CIE Peer Review

Subject Stock Assessment of Yellowfin Tuna in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean
Document(s) Reviewed
Langley A, Harley S, Hoyle S, Davies N, Hampton J, Kleiber P
2009. Stock assessment of yellowfin tuna in the western and central Pacific Ocean. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, Scientific Committee, 5th Regular Session, 10–21 August 2009, Port Vila, Vanuatu. WCPFC-SC5-2009/SA-WP-03, 121 p.
Download (2.6 MB PDF)
Harley S, Hoyle S, Bouyé F
2009. General structural sensitivity analysis for the yellowfin tuna stock assessment. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, Scientific Committee, 5th Regular Session, 10–21 August 2009, Port Vila, Vanuatu. WCPFC-SC5-2009/SA-IP-03, 30 p.
Download (0.4 MB PDF)
Date August 2010

Stock assessments for yellowfin tuna in the western and central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) are conducted regularly by the Oceanic Fisheries Programme (OFP) of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community, with collaboration of scientists participating in the Scientific Committee of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). The assessments provide scientific advice critical to fishery management and conservation decisions of the WCPFC and its members. Further, they influence U. S. policy on marine resource utilization.

In August 2010, the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC) solicited independent peer reviews of the 2009 WCPO yellowfin tuna stock assessment report. The review also involved critical reading of a second document describing a sensitivity analysis of the most recent previous assessment, conducted in 2007 (see documents listed above). Both documents had been submitted by OFP to the Scientific Committee of the WCPFC. The peer reviews were facilitated by the Center of Independent Experts (CIE). The CIE selected 2 independent experts to conduct the desk reviews and provided the primary review documents and related reference material to each reviewer. Each reviewer was asked to address the following items:

  1. Comment on the adequacy and appropriateness of data sources for stock assessment.
  2. Review the assessment methods: determine if they are reliable, properly applied, and adequate and appropriate for the species, fisheries and available data.
  3. Evaluate the assessment model configuration, assumptions, and input data and parameters (fishery, life history, and spawner-recruit relationships): determine if data are properly used, input parameters seem reasonable, models are appropriately configured, assumptions are reasonably satisfied, and primary sources of uncertainty are accounted for.
  4. Evaluate the adequacy of the sensitivity analyses in regard to completeness and incorporation of results.
  5. Comment on the proposed population benchmarks and management parameters (e.g., MSY, FMSY, BMSY, MSST, MFMT); if necessary, recommended values for alternative management benchmarks (or appropriate proxies) and clear statements of stock status.
  6. Evaluate the adequacy, appropriateness, and application of the methods used to project future population status.
  7. Suggest research priorities for improving understanding of the essential population dynamics and fishery dynamics. Such understanding is necessary to formulation of best management practices.

The independent peer review comments are posted on this web page. The reviews were also provided to the OFP.

— Samuel G. Pooley, Director

Reviewer Comments

Dr. Malcolm Haddon
CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research
Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Comments (0.6 MB PDF)

Dr. Jean-Jacques Maguire
Halieutikos, Inc.
Québec, Canada
Comments (0.2 MB PDF)

Author Response

Secretariat of the Pacific Community - Oceanic Fisheries Programme (SPC-OFP)
Response (0.1 MB PDF)