Appendix C
Questionnaires Sent to Fishery Management Councils and Fisheries Science Centers

FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL QUESTIONNAIRE

If possible, please submit a flow chart for the application of scientific information to the development of your fishery management plans (FMPs).

Questions

How does the council interpret the phrase “best scientific information available” as used in National Standard 2?

Are constituent observations, opinions, or recommendations considered in addressing Standard 2?

When there are discrepancies in information from different sources (e.g., NOAA Fisheries, council staff, state fishery scientists, academics, industry representatives) who determines which information to use in preparing the FMPs? What criteria are used to rank or reject information?

Who determines what information is contained in the Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation reports, what criteria are used to select the information included in those reports, and what quality control procedures are in place?



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 75
Improving the use of the “Best Scientific Information Available” Standard in Fisheries Management Appendix C Questionnaires Sent to Fishery Management Councils and Fisheries Science Centers FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL QUESTIONNAIRE If possible, please submit a flow chart for the application of scientific information to the development of your fishery management plans (FMPs). Questions How does the council interpret the phrase “best scientific information available” as used in National Standard 2? Are constituent observations, opinions, or recommendations considered in addressing Standard 2? When there are discrepancies in information from different sources (e.g., NOAA Fisheries, council staff, state fishery scientists, academics, industry representatives) who determines which information to use in preparing the FMPs? What criteria are used to rank or reject information? Who determines what information is contained in the Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation reports, what criteria are used to select the information included in those reports, and what quality control procedures are in place?

OCR for page 75
Improving the use of the “Best Scientific Information Available” Standard in Fisheries Management Please describe briefly the process by which the council (including the staff and committees) prepares FMPs and supporting documents (amendments, environmental impact statement, etc.)? How does the council ensure that Standard 2 is satisfied when preparing FMPs and supporting documents, and how does it determine what information to consider with respect to the folowing: Stock assessments Essential fish habitat Nontarget species impacts Socioeconomic assessments Other What is the origin of the data used in these scientific reports? In other words, who collects the primary data and how is it collected? Have any data been excluded from consideration in the aforementioned scientific reports? If so, what was the basis for such exclusion? Have some data and/or information been ranked higher than others for scientific assessments? If so, please explain the basis for such ranking. If all data have been treated equally, please explain why. Are there steps in process where the scientific data and findings are submitted for peer review? If so, is there a procedure for responding to critiques? FISHERIES SCIENCE CENTER QUESTIONNAIRE If possible, please submit a flow chart for the collection and analysis of data for the scientific assessments prepared for advising the fishery management councils. Questions How does the center interpret the phrase “best scientific information available” as used in National Standard 2?

OCR for page 75
Improving the use of the “Best Scientific Information Available” Standard in Fisheries Management Please describe briefly the process by which center prepares scientific reports for the Fishery Management Councils regarding the following: Stock assessments Essential fish habitat Nontarget species impacts Socioeconomic assessments Other What is the origin of the data used in these scientific reports? In other words, who collects the primary data and how is it collected? Who in the process makes the decision on what types of data and methods of analyses to use? Are there specific criteria? Have any data been excluded from consideration in the aforementioned scientific reports? If so, what was the basis for such exclusion? Have some data and/or information been ranked higher than others for scientific assessments? If so, please explain the basis for such ranking. If all data have been treated equally, please explain why. Are there steps in process where the scientific data and findings are submitted for peer review? If so, is there a procedure for responding to critiques?

OCR for page 75
Improving the use of the “Best Scientific Information Available” Standard in Fisheries Management This page intentionally left blank.