Retrospective forecasting - evaluating performance of stock projections for New England groundfish stocks

• Main Authors: Brooks, Elizabeth N, Legault, Christopher M.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: unknown
• Published: NRC Research Press (a division of Canadian Science Publishing) 2015
• Subjects: Northwest Atlantic
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/1807/71744; http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/cjfas-2015-0163

Projections are used to explore scenarios for catch advice and rebuilding, and are an important tool for sustainably managing fisheries. We tested each projection specification for 12 groundfish stocks in the Northwest Atlantic to identify sources of bias and evaluate techniques for reducing bias. Projections were made from assessments using Virtual Population Analysis (VPA) with 1-7 years of recent data removed from the full time series, and were then compared to results from a VPA assessment on the full time series of data. The main source of bias in projections was the assessment model estimates of the numbers at age in the terminal model year+1 (Na,T+1). Recruitment was responsible for more bias in projections beyond three years, when population numbers begin to be dominated by cohorts that were statistically generated. Retrospective analysis was performed and several adjustment factors to reduce bias were tested. Even after adjusting for bias, the remaining bias in projections was non-negligible. The direction of bias generally resulted in projected SSB and catch being overestimated, and the bias in catch was nearly always larger than in SSB. Scientists need to clearly communicate the direction and magnitude of this bias, managers need to consider this additional uncertainty when specifying future catch limits, and both scientists and managers need to develop more robust control rules so that objectives are achieved. The accepted manuscript in pdf format is listed with the files at the bottom of this page. The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the manuscript may differ slightly between what is listed on this page and what is listed in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript; that in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript is what was submitted by the author.