CONTESTED STOCK ASSESSMENT - 2 CASE-STUDIES

We describe two case studies where scientists representing alternative interest groups worked together to attempt to resolve scientific issu es of fisheries assessments. In several fisheries in New Zealand, comm ercial fishing interests hired consultants to review governmental asse ssments. In some of these fisheries, the two sides provided alternativ e competing assessments; in other fisheries, there was a cooperative a greed-upon assessment. In the analysis of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) within the Pacific Salmon Treaty, scientists representin g all parties agreed upon an assessment procedure and developed it ove r a number of years. Such contested assessments provide a number of be nefits including (i) intense peer review, (ii) the ability to bring da ta from all parties into the assessment process, and (iii) better unde rstanding and trust of the assessments by the different interest group s. Effective peer review requires repeating the calculations associate d with data sources and assessment models. We suggest that contested a ssessments, despite the extra cost, are highly valuable, as they provi de a substantially improved standard of assessment. Contested assessme nts will evolve towards cooperative analysis unless participating part ies feel that the cooperative assessment is counter to their perceived interests.