|
| Year | Result | Explanatory Note |
|---|
| 2013 | 100.00 | None of 10 species used in the measuring index were deemed to be unhealthy |
| 2014 | 100.00 | None of 10 species used in the measuring index were deemed to be unhealthy |
| 2015 | 100.00 | None of the 10 species used in the measuring index were deemed to be unhealthy in calendar year 2014, which is reported in 2015. |
| 2016 | 75.00 | Out of a possible 20 independent measures of stock health for the ten species listed four were disregarded because the status was unknown, and there were 12 positive measures out of a possible 16 which calculates to stock health index of 75+(12/16). |
| 2017 | 73.00 | The 2017 “Key 10” performance measure is 73+; out of a possible 20 independent measures of stock health in 2016 for the ten species tracked, 5 were disregarded because the status was unknown, and there were 11 positive measures (thumbs up) out of a possible 15 which then calculates to stock health index of 73+ (11/15). |
| 2018 | 73.00 | The 2018 “Key 10” performance measure is 73+; out of a possible 20 independent measures of stock health in 2017 for the ten species tracked, 5 were disregarded because the status was unknown, and there were 11 positive measures (thumbs up) out of a possible 15 which then calculates to stock health index of 73+(11/15). |
| 2019 | 66.00 | The 2019 “Key 10” performance measure is 66+; out of a possible 20 independent measures of stock health for the ten species tracked, 5 were disregarded because the status was unknown, and there were 10 positive measures (thumbs up) out of a possible 15 which then calculates to stock health index of 66+ (10/15). |