search

Philipp-Neubauer / FirstAssessment

Analysing the time to first assessment of fish stocks
0 stars 0 forks source link

Minor stock threshold #14

Closed Philipp-Neubauer closed 7 years ago

Philipp-Neubauer commented 7 years ago

Suggest changing from species-region-10t to stock-region-5t

mcmelnychuk commented 7 years ago

what is the species vs. stock difference in that? (Or is it just a 10t vs. 5t difference, with "species" and "stock" equivalent?)

Mike

On 2016-11-11 11:01 PM, Philipp Neubauer wrote:

Suggest changing from species-region-10t to stock-region-5t

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/Philipp-Neubauer/FirstAssessment/issues/14, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AV_oVezKWPKijemvKfidP-Skq4L5WKlmks5q9WRdgaJpZM4KwWZf.

Philipp-Neubauer commented 7 years ago

Species can be split into multiple stocks within a region - as for Black Sea Bass or Pollock. So if the decision is a threshold per species (as it is now), then the Pollock catch doesn't get eliminated, but per stock it does.

mcmelnychuk commented 7 years ago

sounds good, but just to confirm, there wouldn't be multiple unassessed stocks of the same species within a region, correct? (even if they pass all landings thresholds etc.). Those would be aggregated into a single unassessed stock for the region, so it's only when there's an assessed and an unassessed stock in a region that there could be two stocks per region of the same species?

Mike

Philipp-Neubauer commented 7 years ago

yep

On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Michael Melnychuk <notifications@github.com

wrote:

sounds good, but just to confirm, there wouldn't be multiple unassessed stocks of the same species within a region, correct? (even if they pass all landings thresholds etc.). Those would be aggregated into a single unassessed stock for the region, so it's only when there's an assessed and an unassessed stock in a region that there could be two stocks per region of the same species?

Mike

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/Philipp-Neubauer/FirstAssessment/issues/14#issuecomment-260107402, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACJDCxQQ3P-qvH4fzc564rHVALVEWStRks5q9Wu9gaJpZM4KwWZf .

Phil

mcmelnychuk commented 7 years ago

got it.

Philipp-Neubauer commented 7 years ago

Have fixed this as follows: Only stocks with 2 stocks within a region (i.e., 1 assessed & 1 unassesed) have a threshold to be included in the analysis. The threshold is set at 5% of the average landings in the assessed stock. All other stocks are included by default.

This changes the analysis a little bit, as we now include more Rock-fish (some of which have very low landings). The model results only change a little bit, notably, the landings effect becomes stronger. Everything else seems to stay pretty much the same (qualitatively).

mcmelnychuk commented 7 years ago

sounds good!

Mike

On 11/13/2016 5:59 PM, Philipp Neubauer wrote:

Have fixed this as follows: Only stocks with 2 stocks within a region (i.e., 1 assessed & 1 unassesed) have a threshold to be included in the analysis. The threshold is set at 5% of the average landings in the assessed stock. All other stocks are included by default.

This changes the analysis a little bit, as we now include more Rock-fish (some of which have very low landings). The model results only change a little bit, notably, the landings effect becomes stronger. Everything else seems to stay pretty much the same (qualitatively).

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/Philipp-Neubauer/FirstAssessment/issues/14#issuecomment-260231959, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AV_oVQD_Jn6RY1BY_X83twnyc_0YO9unks5q98CfgaJpZM4KwWZf.

Philipp-Neubauer commented 7 years ago

Think this is settled...