pfmc-assessments / canary_2023

Other
5 stars 1 forks source link

Compile Data - Discards #10

Open brianlangseth-NOAA opened 1 year ago

brianlangseth-NOAA commented 1 year ago
  1. Discards

Other sources?

brianlangseth-NOAA commented 1 year ago

Chantel has added the latest Groundfish Mortality Report onto our network here:

\nwcfile\FRAM\Assessments\GEMM Report\GMR_2021

where the GEMM data are in table 3 in the excel file.

These can also be accessed by using the nwfscSurvey package which includes a function to pull these data (thanks to Erin Steiner) from the data warehouse:

widow_data <- nwfscSurvey::pull_gemm(common_name = "Widow Rockfish")

Currently, the most recent GEMM data from 2021 is not in the data warehouse yet but should be available soon.

brianlangseth-NOAA commented 1 year ago

For discards for commercial samples, email Andi/Chantel and they will provide csv's to make the calculations. These data will be available after december.

brianlangseth-NOAA commented 1 year ago

When have commercial fleet structure known, and have NDA's signed, send request to Chantel/Andi via this form data request form

brianlangseth-NOAA commented 1 year ago

Sent request based on planned fleet structure of trawl and non-trawl gears

aliwhitman commented 1 year ago

With the OR recreational catch, RecFIN has estimated discards in mt and so I was planning on providing the recreational total mortality but with retained and discard dead estimates separately (2001 - 2022). I also did not recommend estimating discards during the "historic" period prior to 2000 (bag limits were high! discarding was very limited).

Just wanted confirmation prior to sending.

shcaba commented 1 year ago

That sounds good to me.

On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 9:26 AM Ali Whitman @.***> wrote:

With the OR recreational catch, RecFIN has estimated discards in mt and so I was planning on providing the recreational total mortality but with retained and discard dead estimates separately (2001 - 2022). I also did not recommend estimating discards during the "historic" period prior to 2000 (bag limits were high! discarding was very limited).

Just wanted confirmation prior to sending.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/pfmc-assessments/canary_2023/issues/10#issuecomment-1403977830, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB6IZLXQ7EXPIXHPB6EA4ATWUFO4FANCNFSM6AAAAAAQUMHX2Y . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

--

Jason M. Cope, Ph.D.Research Fishery Biologist Fishery Resource Analysis and Monitoring Division Northwest Fisheries Science Center 2725 Montlake Blvd. East

Seattle, WA 98112-2013 NOAA Fisheries Affiliate assistant faculty School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences University of Washington @. @.> (206) 302-2417 www.nmfs.noaa.gov

brianlangseth-NOAA commented 1 year ago

Confirmed @aliwhitman. Having both separated will be helpful.

If we are wanting to model discard rates in the recent period, presumably that could be obtained by dead discard over the sum of dead discard and live discard, which could be provided separately if we use it. I think for now, what you plan is great.

brianlangseth-NOAA commented 1 year ago

@chantelwetzel-noaa mentioned that because we are planning on adding discards to landings, the GEMM report estimates of total discards will likely be a better estimate (because the expansion is more fine scale) of total mortality than calculating discards as the product of rates from the WCGOP data and landings from PacFIN. I plan to look at both to ensure they are in the same ball park (they should be)

okenk commented 1 year ago

Accord to the latest SSC accepted practices document, "STATs should include an analysis to evaluate whether there is evidence of size-based discarding and determine if the assessment model should include size-based retention for either commercial or recreational catch."