big deez, one only has to read the latest independent review of the snapper stock assessment to realise how much guesswork has gone into those figures.
in the real scientific world (i.e not the political one), an independent review like that one would have the authors scrambling back to the drawing board to re-do their assessment with better data.
Note this is the document fisheries QLD have used in
support of their stock assessment, both by managing director jim groves on this forum as well as throughout the RIS. Instead of actually considering how unsupportive this document is, they have just written "the scienctific assessment is rigorous". i.e staring fact in the face and denying it...
this is one of the most blatant lies i've seen and it annoys me a great deal
here's how the report reads in summary form
uncertain, uncertain, substantially uncertain, non-trivial uncertainty, uncertain, uncertainty, uncertain, yet remains plausible!
no self respecting scientist should be happy to roll with that mate, and it's clear for all to see.
http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/documents/...-to-Client.pdf