Fishermen may sometimes say that there are more fish in a given area than what is reported in stock assessments for several reasons, including: Different perspectives: Fishermen often rely on their own experiences and observations, while stock assessments are based on a combination of data sources, including scientific surveys, fishing effort data, and observer data. There may be a mismatch between what the fishermen are seeing and what the assessments are indicating, leading to differing opinions about the abundance of fish. Incomplete data: Stock assessments rely on data from various sources, but there can be gaps or uncertainties in the data, especially in remote or poorly monitored areas. Fishermen may be aware of areas where the data is limited and may feel that there are more fish than what is reported in the assessments. Different time frames: Stock assessments typically cover a specific time period, usually a year, and may not reflect fluctuations in the abundance of fish that can occur over shorter periods. Fishermen may be aware of short-term changes in the abundance of fish that are not reflected in the assessments. Different methods: Stock assessments are based on a variety of methods, including scientific surveys, statistical models, and observer data. Fishermen may have a different understanding of how these methods work, and may not agree with the results of the assessments. There can be differing opinions between fishermen and stock assessments, and it is important to consider both perspectives when making decisions about the management of fish stocks. By working together and incorporating the knowledge and experiences of both scientists and fishermen, it is possible to develop more accurate and comprehensive assessments of fish stocks and support sustainable fishing practices.