correct ABC/ACL, add NARW edits

SOE-MAFMC-2022.Rmd

@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ Single species management objectives (1. maintaining biomass above minimum thres
 ```{r stock-status, fig.cap = paste0("Summary of single species status for ",council_abbr," and jointly federally managed stocks (Spiny dogfish and both Goosefish). The dotted verticxal line is the target bioomass reference point of Bmsy. The dashed lines are the management trehsolds of one half Bmsy (vertical) or Fmsy (horizontal). Stocks in green are below the biomass threshold (overfished), stocks in orange are above the biomass threshold but below the biomass target, and stocks in purple are above the biomass target. Only one stock, Atlantic mackerel, has fishing mortality above the limit (subject to overfishing)."), code = readLines("https://raw.githubusercontent.com/NOAA-EDAB/ecodata/master/chunk-scripts/human_dimensions_MAB.Rmd-stock-status.R"), fig.width = 7.5, fig.asp = 0.5}
 ```
 
-Stock status affects catch limits established by the Council, which in turn may affect landings trends. Summed across all MAFMC managed species, total Acceptable Biological Catch or Annual Catch Limits (ABC or ACL) have been relatively stable 2012-2020 (Fig. \ref{fig:abcacl-stacked}). With the addition of blueline tilefish management in 2017, an additional ABC and ACL contribute to the total 2017-2020. Discounting blueline tilefish, the recent total ABC or ACL is lower relative to 2012-2013, with much of that decrease due to declining Atlantic mackerel ABC. 
+Stock status affects catch limits established by the Council, which in turn may affect landings trends. Summed across all MAFMC managed species, total Acceptable Biological Catch or Annual Catch Limits (ABC or ACL) have been relatively stable 2012-2020 (Fig. \ref{fig:abcacl-stacked}). The recent total ABC or ACL is lower relative to 2012-2013, with much of that decrease due to declining Atlantic mackerel ABC. This is true even with the addition of blueline tilefish management in 2017 contributing an additional ABC and ACL to the total 2017-2020, due to that fishery's small relative size. 
 
 ```{r abcacl-stacked, fig.cap="Sum of catch limits across all MAFMC managed fisheries.", code =  readLines("https://raw.githubusercontent.com/NOAA-EDAB/ecodata/master/chunk-scripts/human_dimensions_MAB.Rmd-abcacl-stacked.R"), fig.width = 5, fig.asp = 0.5}
 
@@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ Bycatch management measures have been implemented to maintain bycatch below PBR
 
 The number of gray seals in U.S. waters has risen dramatically in the last three decades. Based on a survey conducted in 2016, the size of the gray seal population in the U.S. during the breeding season was approximately 27,000 animals, while in Canada the population was estimated to be roughly 425,000. The population in Canada is increasing at roughly 4% per year, and contributing to rates of increase in the U.S., where the number of pupping sites has increased from one in 1988 to nine in 2019. Mean rates of increase in the number of pups born at various times since 1988 at four of the more data-rich pupping sites (Muskeget, Monomoy, Seal, and Green Islands) ranged from no change on Green Island to high rates of increase on the other three islands, with a maximum increase of 26.3% (95\%CI: 21.6 - 31.4\%; @wood_rates_2020, and see the 2021 New England report^[https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/29524]). These high rates of increase provide further support for the hypothesis that seals from Canada are continually supplementing the breeding population in U.S. waters.  
 
-Strong evidence exists to suggest that interactions between right whales and both the fixed gear fisheries in the U.S. and Canada and vessel strikes in the U.S. are contributing substantially to the decline of the species [@hayes_north_2018]. Further, right whale distribution has changed since 2010. New research suggests that recent climate driven changes in ocean circulation have resulted in right whale distribution changes driven by increased warm water influx through the Northeast Channel, which has reduced the primary right whale prey (*Calanus finmarchicus*) in the central and eastern portions of the Gulf of Maine [@hayes_north_2018; @record_rapid_2019; @sorochan_north_2019].
+Strong evidence exists to suggest that interactions between right whales and both the fixed gear fisheries in the U.S. and Canada and vessel strikes in the U.S. are contributing substantially to the decline of the species [@hayes_north_2018]. Further, right whale distribution has changed since 2010. New research suggests that recent climate driven changes in ocean circulation have resulted in right whale distribution changes driven by increased warm water influx through the Northeast Channel, which has reduced the primary right whale prey (*Calanus finmarchicus*) in the central and eastern portions of the Gulf of Maine [@hayes_north_2018; @record_rapid_2019; @sorochan_north_2019]. Additional potential stressors include offshore wind development, which overlaps with important habitat areas used year-round by right whales, including mother and calf migration corridors and foraging habitat [@quintana-rizzo_residency_2021; @schick_striking_2009]. This area is also the only known right whale winter foraging habitat. Additional information can be found in the [offshore wind risks section](#other-ocean-uses-offshore-wind).
 
 The UMEs are under investigation and are likely the result of multiple drivers. For all three large whale UMEs, human interaction appears to have contributed to increased mortalities, although investigations are not complete. An investigation into the cause of the seal UME so far suggests phocine distemper virus as a potential cause. 
 
@@ -695,13 +695,13 @@ As of February 2022, 24 offshore wind development projects are proposed for cons
 ```{r wind-proposed-dev, fig.cap='Proposed wind development on the northeast shelf.', code=readLines("https://raw.githubusercontent.com/NOAA-EDAB/ecodata/master/chunk-scripts/human_dimensions_MAB.Rmd-wind-proposed-dev.R")}
 ```
 
-
-Just over 2,500 foundations and more than 7,000 miles of inter-array and offshore export cables are proposed to date. The colored chart in Fig. \ref{fig:wind-dev-cumul} also presents the offshore wind development timeline in the Greater Atlantic region with the estimated year that foundations would be constructed (matches the color of the wind areas). These timelines and data estimates are expected to shift but represent the most recent information available as of February 2022. Based on current timelines, the areas affected would be spread out such that it is unlikely that any one particular area would experience full development at one time. Future wind development areas are also presented. Additional lease areas, totalling over 488,000 acres in the NY Bight are available for BOEM's 2022 lease sale. It’s anticipated that the NY Bight leases will fulfill outstanding offshore wind energy production goals for NY and NJ. VA and NC have outstanding goals that cannot be fulfilled within the existing lease areas, and it is expected that these will be fulfilled with future development off the Delmarva Peninsula. 
 ```{r wind-dev-cumul, fig.cap = "All Northeast Project areas by year construction ends (each project has 2 year construction period).", out.width='90%'}
 #knitr::include_url("https://raw.githubusercontent.com/NOAA-EDAB/ecodata/master/docs/images/All_2021128_needsgraph-01.jpg")
 knitr::include_graphics("images/offshore_wind_timeline.png")
 ```
 
+Just over 2,500 foundations and more than 7,000 miles of inter-array and offshore export cables are proposed to date. The colored chart in Fig. \ref{fig:wind-dev-cumul} also presents the offshore wind development timeline in the Greater Atlantic region with the estimated year that foundations would be constructed (matches the color of the wind areas). These timelines and data estimates are expected to shift but represent the most recent information available as of February 2022. Based on current timelines, the areas affected would be spread out such that it is unlikely that any one particular area would experience full development at one time. Future wind development areas are also presented. Additional lease areas, totalling over 488,000 acres in the NY Bight are available for BOEM's 2022 lease sale. It’s anticipated that the NY Bight leases will fulfill outstanding offshore wind energy production goals for NY and NJ. VA and NC have outstanding goals that cannot be fulfilled within the existing lease areas, and it is expected that these will be fulfilled with future development off the Delmarva Peninsula. 
+
 Based on federal vessel logbook data, average commercial fishery revenue from trips in the current offshore wind lease areas and the New York Bight leasing areas identified in the proposed sale notice represented 2-20% of the total annual revenue for the most affected fisheries in federal waters from 2008-2019 (Fig. \ref{fig:wea-spp-rev}). 
 
 ```{r wea-spp-rev, fig.cap="Wind energy revenue in the Mid-Atlantic.", code=readLines("https://raw.githubusercontent.com/NOAA-EDAB/ecodata/master/chunk-scripts/human_dimensions_MAB.Rmd-wea-spp-rev.R"), fig.width=5, fig.asp=.4}
@@ -782,7 +782,8 @@ Current plans for rapid buildout of offshore wind in a patchwork of areas spread
 
 Up to 20% of total average revenue for major Mid-Atlantic commercial species in lease areas could be forgone or reduced and associated effort displaced if all sites are developed. Displaced fishing effort can alter historic fishing area, timing, and method patterns, which can in turn change habitat, species (managed and protected), and fleet interactions. Several factors, including fishery regulations, fishery availability, and user conflicts affect where, when, and how fishing effort may be displaced. 
 
-Right whales have been observed foraging in proposed wind areas (Fig \ref{fig:whales-wind}). Altered local oceanography could affect right whale prey availability.
+Planned development overlaps right whale mother and calf migration corridors and a significant foraging habitat that is used throughout the year [@quintana-rizzo_residency_2021] (Fig \ref{fig:whales-wind}). Turbine presence and extraction of energy from the system could alter local oceanography [@christiansen_emergence_2022] and may affect right whale prey availability. Proposed wind development areas also bring increased vessel strike risk from construction and operation vessels. In addition, there are a number of potential impacts to whales from pile driving and operational noise such as displacement, increased levels of communication masking, and elevated stress hormones.
+
 
 ```{r whales-wind, out.width="60%", fig.cap="Northern Right Whale persistent hotspots and Wind Energy Areas."}
 knitr::include_graphics("images/NARW_hotpsot_persistence_2_1_2022_TPW.png")
@@ -796,7 +797,7 @@ The increase of offshore wind development can have both positive (e.g., employme
 
 **Editors** (NOAA NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center, NEFSC): Sarah Gaichas, Kimberly Bastille, Geret DePiper, Kimberly Hyde, Scott Large, Sean Lucey, Chris Orphanides, Laurel Smith
 
-**Contributors** (NEFSC unless otherwise noted): Aaron Beaver (Anchor QEA), Andy Beet, Ruth Boettcher (Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries), Mandy Bromilow and CJ Pellerin (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office), Joseph Caracappa, Doug Christel (GARFO), Patricia Clay, Lisa Colburn, Jennifer Cudney and Tobey Curtis (NMFS Atlantic HMS Management Division), Geret DePiper, Dan Dorfman (NOAA-NOS-NCCOS), Hubert du Pontavice, Emily Farr and Grace Roskar (NMFS Office of Habitat Conservation), Michael Fogarty, Paula Fratantoni, Kevin Friedland, Marjy Friedrichs (VIMS), Sarah Gaichas, Ben Galuardi (GAFRO), Avijit Gangopadhyay (School for Marine Science and Technology, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth), James Gartland (Virginia Institute of Marine Science), Glen Gawarkiewicz (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution), Sean Hardison, Kimberly Hyde, John Kosik, Steve Kress and Don Lyons (National Audubon Society’s Seabird Restoration Program), Young-Oh Kwon and Zhuomin Chen (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution), Andrew Lipsky, Sean Lucey, Chris Melrose, Shannon Meseck, Ryan Morse, Brandon Muffley (MAFMC), Kimberly Murray, Chris Orphanides, Richard Pace, Tom Parham (Maryland DNR), Charles Perretti, Grace Saba and Emily Slesinger (Rutgers University), Vincent Saba, Sarah Salois, Chris Schillaci (GARFO), Dave Secor (CBL), Angela Silva, Adrienne Silver (UMass/SMAST), Laurel Smith, Talya ten Brink (GARFO), Bruce Vogt (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office), Ron Vogel (University of Maryland Cooperative Institute for Satellite Earth System Studies and NOAA/NESDIS Center for Satellite Applications and Research), John Walden, Harvey Walsh, Changhua Weng, Mark Wuenschel 
+**Contributors** (NEFSC unless otherwise noted): Kimberly Bastille, Aaron Beaver (Anchor QEA), Andy Beet, Ruth Boettcher (Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries), Mandy Bromilow and CJ Pellerin (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office), Joseph Caracappa, Doug Christel (GARFO), Patricia Clay, Lisa Colburn, Jennifer Cudney and Tobey Curtis (NMFS Atlantic HMS Management Division), Geret DePiper, Dan Dorfman (NOAA-NOS-NCCOS), Hubert du Pontavice, Emily Farr and Grace Roskar (NMFS Office of Habitat Conservation), Michael Fogarty, Paula Fratantoni, Kevin Friedland, Marjy Friedrichs (VIMS), Sarah Gaichas, Ben Galuardi (GAFRO), Avijit Gangopadhyay (School for Marine Science and Technology, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth), James Gartland (Virginia Institute of Marine Science), Glen Gawarkiewicz (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution), Sean Hardison, Kimberly Hyde, John Kosik, Steve Kress and Don Lyons (National Audubon Society’s Seabird Restoration Program), Young-Oh Kwon and Zhuomin Chen (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution), Andrew Lipsky, Sean Lucey, Chris Melrose, Shannon Meseck, Ryan Morse, Brandon Muffley (MAFMC), Kimberly Murray, Chris Orphanides, Richard Pace, Tom Parham (Maryland DNR), Charles Perretti, Grace Saba and Emily Slesinger (Rutgers University), Vincent Saba, Sarah Salois, Chris Schillaci (GARFO), Dave Secor (CBL), Angela Silva, Adrienne Silver (UMass/SMAST), Laurel Smith, Talya ten Brink (GARFO), Bruce Vogt (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office), Ron Vogel (University of Maryland Cooperative Institute for Satellite Earth System Studies and NOAA/NESDIS Center for Satellite Applications and Research), John Walden, Harvey Walsh, Changhua Weng, Mark Wuenschel 
 
 
 \newpage