Originally Posted By: Carcassman
In re-reading Salmo's responses he notes that some of the goals get re-evaluated (lower). That's fine but why when the same models show that they should be increased they aren't?

I remember way back in the early years of Boldt that tribes were pushing "probing" to determine goals. The idea was, try different escapements and see what gives MSY. Conceptually sound but they also wanted to only probe lower than the WDF goals.


Changing an escapement goal under co-management requires agreement to do so. Human nature, being subject to greed and avarice, it's almost always easier to get your working partner to agree to lower it than to raise it.

In hindsight, I think probing for a better escapement goal is subject to duplicity. Think about the ecosystem mechanics and density dependent mortalities. It's nigh on universal that low escapements yield the highest number of recruits per spawner. As escapement increases and you approach habitat carrying capacity, recruits per spawner decreases toward 1. And "so called" over escapement yields less than 1 recruit per spawner, as if that is somehow wrong in the world of ecosystem processes. MSY/MSH is strictly an economic yardstick and not an ecological one; that's what I've come to think.