Cooperative Research in the National Marine Fisheries Service (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
8. What Works and Doesn't Work
8. What Works and Doesn't Work
Pages 95-110
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 95... ...
In this chapter the information from the previous chapters is summarized, with focus on what works and doesn't work in cooperative research. REASONS FOR SUCCESS Cooperative research works when scientists and fishermen realize that each bring valuable tools and experience to the objectives of a research project.
|
From page 96... ...
A prerequisite of successful cooperative research is that all participants thoroughly understand that they are involved in scientific research, even though fishermen may be responsible for much of the design and execution of that research. It must meet scientific standards if it is to be useful for management decisions.
|
From page 97... ...
When dolphin bycatch mortality in the tuna seine fleet precipitated widespread boycott of tuna products by the general public, eastern Pacific tuna seiners were motivated to develop dolphin avoidance techniques in conjunction with the InterAmerican Tropical Tuna Commission, starting in the 1 980s. Potential sanctions of the Endangered Species Act likewise threatened to close the North Pacific longline fishery in the late 1990s due to bycatch of an endangered species, the short-tailed albatross.
|
From page 98... ...
In the northeast United States stock boundaries for codfish were established decades ago from tagging studies, growth rates, and parasite loading. Currently, management recognizes a Georges Bank cod stock and a Gulf of Maine cod stock with distinctly different biological reference points and management strategies.
|
From page 99... ...
Such a journal would need to have a rapid turnaround time, and it might be possible to have the peer review of the cooperative research projects serve as the peer review for the reports and the reports then published online with rapid turnaround. An alternative is to encourage scientific journals to publish more cooperative research.
|
From page 100... ...
In this case, the fishermen's incentive to be part of a research project was to point out the shortcomings of existing fishery-independent research. This was also the case in several other examples, including New Zealand rock lobster, Canadian West Coast groundfish and East Coast halibut.
|
From page 101... ...
WHAT WORKS AND DOESN'T WORK 101 expertise to best advantage. The fishermen are the experts on the fishing grounds; they understand the realities of working at sea.
|
From page 102... ...
The model of NMFS scientists taking the lead in design and fishermen the lead in execution is far from universal or mandatory. NMFS is not the only science provider in the United States and in many cases university scientists have been heavily involved in the scientific design of cooperative research projects.
|
From page 103... ...
1 trough responsibility should reside in one individual as the lead principal investigator, the most successful cooperative research results from an integrated team effort. The genius of cooperative research is that it attempts to harness divergent viewpoints to a common goal.
|
From page 104... ...
Consistent, basic standards and criteria for awarding grants, distributing money, selecting cooperative partners, choosing vessels, and deciding other aspects of cooperative projects, such as the basic authority to conduct such work, would shield the agency from challenges that the various cooperative research programs are inconsistent and therefore unfair. Further, communication among NMFS headquarters, regional offices, and the fisheries science centers should include sharing of problem-solving tactics and successful experiences.
|
From page 105... ...
The fishermen who participate must also understand that the pay for their work is not renegotiable once the contract is signed. Successful cooperative research requires that scientists, fishermen, and the overseeing agency be responsible and accountable in ways not normally required in order to maintain the focus and to address the original purpose of the research.
|
From page 106... ...
Lack of coordinating control is one way that a cooperative research project can fail. With the many different parties involved in cooperative research, any participant wavering from protocols can provide bad data.
|
From page 107... ...
With even more appropriations due in the future, regional officials have stated that they currently are unprepared to handle the amount of information from the resultant cooperative research. Results of successful projects will be useless if the management agencies cannot assimilate them as required.
|
From page 108... ...
and fishermen. Cooperative research has effectively thwarted lawsuits when it has been a tool to target a specific contentious issue and has established a basis for making rational, effective decisions that can resolve a particular issue (e.g., albatrosses in Alaska, stock assessments in surf clams)
|
From page 109... ...
Cooperative research is often cited as a means for fishermen to trust NMFS science, or at least to trust the results of research with which they are involved. When one considers the costs of a lack of trust the costs in manpower and resources of a politically besieged management systemthen effort expended to bolster science for the sake of building political will is worth doing.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.