11 AFAM Toolkit Worksheet
The AFAM Toolkit dashboard will keep track of all of your steps and automatically generate a report once you’ve complete all steps. However, you may also wish to keep track of the outputs from each step on a hard copy piece of paper, especially since the dashboard does not currently allow you to save your work.
As your work through each step, fill out the following tables.
Step 1 – Determine assessment and management tiertermine assessment and management tier
Step 1 outputs – Data Inventory
| Minimum Required Data | Needed? | Available? | Years of data |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qualitative characterization of the fishery | Required | ||
| List of prioritized species for management | Required | ||
| List of prioritized goals for management | Required | ||
| Landings, effort, and CPUE of key target species | Optional | ||
| Length composition data of key target species | Optional | ||
| Density ratio from UVC (key target species) | Optional | ||
| Biomass ratio from UVC (aggregated across species) | Optional |
Step 1 outputs – Assessment and Management Tier
| Response | |
|---|---|
| What is your assessment and management tier? | |
| Notes |
Step 2 – Determine appropriate Fisheries Management Controls
Step 2 outputs – Existing fisheries management controls (FMCs)
| Existing FMC 1 | Existing FMC 2 | Existing FMC 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Name of Existing FMC | |||
| Who introduced this FMC? Who implements this FMC? | |||
| Resources required for implementation | |||
| Level of compliance | |||
| Community Attitude towards FMC | |||
| Is the FMC effective in meeting management objectives? | |||
| Other implementation pro/cons | |||
| Notes |
Step 2 outputs – Potential new fisheries management controls (FMCs)
| Question | New FMC 1 | New FMC 2 | New FMC 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Name of potential new FMC | |||
| Possible Implications (positive or negative) |
Step 3 – Select performance indicators, reference points, and assessment methods
Step 3 outputs Note: We generally recommend using 3 performance indicators, from 3 independent data sources if possible.
| PI 1 | PI 2 | PI 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance Indicator Name | |||
| Data source | |||
| Target Reference Point (TRP) | |||
| Limit Reference Point (LRP) | |||
| Notes |
Step 4 – Define Harvest Control Rules Step 4 outputs
| Scenario | PI 1 Stoplight | PI 2 Stoplight | PI 3 Stoplight | Interpretation | Management Response |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |||||
| 2 | |||||
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| 5 | |||||
| 6 | |||||
| 7 | |||||
| 8 |
Step 5 - Perform assessment methods Step 5 outputs
| PI 1 | PI 2 | PI 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| PI Name | |||
| PI Value | |||
| Notes |
Step 6 – Interpret assessment results Step 6 outputs
| PI 1 | PI 2 | PI 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| PI Name | |||
| PI Value | |||
| TRP Value | |||
| LRP Value | |||
| Stoplight Result |
Step 7 - Adjust fisheries management controls using defined harvest control rules Step 7 outputs
| Response | |
|---|---|
| Selected management response | |
| Notes |