Steven D. Gaines

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are important conservation tools that confer ecosystem benefits by removing fishing within their borders to allow stocks to rebuild. Fishing mortality outside a traditionally fixed MPA can exert selective pressure for low movement alleles, resulting in enhanced protection. While evolving to move less may be useful for conservation presently, it could be detrimental in the face of climate change for species that need to move to track their thermal optimum. Here, we build a spatially explicit simulation model to assess the impact of movement evolution in and around static MPAs resulting from both fishing mortality and temperature‐dependent natural mortality on conservation benefits across five climate scenarios: (i) linear mean temperature shift, (ii) El Niño/La Niña conditions, (iii) heat waves, (iv) heatwaves with a mean temperature shift, and (v) no climate change. While movement evolution allows populations within MPAs to survive longer, we find that over time, climate change degrades the benefits by selecting for higher movement genotypes. Resulting population declines within MPAs are faster than expected based on climate mortality alone, even within the largest MPAs. Our findings suggest that while static MPAs may conserve species for a time, other strategies, such as dynamic MPA networks or assisted migration, may also be required to effectively incorporate climate change into conservation planning.

Climate change is altering the productivity of marine fisheries and challenging the effectiveness of historical fisheries management. Harvest control rules, which describe the process for determining catch limits in fisheries, represent one pathway for promoting climate resilience. In the USA, flexibility in how regional management councils specify harvest control rules has spawned diverse approaches for reducing catch limits to precautionarily buffer against scientific and management uncertainty, some of which may be more or less resilient to climate change. Here, we synthesize the control rules used to manage all 507 US federally managed fish stocks and stock complexes. We classified these rules into seven typologies: (1) catch‐based; (2) constant catch; (3) constant escapement; (4) constant F; (5) stepped F; (6) ramped F and (7) both stepped and ramped F. We also recorded whether the control rules included a biomass limit (‘cut‐off’) value or were environmentally linked as well as the type and size of the buffers used to protect against scientific and/or management uncertainty. Finally, we review the advantages and disadvantages of each typology for managing fisheries under climate change and provide seven recommendations for updating harvest control rules to improve the resilience of US federally managed fisheries to climate change.