Would a combined or separate landings and discards table be preferred?

[Schiano-NOAA]

We currently have table_landings() available in the package and have planned to develop table_discards(). Is there a preference to keep these tables separated or put them together for a report?

Any thoughts @nmfs-ost/asar-collaborators ?

[lisaailloud-NOAA]

I think separate makes more sense. It'll be too much to have all this information in a single table. Plus, some fleets have landings but no discards and others discards but no landings.

[okenk]

Even within NWFSC the way we handle discards is really variable depending on the species. When they are small we just add them to landings for existing fleets. Sometimes we create discard fleets with discard catches and selectivity curves, and sometimes we have discard rates and retention curves (which are associated with traditional fleets that have retained catches and selectivity curves).

I think SEFSC has to deal with complex discard situations the most frequently so probably defer to @lisaailloud-NOAA!

[lisaailloud-NOAA]

that's a good point, sometimes we do that too (adding landings to discards). @Schiano-NOAA -- couldn't we generalize the function to be anything? landings / discards or total catch? this way you don't have to make two separate tables?

[Schiano-NOAA]

Yeah I think we could do that approach. We have a total_catch table and landings table right now. I think it just depends on the variations people would want in it.