Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Traditionally, the natural mortality rate (M) in a stock assessment is assumed to be constant. When M increases within an assessment, the question arises how to change the fishing mortality rate target (F Target ). Per recruit considerations lead to an increase in F Target , while limiting total mortality leads to a decrease in F Target . Application of either approach can result in nonsensical results. Short-term gains in yield associated with high F Target values should be considered in light of potential losses in future yield if the high total mortality rate leads to a decrease in recruitment. Examples using yellowtail flounder (Limanda ferruginea) and Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) are used to demonstrate that F Target can change when M increases within an assessment and to illustrate the consequences of different F Target values. When a change in M within an assessment is contemplated, first consider the amount and strength of empirical evidence to support the change. When the empirical evidence is not strong, we recommend using a constant M. If strong empirical evidence exists, we recommend estimating F Target for a range of stock–recruitment relationships and evaluating the trade-offs between risk of overfishing and forgone yield.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Legault et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: