This talk compares the harvest strategies (HSs) from three Australian states using Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) developed for abalone. Two base-case operating models were conditioned, with additional operating model sensitivity tests, on the Tasmanian blacklip and South Australian greenlip resources. Initial conditioning is undertaken using an integrated size-based assessment. The MSE is spatially disaggregated to the population level with larval advection, whereas the assessment and management of the fisheries is at either the sub-quota-Zone (a group of populations) or quota-Zone scale. Most states manage abalone using empirical HSs, but each HS is quite different despite mainly relying on catch rate as an index of abundance. Three of these HSs, from Victoria, South Australia, and Tasmania, are tested and compared. The MSE is also used to test how well the HSs perform when different environmental perturbations are imposed, such as a virus outbreak, marine heat waves, and reduced long-term recruitment. Fundamental differences in performance are shown between the HSs. For example, those that manage spatially within a Zone are, not surprisingly, better at resolving localized depletion. An HS that is consistently pessimistic results in an overall decline in catch because it is slow to return any catch that was removed. It is important to have some form of target, as those without can meander aimlessly. The SA and Vic HSs did not clearly define what happens after a fishery closure is imposed, so this had to be added to the HS in the MSE. When environmental perturbation scenarios were tested, these closure settings were needed. Both the South Australian and Tasmanian HSs respond well to an environmental perturbation, with the Tasmanian HS reacting more quickly and more aggressively than the South Australian. All recover the resource. Those HSs that use a TAC multiplier are slow to return the TAC after a low TAC event.