What is a fish stock assessment? Is it a sound method? Can it be used to manage a commercial fishery?

Abstract

Under Karl Popper's non-inductive theory of method arguments are never carried from data to advice as in a fish stock assessment. That is: a distinction or 'demarcation' has to be made between (i) a Lamarckian-like inductive argument involving instruction from the environment and (ii) a Darwinian-like selection by falsification involving selection by the environment. The absurdity that we should seek to manage the marine environment by looking for instruction from the data, instead of using our own intellect in the form of bold imaginative policies, results in a monism of 'scientific' ethics.I conclude a fish stock assessment is an unsound method. Its data-based inductive arguments have no problem-solving capacity and are to be held responsible for the collapse of some of the World's largest Gadoid fisheries. A deductive method capable of problem-solving would involve the selection of bold policies by falsification, given as error elimination (EE) in Karl Popper's trial and error heuristic. An example of policy selection by falsification would be the use of lobster landings (LL) as a negative feedback index by the 120+ year old inshore Maritime lobster fishery.