorporates multiple patterns (e.g., 

warming trend overlaid on El Niño-Southern Oscillation and Pacific Decadal Oscillation). Complex statistical 

techniques can distinguish the multiple drivers of change through time series analysis and are used to isolate signals in the data. Such statistical and analytical methods are relatively novel, and technique development could also advance NOAA Fisheries understanding of ecosystem state. 

The detection and reporting of status and trends of physical and biological data could also provide commonly needed climate-related data inputs for LMR and ecosystem models. These data vectors or matrices 

can serve as direct inputs, covariates, data modifiers, parameter tuning sets, or similar value in a host of 

LMR and ecosystem models. 

Important strategies to bolster current status estimates include:

• Utilize climate vulnerability risk analyses to conduct triage and prioritization for climate change science related to LMR management. 

• Develop and maintain standard climate-LMR report cards (i.e., ESRs) to communicate data and 

understanding to all stakeholders. 

• Conduct regional assessments of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges related to 

LMR science and management in the face of climate change. 

• Emphasize the critical need for ongoing monitoring in science planning and budgeting processes. 

• Train staff in multi-variate time-series analyses.

• Engage in scoping exercises related to LMR science and management in the face of climate change 

with partners and constituents. Partner with outside organizations to help collect and share data.
42

Objective 7: Build and main- tain the science infrastruc- ture needed to fulfill NOAA 

Fisheries mandates under 

changing climate conditions.

Adequate scientific infrastructure is critical to the science enterprise described in 

this Strategy. However, NOAA Fisheries 

existing infrastructure is not yet adequate 

to meet those science needs. Here, we 

identify existing programs that should be 

better coordinated, or expanded to meet the needs outlined in the Strategy with minimal disruption to NOAA

Fisheries as it fulfills its mandates. Clearly there is a general need for increased capacity (and expanded 

partnerships) to link climate change and LMRs. But what would that entail? 

Observational data on the physical and chemical conditions that freshwater, coastal, and marine organisms 

experience in their environment are a fundamental part of understanding species response to ocean and 

climate change. While NOAA Fisheries supports a variety of biological, physical, and human system monitoring efforts that inform fisheries and ecosystem management, these efforts fall short of what is needed 

to adequately track the impacts of climate change. An enhanced system that inventories current observing 

efforts, identifies gaps in these efforts, fills gaps with new observations, makes data readily available to 

scientists and stakeholders, and allows integration across data types collected in the system is required 

to meet NOAA Fisheries needs today and in the future. Doing so would provide the data needed to deliver 

core information on the status and trends of marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems and human systems under climate change, and could provide early warnings of rapid or impending changes. 

Building and maintaining an adequate physical, chemical, and biological observing system will require a 

variety of critical science infrastructure, including ship time, remote observing assets, establishment of key 

partnerships, and personnel to collect and process samples. Ideally, a large component of the modified 

observing system would be ongoing fisheries oceanography and LMR monitoring time series, but paired 

with simultaneous physical-chemical observations in both marine and freshwater systems. Building and 

maintaining an adequate observation system for fishing- and LMR-dependent community resource use and 

overall well-being will require a similar amount of effort given the sheer amount of time required to collect 

and analyze socio-economic data. Where gaps exist between projected needs and ongoing time series, to 

the extent feasible, NOAA Fisheries should increase support for existing activities and initiate new observational time series to generate data relevant to managing LMRs and human communities over the coming 

decades. Ideally, observing efforts would include concurrent, integrated, interdisciplinary collection of physical, chemical, biological, and socio-economic data. 

To succeed in implementing the Strategy, NOAA Fisheries will need to evaluate and possibly adopt novel 

and advanced sampling approaches and invest in enhanced computing technologies and laboratory assets. 

Taking advantage of the efficiencies and precision these devices can provide will open up new data-sets 

requisite for tracking climate change (e.g., underwater gliders to measure physical and chemistry conditions, accurate and precise ocean carbon chemistry sensors, and acoustic monitoring of fish populations). 

Climate-Informed 

Reference Points

Management Strategies

Management Processes

Future Projections

Mechanisms of Change

Status,Trends and Early Warnings

Science Infrastructure

Interdependent
43

Many of the observing systems and modeling exercises described above, especially future projections and 

hind-casting, require computing systems that can store large data-sets and are fast enough to complete 

scenarios in a reasonable amount of time. Expansion of computing systems is required to meet these 

needs. Collection of high-quality species-response data will require laboratories with specialized equipment 

and animal holding facilities to elucidate physiological and genetic responses of LMR’s to future conditions 

(e.g., Northwest Fisheries Science Center’s ocean acidification experimental system).

Improved data access and data visualization tools are necessary for fully sustaining and supporting the 

science enterprise outlined in the Strategy and implementing the Strategy successfully over time. Maintaining 

data archives accessible inside and outside of NOAA Fisheries, as appropriate, with appropriate database 

infrastructural elements is one step towards doing so. Development of data visualization tools would facilitate 

the uptake and understanding of data related to climate change. 

Staffing considerations are key for addressing this strategy. Dedicated LMR-climate staff are needed in 

the Science Centers and Regional Offices to help produce, deliver, and use climate-related information in 

fulfilling NOAA Fisheries mission activities. There is also a need for training and development of analytical 

capacity for NOAA Fisheries personnel. Research and provision of climate-smart management advice is 

predicated upon a workforce with the vision, understanding, and capability to analytically address the needs 

described throughout this Strategy. Additional analytical billets, quantitative training, and increased awareness of climate-change needs are warranted to increase the production, delivery, and use of climate-related 

information in fulfilling NOAA Fisheries mission activities.

Many entities outside of NOAA Fisheries collect data, conduct research, build models, and develop predictions that are useful for projecting future states of LMRs, habitats, ecosystems, human communities, 

and their use of LMRs under climate change (Table 2). Communication of the utility of these resources 

and their contribution to NOAA Fisheries LMR mandates should be highlighted by NOAA Fisheries. NOAA 

Fisheries has a foundation of partnerships within NOAA and with other entities (e.g., state and other federal 

agencies, academia, industry, etc.; Table 2). Building on and strengthening these internal and external 

foundations are a critical component of developing an efficient and comprehensive capacity for modeling 

future states. Gaps in scope and capacity of NOAA Fisheries programs will need to be filled by expanding 

existing, and establishing new, partnerships with programs outside the agency.

Important strategies to bolster and better deliver climate-smart science infrastructure include:

• Increase the Fisheries Oceanography (e.g. Fisheries and the Environment (FATE), and Integrated 

Ecosystem Assessment (IEA)) program budgets, including investment in socio-economic research. 

• Maintain 10 percent of overall NOAA Fisheries science budget directed to process-oriented research. 

• Establish dedicated climate-LMR FTEs at each fisheries Science Center with a portion of their time 

dedicated to coordinating with managers in NOAA Fisheries Regional Offices through regional teams. 

• Bolster NOAA Fisheries climate-LMR coordination nationally.

• Continue and expand NOAA Fisheries participation in cross-governmental efforts related to climate 

change.

• Increase partnerships with the Ocean Observing networks, Sea Grant, and regional climate centers.
44

CHAPTER 3

Moving Forward

Given the scale of U.S. dependence on LMRs- and the expected pace, scale, and scope of climate-related 

impacts on marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems-immediate action is needed to understand, prepare 

for, and respond to these changes in ways that reduce impacts and increase resilience of LMRs for current 

and future generations (Osgood 2008; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013; Melillo et al. 

2014). This Strategy provides a blueprint for increasing the production, delivery, and use of the climate-related information needed to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mandates in a changing climate. It is intended to provide 

a national framework that can be regionally tailored and implemented through NOAA Fisheries Science 

Centers, Regional Offices, and their partners via existing planning processes. Implementation of the Strategy over the next 3-5 years is critical for effective fulfillment of the NOAA Fisheries mission and mandates in 

a changing climate. 

This Strategy identifies seven priority objectives and specific actions to address them. Many of the recommendations are designed to address common needs across mandates, regions, and LMRs, so implementation of these items could have especially high utility and return on investment. While some impacts of climate change on LMRs are shared across regions, each region has a unique combination of climate-related 

challenges, capabilities, and information needs that will need to be assessed as part of developing Strategy 

implementation plans for each region. The seven objectives are intended to identify areas that should be 

addressed by each region, although the specific actions and priorities should be determined by science and 

management experts in each region. 

The Strategy is designed to provide a consistent, national framework that is primarily implemented through 

regional action plans. The regional action plans should focus on building regional capacity, products, and 

services under the seven priority objectives based on evaluation of regional, climate-related, LMR information needs, and of the existing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges to address them. 

While the particular timeline for implementation will depend on specific budget realities, regional action 

plans are expected to guide implementation of this Strategy through a variety of means, including adjustments to programs within existing budgets and initiation of additional efforts using new resources. 

In developing this Strategy, a variety of science and information needs came up repeatedly as priorities to 

be addressed because they were common needs across many mandates and regions. Addressing these 

needs is key to meeting a variety of other requirements and, if filled, would advance climate-ready LMR 

management over the next 3-5 years. 

The following is a list of recommendations to help implement this Strategy. Implementing these recommendations will efficiently and effectively increase the production, delivery, and use of climate-related information in NOAA Fisheries LMR management and thereby reduce impacts and increase resilience of LMRs 

and the people that depend on them. 

PRIORITY ACTIONS:

Three main products or activities consistently emerge across all seven priority objectives in the Strategy. We 

highlight these here as the prioritized actions that will best help NOAA Fisheries address its mandates in a more 
45

climate-ready manner. We recommend these be adopted and executed as soon as is appropriate, given the 

other, more time-constrained or infrastructural needs subsequently identified below.

1. Conduct climate vulnerability analyses in each region for all LMRs.

2. Establish and strengthen ecosystem and socio-economic indicators and status reports in all regions. 

3. Develop capacity to conduct management strategy evaluations regarding climate change impacts on 

management targets, priorities, and goals.

PRIORITY NEAR-TERM ACTIONS:

The following are key near-term recommendations to advance implementation of this Strategy in the 6 to 24 

months after the release of this report:

1. Strengthen climate-related science capacity within each region and nationwide.

a. Bolster national and region-level capacity for implementing the Strategy and advancing LMR-ecosystem-climate initiatives to support implementation

b. Establish dedicated LMR-climate leads at Science Centers and Regional Offices to increase coordination, priority setting, evaluation, and implementation of the Strategy at regional levels. 

c. Establish regional climate-LMR teams composed of Science Center, Regional Office, and external 

partners to help strengthen the production, delivery, use, and evaluation of climate-related information 

in LMR management. 

d. Strengthen production and delivery of output from climate-driven regional ocean models used for 

projecting climate impacts on LMRs

e. Strengthen production and delivery of output from climate-driven regional models of temperature, 

precipitation, and other factors used for projecting climate impacts on LMRs in coastal and freshwater habitats.

2. Develop regional-level implementation plans to execute this Strategy based on Science Center, 

Regional Office, and external partners’ assessment of: 

a. Specific climate-LMR issues in the region.

b. Barriers to producing, delivering, and incorporating climate-related information into LMR management. 

c. Major climate-related data and information gaps in the region.

d. Existing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges to implement the Strategy.

3. Ensure that adequate resources are dedicated to climate-related, process-oriented research (target – 

10% NOAA Fisheries Science Budget).

a. Initiate or expand partnerships with key science providers (e.g., OAR, NASA, USGS, NSF) to 

leverage and attract resources to help meet NOAA Fisheries climate-related science and information needs. 

b. Leverage planned and new initiatives.

4. Establish standard, climate-smart terms of reference to apply to all of NOAA Fisheries LMR management, environmental compliance requirements, and other processes that cross multiple mandates 

and core policy areas.
46

PRIORITY MEDIUM-TERM ACTIONS:

The following are key medium-term recommendations to advance implementation of this Strategy. These 

are intended to be ongoing with significant progress (e.g., first phase completed) within 2 to 5 years after 

the release of this report:

Workshops and training

1. Establish regular, NOAA-wide, national, climate-science workshops with LMR emphasis, with a focus 

on climate-ready BRPs and science for setting Harvest Control Rules, ESA evaluations (section 7 

and section 10), essential fish habitat consultations, aquaculture, and NEPA analyses in a changing 

climate. 

2. Increase awareness of and training for NOAA Fisheries science and management staff on the impacts of climate change on LMRs and climate-informed LMR management practices.

3. Organize and conduct regime-shift detection workshops for each region.

4. Organize and conduct distribution shift workshops, with implications for stock and population identification and unit area across all LMRs in each region.

5. Organize and conduct vital rate workshops, with implications for LMR life-history parameters across 

all LMRs in each region.

6. Organize and conduct workshops aimed at identifying regional data gaps (biological, physical, and 

socio-economic) related to climate variability and change and devising data collection programs 

aimed at filling those gaps, especially socio-economic gaps.

Engagement and outreach

7. Develop and execute national and regional science communication plans for increasing dissemination of climate-related LMR science and information to technical users and other interested stakeholder audiences.

8. Expand and support engagement with international partners to advance the production, delivery, and 

use of climate-related information (e.g., Climate-LMR related workshops, symposia, meetings, etc.) 

with specific focus on climate-informed biological reference points, climate-smart Harvest Control 

Rules, management strategy evaluations for climate-ready LMR management (including species and 

habitat recovery) and, climate-smart protected species and habitat consultations.

9. Continue and expand NOAA Fisheries participation in cross-governmental, national efforts to advance climate-related science.

Science to inform policy

10. Work with partners to re-evaluate risk policies under changing climate and ocean conditions.

11. Establish science-based approaches for shifting biological reference points to account for changing 

productivities, distributions, and diversities.

12. Conduct management strategy evaluations on climate scenarios in extant ecosystem and population 

models in conjunction with the NOAA IEA program, NOAA Fisheries Stock Assessment Improvement Plan Update/Next Generation Stock Assessment, NOAA Fisheries Protected Resources Stock 

Assessment Improvement Plan, and development of ESA Five-Year Status Reviews.

13. Establish science-based thresholds for exiting and entering fisheries.

14. Establish and implement clear policies and practices for incorporating climate change into all NEPA 

and ESA (i.e., listing, recovery planning, interagency consultations, and permitting) activities. 
47

15. Establish and implement standards and guidelines for incorporating climate change information into 

Fisheries Management Plans and Fisheries Ecosystem Plans.

16. Develop and implement standards and practices to promote climate resilience and climate mitigation 

in NOAA Fisheries habitat conservation activities.

17. Develop climate-driven regional ocean models for use in projecting climate impacts on LMRs.

Science planning and management

18. Develop a national inventory of key science and information gaps related to NOAA Fisheries LMR 

and socio-economic responsibilities, building on regional data/information gap assessments. 

19. Increase support for existing programs addressing priority needs and objectives identified in this 

Strategy (e.g., Fisheries Oceanography, FATE, and IEAs). 

20. Establish common climate-smart input data vectors/matrices for inclusion in LMR assessments in 

conjunction with NOAA Fisheries Stock Assessment Improvement Plan Update/Next Generation 

Stock Assessment and Protected Resources Stock Assessment Improvement Plan, and development 

of ESA Five-Year Status Reviews.

21. Identify and support process research linking changing climate and ocean conditions to LMR dynamics.

22. Identify and maintain capability to execute oceanographic cruises for climate-smart observations and 

process research.

23. Increase capability to undertake climate-smart, socio-economic research projects and analyses of 

human uses of LMRs and their ecosystems.

24. Develop climate-resilient and climate-mitigating aquaculture strategies.
48

SUMMARY

Changes in the planet’s climate system are affecting the nation’s valuable marine, coastal, and freshwater 

LMRs. These impacts are expected to significantly increase with continued changes in the climate system. 

These impacts will affect the valuable services LMRs provide the nation; the many people, businesses, 

and communities that depend on them (Osgood 2008; Doney et al. 2012; Melillo et al. 2014); and NOAA 

Fisheries LMR management efforts. 

This Strategy presents seven key objectives to increase the production, delivering and use of climate-related information needed to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mission in a changing climate. The Strategy is part of a 

broader effort that includes adopting ecosystem-based management to strengthen NOAA Fisheries capacity to fulfill its mandates (MacLeod and Leslie 2009; Link 2010). It identifies a series of high utility actions 

that will meet information needs across multiple mandates and should be given high priority for near-term 

implementation. When implemented, these efforts will deliver high value information, tools and approaches 

to address priority needs across mandates, regions, and LMRs. The commonality of information needed 

across mandates should be useful to gain efficiencies in how that material is produced and delivered.

The Strategy identifies actions that NOAA Fisheries can do now that will yield a high return on investment. 

Additional actions will be needed over the next 3-5 years to fully implement the strategy. Addressing these 

science and management challenges will require cross-cutting efforts that span NOAA Fisheries LMR 

stewardship mandates (Figure 4), as well as increased collaborations and contributions from many NOAA

Fisheries partners (Table 2). 
49

GLOSSARY

Adaptation: (1) An adjustment in natural or human systems to a new or changed environment that exploits beneficial opportunities or moderates negative effects (Melillo et al. 2014); (2) Minimizing the impact 

of climate change on fish and wildlife through the application of cutting-edge science in managing species 

and habitats (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2010).

Biological Reference Point(s): A biological benchmark against which the abundance of the stock 

or the fishing mortality rate can be measured in order to determine its status. These reference points can be 

used as limits or targets, depending on their intended usage (Blackhart et al. 2006).

Calcite saturation states: (The availability of carbonate ions is crucial for marine calcifying organisms to form their skeletons or shells that are made of different crystalline forms of calcium carbonate, such 

as calcite and aragonite. Aragonite is more soluble than calcite. Thus, the saturation state of aragonite can 

be taken as an indicator for ocean acidification. Website: http://iprc.soest.hawaii.edu/)

Climate Change: Refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g., by using 

statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists for an 

extended period, typically decades or longer (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007).

Climate-smart Harvest Control Rules: A set of well‐defined pre‐agreed rules or actions used 

for determining a management action in response to changes in indicators of stock status with respect to 

reference points in a commercial or recreational fishery. Climate smart HCRs are the same but are based 

on reference points that incorporate climate considerations in their estimation, and/or account for climate 

impacts in adjustments to their rules, policy or actions.

Climate System: The climate system is the highly complex system consisting of five major components: the atmosphere, the hydrosphere, the cryosphere, the lithosphere and the biosphere, and the interactions between them. The climate system evolves in time under the influence of its own internal dynamics 

and because of external forcings such as volcanic eruptions, solar variations and anthropogenic forcings 

such as the changing composition of the atmosphere and land use change (Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change 2013).

Climate Variability: Refers to variations in the mean state and other statistics of the climate on all 

temporal and spatial scales beyond that of individual weather events or seasons (Intergovernmental Panel 

on Climate Change 2007).

Diadromous: Diadromous species spend part of their life-cycle in fresh water and other part in salt 

water. Diadromous is the term used to refer to anadromous, catadromous, or amphidromous species.

Ecosystem connectivity: Ecosystem connectivity is the degree to which the marine ecosystem 

facilitates or impedes movement among different habitats. Connectivity includes both structural connectivity 

(the physical arrangements of habitats) and functional connectivity (the movement of individuals among 

habitats).The degree to which an ecosystem is connected determines the amount of dispersal among habitats, which influences gene flow, local adaptation, extinction risk, colonization probability, and the potential 
50

for organisms to move as they cope with climate change.

Ecosystem-Based Management: Ecosystem-Based Management is an integrated approach to 

management that drives decisions at the ecosystem level to protect the resilience and ensure the health 

of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes. Ecosystem Based Management is informed by science 

and draws heavily on natural and social science to conserve and protect our cultural and natural heritage, 

sustaining diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems and the services they provide, thereby promoting the 

long-term health, security, and well-being of our Nation (Ocean Research Advisory Panel 2013).

Fisheries Ecosystem Plan (FEP): An umbrella document containing information on the structure and function of the ecosystem in which fishing activities occur, so that managers can be aware of the 

effects their decisions have on the ecosystem, and the effects other components of the ecosystem may 

have on fisheries. The document(s) strives to provide Council members with a clear understanding regarding 3 main concepts. First, the biological, physical and human/institutional context of ecosystems in which 

fisheries are managed. Second, direct how that information should be used in the context of FMPs. Finally, 

set policies by which management options would be developed and implemented. 

Fisheries Management Plan: A document prepared under supervision of the appropriate fishery 

management council for management of stocks of fish judged to be in need of management. The plan must 

generally be formally approved. A Fisheries Management Plan includes data, analyses, and management 

measures. A plan containing conservation and management measures for fishery resources, and other 

provisions required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, developed by regional fishery management councils or 

the Secretary of Commerce (Blackhart et al. 2006).

Greenhouse Gas: A gas in the atmosphere of natural or human origin that absorbs and emits thermal 

infrared radiation. Water vapour, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane and ozone are the main greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere. Their net impacts is to trap heat within the climate system (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013).

Harvest Control Rule: A set of well‐defined pre‐agreed-upon rules or actions used for determining a 

management action in response to changes in indicators of stock status with respect to reference points. 

Integrated Ecosystem Assessment: An Integrated Ecosystem Assessment is a formal synthesis 

and quantitative analysis of information on relevant natural and socio-economic factors in relation to specified ecosystem management goals. It involves and informs citizens, industry representatives, scientists, 

resource managers, and policy-makers through formal processes to contribute to attaining the goals of an 

ecosystem approach to management (Levin et al. 2008). 

Intensity of upwelling and downwelling: Upwelling intensity depends on wind strength and 

seasonal variability, as well as the vertical structure of the water column, variations in the bottom bathymetry, and instabilities in the currents. Upwelling is the upward motion of cold, nutrient rich deep water along 

the coast. Downwelling involves the downward motion of warm surface waters along the coast. (NOAA: 

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/upwelling.html)
51

Large Marine Ecosystem: Large Marine Ecosystems are large areas of ocean space, approximately 

200,000 km2 or greater, that have been identified for conservation purposes. They are located in coastal 

waters characterized by unique species, levels of productivity, bathymetry, and hydrography (Blackhart et 

al. 2006).

Management Strategy Evaluation: The evaluation of a strategy adopted by the management 

authority to reach established management goals. In addition to the objectives, it includes choices regarding all or some of the following: access rights and allocation of resources to stakeholders, controls on 

inputs (e.g., fishing capacity, gear regulations), outputs (e.g., quotas, minimum size at landing), and fishing 

operations (e.g., calendar, closed areas, and seasons) (Blackhart et al. 2006).

Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY): MSY is the largest long-term average catch or yield that can 

be taken from a stock or stock complex under prevailing ecological, environmental conditions and fishery 

technological characteristics (e.g., gear selectivity), and the distribution of catch among fleets. MSY is usually estimated in stock assessments. 

Mitigation: Implementing actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or increase the amount of carbon 

dioxide absorbed and stored by natural and man-made carbon sinks (Melillo et al. 2014).

Mixed layer depth: The surface layer of the ocean that is mixed by the action of wind, waves and tides 

so that the waters are nearly isothermal and isohaline; underlain by a pycnocline.

Nutrient availability: Chemicals (such as nitrogen and phosphorus) that plants and animals need to 

live and grow. At high concentrations, particularly in water, nutrients can become pollutants.

Ocean acidification: Ocean acidification refers to a reduction in the pH of the ocean over an extended 

period, typically decades or longer, which is caused primarily by uptake of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, but can also be caused by other chemical additions or subtractions from the ocean. Anthropogenic 

ocean acidification refers to the component of pH 

reduction that is caused by human activity (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013).

Ocean Circulation: The large-scale movement of waters in the ocean basins. Winds drive surface 

circulation, and the cooling and sinking of waters in the polar regions drive deep circulation.

Potential Biological Removal: Defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not 

including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to 

reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population. The Potential Biological Removal level is the product 

of the following factors: the minimum population estimate of the stock; one-half the maximum theoretical or 

estimated net productivity rate of the stock at a small population size; and a recovery factor of between 0.1 

and 1.0 (NOAA Fisheries Office of Protected Resources 2014).

Projection: The potential evolution of a quality or set of quantities, often computed with the aid of a model. 

Projections are distinguished from predictions in order to emphasize that projections involve assumptions-–

concerning, for example, future socio-economic and technological developments, that may or may not be realized and are therefore subject to substantial uncertainty (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007)
52

Resilience: Capacity of a natural system (fisheries community or ecosystem) to recover from heavy 

disturbance such as intensive fishing (Blackhart et al. 2006).

Salinity: The weight of dissolved salts in a kilogram of seawater. Because the total amount of salt in the 

ocean does not change, the salinity of seawater can be changed only by addition or removal of fresh-water. 

(IPCC, 2013 pg. 265)

Scenario: A plausible and often simplified description of how the future may develop based on a coherent and internally consistent set of assumptions about key driving forces (e.g., rate of technology change, 

prices) and relationships. Scenarios are neither predictions nor projections and sometimes may be based 

on a “narrative storyline.” Scenarios may be derived from projections but are often based on additional 

information from other sources (Blackhart et al. 2006).

Sensitivity: The degree to which a system is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by climate 

variability or climate change. The effect may be direct (e.g., a change in population size in response to a 

change in the mean, range, or variability of temperature) or indirect (e.g., damages caused by an increase 

in the frequency of coastal flooding due to sea level rise) (adapted from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007).

Vulnerability: The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects 

of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability is a function of the character, 

magnitude, and rate of climate variation to which a system is exposed and its adaptive capacity (Melillo et 

al. 2014). 

Wind mixing: Wind blowing across the surface of the water generates turbulence, which effectively stirs 

or mixes the upper layer of the water column. This process helps to maintain a relatively uniform distribution of temperature, salinity and oxygen in the upper layer, appropriately called the ‘wind-mixed layer’ or 

simply ‘mixed layer’. Changes in wind intensity impact the depth of the layer and changes in the amount of 

turbulence has both positive and negative impacts on organisms that live near the surface.
53

TABLES

Table 1. Key mandate areas for NOAA Fisheries, with notes on authorities, objectives, thresholds, regulatory devices, and analytical frameworks. In general, fulfilling these NOAA Fisheries mandates requires 

consideration of the impacts of climate and other environmental conditions on LMRs. 

NOAA Fisheries Mandated Areas of Emphasis

Fisheries Protected 

Species

Aquaculture Habitat Ecosystems

Primary 

Authorizing 

Mandates

Magnuson-Stevens 

Act

Endangered Species ActNational Aquaculture ActMagnuson-Stevens ActNational 

Environmental 

Policy Act

Marine Mammal 

Protection Act

Endangered 

Species Act

National 

Ocean Policy

Others* Others**

Primary 

Objectives

Prevent 

overfishing, rebuild 

overfished 

stocks, 

realize full 

potential 

benefit to the 

nation 

Conserve, protect, 

and recover protected marine life and 

the ecosystems on 

which they depend 

Provide for the 

development 

of aquaculture 

in the United 

States

Preserve, protect, develop, 

and where possible, restore 

or enhance 

habitat

Consider 

environmental 

and socio-economic impacts 

and evaluate 

cumulative effects when enacting policies 

and planning 

action

Primary 

Thresholds

Annual 

Catch Limits 

(and Targets) 

linked to Optimal Yield †

Minimum Viable 

Population linked to 

Extinction Risk††

Appreciable reduction in population 

viability††

Cost-benefit 

ratio linked 

to economic 

and ecological 

viability

Fractional 

Areas of Degraded Habitat 

(or loss of essential habitat 

features)

Integrative 

Ecosystem Indicator Thresholds linked to 

Pressures
54

Recovered Populations (Optimal, 

Sustainable, Viable) 

††

Cumulative 

Production

Main regulatory or 

management delivery-devices 

to achieve 

objectives

Fishery 

Management 

Plans

Section 4 Listings

Section 7 consultations, Section 

10 take permits 

Permitting of aquaculture farmsRestoration 

Plans 

Essential Fish 

Habitat Designation

Section 7 

consultations, 

Section 10 take 

permits

Environmental 

Impact Statements and 

Social Impact 

Assessments

Rebuilding 

Plans

Conservation 

(Recovery) Plans

Site Reviews Conservation 

(Recovery) 

Plans

Fishery Ecosystem Plans

Site Reviews

Main analytical 

frameworks 

to develop 

thresholds

Stock AssessmentsStock Assessments (Status 

Reviews)

Feasibility AssessmentsHabitat AssessmentsIntegrated 

Ecosystem 

Assessments

*e.g. Coastal Zone Management Act; Clean Water Act; Federal Power Act; Oil Pollution Act; Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act; Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act; American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act

** Many individual Acts have included ecosystem considerations. The challenge is to simultaneously meet 

ecosystem objectives of each Act. 

† proxied by biomass and fishing rate limits

†† or related parameters
55

Table 2. Information collected by other entities that is useful for NOAA Fisheries 

management of living marine resources under a changing climate.

Entity Information

NOAA

 Oceans and Atmospheric Research

Physical and chemical ocean conditions

Physical oceanographic models

Coupled bio-physical models

Climate monitoring and prediction

 National Weather Service

Weather monitoring and prediction

Storm monitoring and prediction

 National Ocean Service

Shoreline monitoring

Estuarine monitoring

 National Environmental Satellite, 

 Data, and Information Service

Ocean and coastal monitoring

Sea ice monitoring

Data management services

 Integrated Ocean Observing System Physical and chemical ocean conditions

Federal agencies
56

 National Aeronautics and Space 

 Administration

Physical ocean monitoring

Ocean productivity monitoring

Ocean circulation monitoring

 Environmental Protection Agency Coastal monitoring

 US Geological Service Stream monitoring

 US Department of Agriculture Food/Seafood supply and demand

 US Army Corps of Engineers River monitoring

 US Census Bureau Demographics, employment, regional economic conditions

Industry 

Fishing effort

Bycatch information

Aquaculture performance
57

Academia

Physical and chemical ocean conditions

Species response to changing conditions

Mechanistic studies

Climate models

Oceanographic models

Ecosystem models

Life-cycle models

Social and economic models

Management strategy evaluation

States

Coastal monitoring

Data on state-managed fisheries

Tribes

Data on tribal-run fisheries

Local traditional knowledge for on the ground changes

Countries 

Data on national fisheries

Data on fisheries in international waters
58

Table 3. Recommended strategies to address each objective

Objective 1:Identify appropriate, climate-informed reference points for managing LMRs.

●	 identify ecosystem-based reference points that include climate change and ecosystem information for all LMR management plans and strategies.

●	 modify existing biological reference points that fail to include ecosystem considerations and 

assume that environmental conditions of the past will persist into the future;

●	 communicate that ecosystem-based biological reference points improve accuracy, especially 

under climate change; 

●	 foster innovation in climate-smart scenario testing;

●	 elucidate the positive opportunities associated with emerging LMRs; and

●	 develop scientific underpinning for Environmental Impacts Statements for climate change in each 

region, including comprehensive socio-economic impact analyses.

Objective 2:Identify robust strategies for managing LMRs under changing climate conditions.

●	 conduct management strategy evaluations and generate other information to allow risk-based 

policies to be re-evaluated under a changing climate; establish science-based approaches and 

policies for determining biological reference points and LMR and ecosystem productivities with 

changing climate and ecosystem conditions; 

●	 establish science-based thresholds and policies for dealing with the immigration and emigration 

of LMRs to/from ecosystems; 

●	 conduct more routine and regular LMR management strategy evaluations with NOAA Fisheries 

partners and constituents to provide science-based assessments of management options in a 

changing climate; 

●	 examine efficacy of proposed mitigation strategies; and

●	 include human behavioral response or motivations into management design. 

Objective 3: Design adaptive decision processes that can incorporate and respond to changing climate 

conditions.

●	 design scientifically sound review-evaluation protocols that could ensure consideration of climate 

change as a standard part of LMR management advice; 

●	 develop and document the scientific basis for the need for climate change considerations in 

legislation or technical guidance; 

●	 identify the many ways that information and understanding related to climate change can be 

inserted into the management process; and 

●	 establish climate-ecosystem criteria that could become a standard part of review of LMR advice
59

Objective 4:Identify future states of marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR -dependent human communities in a changing climate.

●	 develop a standard modeling toolbox or at least documented best practices to link future ocean 

and freshwater states and LMRs, with ability to couple models across types; 

●	 establish best practices for modeling under uncertainty (e.g., multi-model inference);

●	 research socio-economic consequences of future climate scenarios and LMR, and explore range 

of probable human LMR-use responses; and

●	 build on past National Ecosystem Modeling Workshops (NEMoWs).

Objective 5:Identify the mechanisms of climate impacts on ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent 

human communities.

●	 identify process research gaps in each region

●	 develop additional NOAA process research capacity internally and through competitive funding 

opportunities 

●	 develop and maintain partnerships to conduct climate-LMR-related research; 

●	 organize and host regular national climate workshops with LMR emphasis for NOAA employees 

across line-office and external partners to advance research efforts and promote collaboration; 

●	 develop and maintain partnerships with international and other organizations to conduct LMR-climate workshops; 

●	 organize and host regional thematic workshops related to LMR response to climate change 

(regime shift, distribution shift, vital rates, etc.); 

●	 conduct research to identify a suite of proposed mitigation strategies, including those targeted at 

LMR-dependent human communities; and

●	 strengthen core science partnerships with formal mechanisms, especially with academic institutions, NASA, USGS, NSF, EPA, etc.

Objective 6:Track trends in ecosystems, LMRs, and LMR-dependent human communities and provide 

early warning of change.

●	 utilize climate vulnerability risk analyses to conduct triage and prioritization for climate change 

science related to LMR management; 

●	 develop and maintain standard climate-LMR report cards to communicate data and understanding available to all stakeholders; 

●	 conduct regional assessments of strengths, weakness, opportunities, and challenges related to 

LMR science and management in the face of climate change; 

●	 emphasize the critical need of ongoing monitoring in science planning and budgeting processes; 

●	 train staff in time-series analyses; and

●	 engage in scoping exercises related to LMR science and management in the face of climate 

change with partners and constituents.
60

Objective 7: Build and maintain the science infrastructure needed to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mandates 

under changing climate conditions.

●	 increase the Fisheries and the Environment (FATE), Fisheries Oceanography, and IEA program 

budgets, including investment in socio-economic research; 

●	 maintain 10% of overall NOAA Fisheries science budget directed to process-oriented research; 

●	 establish dedicated climate-LMR FTEs at each fisheries Science Center with a portion of their 

time dedicated to coordinating with managers in NOAA Fisheries Regional Offices through 

regional teams; 

●	 bolster NOAA Fisheries climate-LMR coordination nationally; and

●	 continue and expand NOAA Fisheries participation in cross-governmental efforts related to 

climate change.
61

REFERENCES

Anthony KRN, Kline DI, Diaz-Pulido G, Dove S, Hoegh-Guldberg O (2008) Ocean acidification causes 

bleaching and productivity loss in coral reef builders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 

105: 17442-17446

Baker JD, Howell EA, Polovina JJ (2012) Relative influence of climate variability and direct anthropogenic 

impact on a sub-tropical Pacific top predator, the Hawaiian monk seal. Marine Ecology Progress Series 

469: 175-189

Baker JD, Polovina JJ, Howell EA (2007) Effect of variable oceanic productivity on the survival of an upper 

trophic predator, the Hawaiian monk seal Monachus schauinslandi. Marine Ecology Progress Series 346: 

277-283

Barton A, Hales B, Waldbusser GG, Langdon C, Feely RA (2012) The Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas, 

shows negative correlation to naturally elevated carbon dioxide levels: Implications for near-term ocean 

acidification effects. Limnol Oceanogr 57: 698-710

Batchelder HP, Botsford L, Daly K, Davis C, Ji R, Ohman M, Peterson W, Runge J (2013) Climate impacts 

on animal populations and communities in coastal marine systems: forecasting change through mechanistic understanding of population dynamics. Oceanography 26: 34-51

Battin J, Wiley MW, Ruckelshaus MH, Palmer RN, Korb E, Bartz KK, Imaki H (2007) Projected impacts 

of climate change on salmon habitat restoration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104: 

6720-6725

Bednaršek N, Feely RA, Reum JCP, Peterson B, Menkel J, Alin S, Hales B (2014) Limacina helicina shell 

dissolution as an indicator of declining habitat suitability due to ocean acidification in the California Current 

Ecosystem. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 281: 20140123

Beechie T, Imaki H, Greene J. Wade, A., Wu H, Pess G, Roni P, Kimball J, Stanford J, Kiffney P, Mantua N 

(2013) Restoring salmon habitat for a changing climate. River Research and Applications 329: 939-960

Behrenfeld M (2011) Uncertain future for ocean algae. Nature Climate Change 1: 33-34

Bell RJ, Hare JA, Manderson JP, Richardson DE. (2014) Externally driven changes in the abundance of 

summer and winter flounder. ICES Journal of Marine Science 

Blackhart K, Stanton DG, Shimada AM (2006) NOAA Fisheries glossary. US Dept. Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-69

Boughton DA, Pike AS (2013) Floodplain rehabilitation as a hedge against hydroclimatic uncertainty in a 

migration corridor of threatened steelhead. Conservation Biology 27: 1158-1168

Boveng PL, Bengtson JL, Buckley TW, Cameron MF, Dahle SP, Kelly BP, Megrey BA, Overland JE, Wil-
62

liamson NJ (2009) Status review of the spotted seal (Phoca larga). NOAA Technical Memorandum. NMFSAFSC-200

Brainard R, Birkeland C, Eakin C, McElhany P, Miller M, Patterson M, Piniak G (2011) Status review report 

of 82 candidate coral species petitioned under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. U.S. Dept. Commerce, 

NOAA Technical Memorandum, NOAA-TM-NMFS-PIFSC-27

Brainard RE, Weijerman M, Eakin CM, McElhany P, Miller MW, Patterson M, Piniak GA, Dunlap MJ, 

Birkeland C (2013) Incorporating climate and ocean change into extinction risk assessments for 82 coral 

species. Conservation Biology 27: 1169-1178

Bruno JF, Selig ER (2007) Regional decline of coral cover in the Indo-Pacific: timing, extent, and subregional 

comparisons. PLoS ONE 2: e711

Burke L, Reytar K, Spalding M, Perry A (2011) Reefs at risk revisited. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC

Burkett VR, Kirtland DA, Taylor IL, Belnap J, Cronin TM, Dettinger MD, Frazier EL, Haines JW, Loveland 

TR, Milly PCD, O’Malley R, Thompson RS, Maule AG, McMahon G, Striegl RG (2013) U.S. Geological 

Survey climate and land use change science strategy — a framework for understanding and responding to 

global change. U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 1383-A

Busch DS, Greene CM, Good TP (2013) Estimating effects of tidal power projects and climate change on 

threatened and endangered marine species and their food web. Conservation Biology 27: 1190-1200

Carpenter KE, Abrar M, Aeby G, Aronson RB, Banks S, Bruckner A, Chiriboga A, Cortes J, Delbeek JC, 

DeVantier L, Edgar GJ, Edwards AJ, Fenner D, Guzman HM, Hoeksema BW, Hodgson G, Johan O, Licuanan WY, Livingstone SR, Lovell ER, Moore JA, Obura DO, Ochavillo D, Polidoro BA, Precht WF, Quibilan 

MC, Reboton C, Richards ZT, Rogers AD, Sanciangco J, Sheppard A, Sheppard C, Smith J, Stuart S, Turak 

E, Veron JEN, Wallace C, Weil E, Wood E (2008) One-third of reef-building corals face elevated extinction 

risk from climate change and local impacts. Science 321: 560-563

Cheung WWL, Lam VWY, Sarmiento JL, Kearney K, Watson REG, Zeller D, Pauly D (2010) Large-scale redistribution of maximum fisheries catch potential in the global ocean under climate change. Global Change 

Biology 16: 24-35

Chung IK, Oak JH, Lee JA, Shin JA, Kim JG, Park K-S (2013) Installing kelp forests/seaweed beds for mitigation and adaptation against global warming: Korean Project Overview. ICES Journal of Marine Science 

70: 1038-1044

Cooley SR, Doney SC (2009) Anticipating ocean acidification’s economic consequences for commercial 

fisheries. Environmental Research Letters 4: 024007

Crozier LG, Scheuerell MD, Zabel RW (2011) Using time series analysis to characterize evolutionary and 

plastic responses to environmental change: a case study of a shift toward earlier migration date in sockeye 
63

salmon. The American Naturalist 178: 755-773

Crozier LG, Zabel RW, Hamlet AF (2008) Predicting differential effects of climate change at the population 

level with life-cycle models of spring Chinook salmon. Global Change Biology 14: 236-249

De’ath G, Fabricius K, Sweatman H, Puotinen M (2012) The 27-year decline of coral cover on the Great 

Barrier Reef and its causes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109: 17995-17999

Doney SC, Ruckelshaus MH, Duffy JE, Barry JP, Chan F, English C, Galindo HM, Grebmeier JM, Hollowed 

AB, Knowlton N, Polovina J, Rabalais NN, Sydeman WJ, Talley LD (2012) Climate change impacts on 

marine ecosystems. Annual Review of Marine Science 4: 11-37

Dumbauld BR, Kauffman BE, Trimble AC, Ruesink JL (2011) The Willapa Bay oyster reserves in Washington State: fishery collapse, creating a sustainable replacement, and the potential for habitat conservation 

and restoration. J Shellfish Res 30: 71-83

Eakin CM, Lough JM, Heron SF (2009) Climate variability and change: monitoring data and evidence for 

increased coral bleaching stress. In: van Oppen MJH, Lough JM (eds) Coral Bleaching. Springer, Berlin 

Heidelberg, pp 41-67

Eakin CM, Morgan JA, Heron SF, Smith TB, Liu G, Alvarez-Filip L, Baca B, Bartels E, Bastidas C, Bouchon 

C, Brandt M, Bruckner AW, Bunkley-Williams L, Cameron A, Causey BD, Chiappone M, Christensen TRL, 

Crabbe MJC, Day O, de la Guardia E, Díaz-Pulido G, DiResta D, Gil-Agudelo DL, Gilliam DS, N. GR, Gore 

S, Guzmán HM, Hendee JC, Hernández-Delgado EA, Husain E, Jeffrey CFG, J. JR, Jordán-Dahlgren E, 

Kaufman LS, Kline DI, Kramer PA, C. LJ, Lirman D, Mallela J, Manfrino C, Maréchal J-P, Marks K, Mihaly J, 

Miller WJ, Mueller EM, M. ME, Orozco Toro CA, Oxenford HA, Ponce-Taylor D, Quinn N, Ritchie KB, Rodríguez S, Ramírez AR, Romano S, Samhouri JF, Sánchez JA, Schmahl GP, Shank BV, Skirving WJ, Steiner 

SCC, Villamizar E, Walsh SM, Walter C, Weil E, Williams EH, Roberson KW, Yusuf Y (2010) Caribbean 

corals in crisis: record thermal stress, bleaching, and mortality in 2005. PLoS ONE 5: e13969

Executive Order 13547 of July 19th (2010) National Policy for the Stewardship of the Ocean, our Coasts, 

and the Great Lakes. C.F.R. code 75 FR 43021. 

Fay G, Large SI, Link JS, Gamble RJ (2013) Testing systemic fishing responses with ecological indicators: 

an MSE approach. Ecological Modelling 265: 45-55

Feely RA, Sabine CL, Hernandez-Ayon JM, Ianson D, Hales B (2008) Evidence for upwelling of corrosive 

“acidified” water onto the continental shelf. Science 320: 1490-1492

Fogarty M, Incze L, Hayhoe K, Mountain D, Manning J (2008) Potential climate change impacts on Atlantic 

cod (Gadus morhua) off the northeastern USA. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 13: 

453-466

Fulton EA, Link JS, Kaplan IC, Savina-Rolland M, Johnson P, Ainsworth C, Horne P, Gorton R, Gamble RJ, 

Smith ADM, Smith DC (2011) Lessons in modelling and management of marine ecosystems: the Atlantis 
64

experience. Fish and Fisheries 12: 171-188

Gaichas SK, Link JS, Hare JA (2014) A risk-based approach to evaluating Northeast U.S. fish community 

vulnerability to climate change. ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Consell, fsu048 

Gardner, T. A., Côté IM, Gill JA, Grant A, Watkinson AR (2003) Long-term region-wide declines in Caribbean corals. Science 301: 958-960

Gregory R, Arvai J, Gerber LR (2013) Structuring decisions for managing threatened and endangered 

species in a changing climate. Conservation Biology 27: 1212-1221

Griffis R, Howard J (2013) Oceans and marine resources in a changing climate. Technical input to the 2013 

National Climate Assessment. Island Press

Hare JA, Alexander MA, Fogarty MJ, Williams EH, Scott JD (2010) Forecasting the dynamics of a coastal 

fishery species using a coupled climate–population model. Ecological Applications 20: 452-464 

Harvell D, Jordan-Dahlgren E, Merkel S, Rosenberg E, Raymundo L, Smith G, Weil E, Willis B (2007) Coral 

disease, environmental drivers, and the balance between coral and microbial associates. Oceanography 

20: 172-195

Hazen EL, Jorgensen S, Rykaczewski RR, Bograd SJ, Foley DG, Jonsen ID, Shaffer SA, Dunne JP, Costa 

DP, Crowder LB, Block BA (2013) Predicted habitat shifts of Pacific top predators in a changing climate. 

Nature Climate Change 3: 234-238

Heenan A, Pomeroy R, Brainard R, Amri A, Alino P, Armada N, Bell J, Cheung W, David L, Guieb R, Green 

S, Jompa J, Leonardo T, Logan C, Mamauag S, Munday P, Parker B, Shackeroff J, Yasin Z (2013) Incorporating climate change and ocean acidification into an ecosystem approach to fisheries management 

(EAFM) plan. The USAID Coral Triangle Support Partnership

Hilborn R, Mangel M (1998) The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models with Data. Princeton University 

Press, Princeton, NJ

Hoegh-Guldberg O, Mumby PJ, Hooten AJ, Steneck RS, Greenfield P, Gomez E, Harvell CD, Sale PF, Edwards AJ, Caldeira K, Knowlton N, Eakin CM, Iglesias-Prieto R, Muthiga N, Bradbury RH, Dubi A, Hatziolos 

ME (2007) Coral reefs under rapid climate change and ocean acidification. Science 318

Hoeke RK, Jokiel PL, Buddemeier RW, Brainard RE (2011) Projected changes to growth and mortality of 

Hawaiian corals over the next 100 years. PLoS ONE 6: e18038

Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. John Wiley & Sons, Chinchester, 

UK

Hollowed AB, Barange M, Beamish RJ, Brander K, Cochrane K, Drinkwater K, Foreman MGG, Hare JA, 

Holt J, Ito S-i, Kim S, King JR, Loeng H, MacKenzie BR, Mueter FJ, Okey TA, Peck MA, Radchenko VI, 
65

Rice JC, Schirripa MJ, Yatsu A, Yamanaka Y (2013) Projected impacts of climate change on marine fish 

and fisheries. ICES Journal of Marine Science 70: 1023-1037

Hollowed AB, Bond NA, Wilderbuer TK, Stockhausen WT, A’mar ZT, Beamish RJ, Overland JE, Schirripa 

MJ (2009) A framework for modelling fish and shellfish responses to future climate change. ICES Journal of 

Marine Science 66: 1584-1594

Hooff RC, Peterson WT (2006) Copepod biodiversity as an indicator of changes in ocean and climate conditions of the northern California current ecosystem. Limnology and Oceanography 51: 2607-2620

Howella P, Austerb PJ (2012) Phase shift in an estuarine finfish community associated with warming temperatures. Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science 4: 481-495

Ianelli JN, Hollowed AB, Haynie AC, Mueter FJ, Bond NA (2011) Evaluating management strategies for 

eastern Bering Sea walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) in a changing environment. ICES Journal of 

Marine Science 68: 1297-1304

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) Climate change 2007: synthesis report. Contribution 

of workgroups I, II and III to the 4th Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

Core writing team 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. 

Contribution of Working Group 1 to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY USA, pp 1535

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change. In: Field C, Barros V, Mach K, Mastrandrea M (eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY USA

Jorgensen JC, McClure MM, Sheer MB, Munn NL (2013) Combined effects of climate change and bank 

stabilization on shallow water habitats of Chinook salmon. Conservation Biology 27: 1201-1211

Kaplan IC, Levin PS, Burden M, Fulton EA (2010) Fishing catch shares in the face of global change: a 

framework for integrating cumulative impacts and single species management. Canadian Journal of Fisheries Science 67: 1968-1982

Keister JE, Di Lorenzo E, Morgan CA, Combes V, Peterson WT (2011) Zooplankton species composition is 

linked to ocean transport in the Northern California Current. Global Change Biology 17: 2498-2511

Kelly RP, Cooley SR, Klinger T (2013) Narratives can motivate environmental action: the Whiskey Creek 

ocean acidification story. AMBIO: 1-8

Kotwicki S, Lauth RR (2013) Detecting temporal trends and environmentally-driven changes in the spatial 
66

distribution of bottom fishes and crabs on the eastern Bering Sea shelf. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical 

Studies in Oceanography 94: 231-243

Kuffner IB, Andersson AJ, Jokiel PL, Rodgers KuS, Mackenzie FT (2007) Decreased abundance of crustose coralline algae due to ocean acidification. Nature Geosci 1: 114-117

Langdon C, Atkinson MJ (2005) Effect of elevated pCO2 on photosynthesis and calcification of corals and 

interactions with seasonal change in temperature/irradiance and nutrient enrichment. Journal of Geophysical Research 110: C09S07

Large SI, Fay G, Friedland KD, Link JS (2013) Defining trends and thresholds in responses of ecological 

indicators to fishing and environmental pressures. ICES Journal of Marine Science 70

Levin PS, Fogarty MJ, Matlock GC, Ernst M (2008) Integrated ecosystem assessments. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-92

Link JS (2010) Ecosystem-based fisheries management: confronting tradeoffs. Cambridge University 

Press, Cambridge, UK

Link JS, Brodziak JKT, Edwards SF, Overholtz WJ, Mountain D, Jossi JW, Smith TD, Fogarty MJ (2011a) 

Marine ecosystem assessment in a fisheries management context. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and 

Aquatic Sciences 59: 1429-1440

Link JS, Bundy A, Overholtz WJ, Shackell N, Manderson J, Duplisea D, Hare J, Koen-Alonso M, Friedland 

KD (2011b) Ecosystem-based fisheries management in the Northwest Atlantic. Fish and Fisheries 12: 152-

170

Lynch PD, Nye JA, Hare JA, Stock CA, Alexander MA, Scott JD, Curti KL, Drew K. (2015) Projected ocean 

warming creates a conservation challenge for river herring populations. ICES Journal of Marine Science 

72(2):374-387.

MacLeod KO, Leslie HM (2009) Ecosystem-based management for the oceans. Island Press, Washington, 

D.C.

McClure MM, Alexander M, Borggaard D, Boughton D, Crozier L, Griffis R, Jorgensen JC, Lindley ST, Nye 

J, Rowland MJ, Seney EE, Snover AMY, Toole C, Van Houtan K (2013) Incorporating climate science in 

applications of the U.S. Endangered Species Act for aquatic species. Conservation Biology 27: 1222-1233

Melillo JM, Richmond TC, Yohe GW (2014) Climate change impacts in the United States: the third national 

climate assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, pp 841

Mote, P., A. K. Snover, S. Capalbo, S. D. Eigenbrode, P. Glick, J. Littell, R. Raymondi, and S. Reeder, 

(2014): Ch. 21: Northwest. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate 

Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research 

Program, 487-513. doi:10.7930/J04Q7RWX. 
67

Mueter FJ, Bond NA, Ianelli JN, Hollowed AB (2011) Expected declines in recruitment of walleye pollock 

(Theragra chalcogramma) in the eastern Bering Sea under future climate change. ICES Journal of Marine 

Science 68: 1284-1296

Murawski SA, Matlock GC (2006) Ecosystem science capabilities required to support NOAA’s mission in 

the year 2020. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-74

National Fish Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Partnership (2012). National Fish, Wildlife and Plants 

Climate Adaptation Strategy. Washington D.C. http://www.wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov/

National Marine Fisheries Service (2014) Fisheries economics of the United States, 2012. US Dept. Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-137

National Ocean Council (2013) National Ocean Policy implementation plan

National Park Service (2010) National Park Service climate change response strategy. National Park Service Climate Change Response Program, U.S. Department of the Interior

National Park Service (2012) Climate Change Action Plan 2012-2014. U.S. Department of the Interior

NOAA Coastal Services Center (2014) Coastal change analysis program regional land cover

NOAA Fisheries Office of Protected Resources (2014) Protected Resources Glossary

NOAA Northwest Fisheries Science Center (2014) Ocean ecosystem indicators: Pacific decadal oscillation

Nye JA, Gamble RJ, Link JS (2013) The relative impact of warming and removing top predators on the 

Northeast US large marine biotic community. Ecological Modelling 264: 157-168

Nye JA, Link JS, Hare JA, Overholtz, William J. (2009) Changing spatial distribution of fish stocks in relation 

to climate and population size on the Northeast United States continental shelf. Marine Ecology Progress 

Series 393: 111-129

Ocean Research Advisory Panel (2013) Implementing ecosystem-based management: a report to the 

National Ocean Council

Osgood KE (2008) Climate impacts on US living marine resources: National Marine Fisheries Service concerns, activities and needs. US Dept. Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-89

Overholtz WJ, Hare JA, Keith CM (2011) Distribution of Atlantic mackerel on the U. S. northeast continental 

shelf. Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science 3: 219-232

Pandolfi JM, Bradbury RH, Sala E, Hughes TP, Bjorndal KA, Cooke RG, McArdle D, McClenachan L, Newman MJH, Paredes G (2003) Global trajectories of the long-term decline of coral reef ecosystems. Science 

301: 955-958
68

Peterson, WT, Fisher JL, Peterson JO, Morgan CA, Burke BJ, and Fresh KL. (2014) Applied fisheries 

oceanography: Ecosystem indicators of ocean conditions inform fisheries management in the California 

Current. Oceanography 27(4):80–89, http://dx.doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2014.88.

Pinsky ML, Fogarty MJ (2012) Lagged social-ecological responses to climate and range shifts in fisheries. 

Climate Change Letters 115: 883-891

Pinsky, ML., and NJ Mantua. (2014). Emerging adaptation approaches for climate-ready fisheries management. Oceanography 27(4):146–159

Pinsky ML, Worm B, Fogarty MJ, Sarmiento JL, Levin SA (2013) Marine taxa track local climate velocities. 

Science 341: 1239-1242

Polovina JJ, Dunne JP, Woodworth PA, Howell EA (2011) Projected expansion of the subtropical biome and 

contraction of the temperate and equatorial upwelling biomes in the North Pacific under global warming. 

ICES Journal of Marine Science 68: 986-995

Polovina JJ, Howell EA, Abecassis M (2008) Ocean’s least productive waters are expanding. Geophysical 

Research Letters 35: L03618

Punt AE, A’mar T, Bond NA, Butterworth DS, de Moor CL, De Oliveira JAA, Haltuch MA, Hollowed AB, 

Szuwalski C (2013) Fisheries management under climate and environmental uncertainty: control rules and 

performance simulation. ICES 

Journal of Marine Science 71(8):2208-2220

Quentin Grafton R (2010) Adaptation to climate change in marine capture fisheries. Marine Policy 34: 606-

615

Quinn TP, Adams DJ (1996) Environmental changes affecting the migratory timing of American shad and 

sockeye salmon. Ecology 77: 1151-1162

Quinn TP, Hodgson S, Peven C (1997) Temperature, flow, and the migration of adult sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in the Columbia River. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54: 1349-

1360

Radlinski MK, Sundermeyer MA, Bisagni JJ, Cadrin SX (2013) Spatial and temporal distribution of Atlantic 

mackerel (Scomber scombrus) along the northeast coast of the United States, 1985–1999. ICES Journal of 

Marine Science 70: 1151-1161

Ruckelshaus M, Doney SC, Galindo HM, Barry JP, Chan F, Duffy JE, English CA, Gaines SD, Grebmeier 

JM, Hollowed AB, Knowlton N, Polovina J, Rabalais NN, Sydeman WJ, Talley LD (2013) Securing ocean 

benefits for society in the face of climate change. Marine Policy 40: 154-159

Rykaczewski RR, Dunne JP (2010) Enhanced nutrient supply to the California Current Ecosystem with global 

warming and increased stratification in an earth system model. Geophysical Research Letters 37: L21606
69

Saba VS, Stock CA, Spotila JR, Paladino FV, Tomillo PS (2012) Projected response of an endangered 

marine turtle population to climate change. Nature Climate Change 2: 814-820

Samhouri J, Levin P, Ainsworth C (2010) Identifying thresholds for ecosystem-based management. PLoS 

ONE 5: e8907

Schnute JT, Maunder MN, Ianelli JN (2007) Designing tools to evaluate fishery management strategies: can 

the scientific community deliver? . ICES Journal of Marine Science 64: 1077-1084

Seney EE, Rowland MJ, Lowery RA, Griffis RB, McClure MM (2013) Climate change, marine environments, 

and the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Conservation Biology 27: 1138-1146

Shelton C (2014) Climate change adaptation in fisheries and aquaculture – compilation of initial examples. 

FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1088. Rome, FAO. 34 pp. 

Sigler MF, Stabeno PJ, Eisner LB, Napp JM, Mueter FJ (2013) Spring and fall phytoplankton blooms in a 

productive subarctic ecosystem, the eastern Bering Sea, during 1995-2011. Deep Sea Res II 

Slocombe DS (1993) Implementing ecosystem-based management. BioScience 43: 612-622

Smith ADM, Sainsbury KJ, A. SR (1999) Implementing effective fisheries management systems—management strategy evaluation and the Australian partnership approach. ICES Journal of Marine Science 56: 

967-979

Snover AK, Mantua NJ, Littell JS, Alexander MA, McClure MM, Nye J (2013) Choosing and using climate-change scenarios for ecological-impact assessments and conservation decisions. Conservation 

Biology 27: 1147-1157

Solomon A, Birdsey R, Joyce L, Hayes J (2009) Forest Service global change research strategy, 2009–

2019. US Department of Agriculture, US Forest Service, Research and Development, FS-917a

Steinacher M, Joos F, Frölicher TL, Bopp L, Cadule P, Cocco V, Doney SC, Gehlen M, Lindsay K, Moore JK, 

Schneider B, 

Segschneider J (2010) Projected 21st century decrease in marine productivity: a multi-model analysis. Biogeosciences 7: 979-1005

Stock CA, Alexander MA, Bond NA, Brander KM, Cheung WWL, Curchitser EN, Delworth TL, Dunne JP, 

Griffies SM, Haltuch MA, Hare JA, Hollowed AB, Lehodey P, Levin SA, Link JS, Rose KA, Rykaczewski RR, 

Sarmiento JL, Stouffer RJ, Schwing FB, Vecchi GA, Werner FE (2011) On the use of IPCC-class models to 

assess the impact of climate on Living Marine Resources. Progress in Oceanography 88: 1-27

Stock CA, Dunne JP, John JG (2014) Global-scale carbon and energy flows through the marine planktonic 

food web: An analysis with a coupled physical–biological model. Progress in Oceanography 120: 1-28

Sutton-Grier AE, Moore AK, Wiley PC, Edwards PET (2014) Incorporating ecosystem services into the imple-
70

mentation of existing U.S. natural resource management regulations: Operationalizing carbon sequestration and 

storage. Marine Policy 43: 246-253

Szuwalski CS, Punt AE (2013) Fisheries management for regime-based ecosystems: a management 

strategy evaluation for the snow crab fishery in the eastern Bering Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science 70: 

955-967

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2009) Water resource policies and authorities: Incorporating sea-level 

change considerations in civil works programs Department of the Army, EC 1165-2-211.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2010) Rising to the urgent challenge: strategic plan for responding to accelerating climate change. U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy (2013) Science for an ocean nation: update of the ocean research priorities plan

USDA (2011) USDA Climate Change Science Plan. U.S. Department of Agriculture

Wainwright TC, Weitkamp LA (2013) Effects of climate change on Oregon Coast coho salmon: habitat and 

life-cycle interactions. Northwest Science 87: 219-242

Walters AW, Bartz KK, McClure MM (2013) Interactive effects of water diversion and climate change for 

juvenile Chinook salmon in the Lemhi River basin (U.S.A.). Conservation Biology 27: 1179-1189

Walters CJ (1986) Adaptive management of renewable resources. McGraw Hill, New York, NY

Weinberg JR, Powell EN, Pickett C, Nordahl J, V.A. , Jacobson LD (2005) Results from the 2004 cooperative survey of Atlantic surfclams. Northeast Fisheries Science Center Reference Document 05-01

Wilderbuer T, Stockhausen W, Bond N (2013) Updated analysis of flatfish recruitment response to climate 

variability and ocean conditions in the Eastern Bering Sea. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in 

Oceanography 94: 157-164