Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH IN THE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE . Committee on Cooperative Research In the National Marine Fisheries Service Ocean Studies Board Division on Earth and Life Studies NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAl ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This paper is funded in part by a contract from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not neces- sarily reflect the views of NOAA or any of its subagencies. International Standard Book Number 0-309-09074-1 (Book) International Standard Book Number 0-309-52747-3 (PDF) Library of Congress Catalog Number 2003114991 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2004 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Stienre, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal govern- ment. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the supe- rior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sci- ences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the ex- amination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given tO the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is presi- dent of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the Na- tional Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www. nationa l-academies.org
COMMITTEE ON COOPERATIVE RESEARCH IN THE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE RAY HILBORN ( Chair), University of Washington, Seattle JOSEPH DEALTERIS, University of Rhode Island, Kingston RICHARD DERISO, Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, La lolla, California GARY GRAHAM, Texas A&M University, West Columbia SUZANNE IUDICELLO, National Fisheries Conservation Center, Rapid City, South Dakota MARK LUNDSTEN, Queen Anne Fisheries, Inc., Seattle, Washington ELLEN PIKITCH, Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, New York GIL SYLVIA, Oregon State University, Newport PRISCILLA WEEKS, Houston Advanced Research Center, The Woodlands, Texas JOHN WILLIAMSON, Fishing Community Activist, Kennebunk, Maine KEES ZWANENBURG, Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Nova Scotia, Canada Staff TERRY SCHAEFER, Study Director DENISE GREENE, Senior Project Assistant V
Preface In recent years there has been growing interest in having fisheries stake- holders involved in various aspects of fisheries data collection and experi- mentation. This activity is generally known as cooperative research and may take many forms, including gear technology studies, bycatch avoid- ance studies, and surveys. While the process of cooperative research is not new at all, the current interest in cooperative research and the growing frequency of direct budgetary allocation for cooperative research prompted the National Marine Fisheries Service (now National Oceanic and Amospheric Administration Fisheries) to commission this study. The committee consisted of individuals from a broad range of disci- plines and perspectives, including academic scientists, a Canadian govern- ment scientist, a non-governmental organization scientist, an international commission scientist, commercial fishermen, a fisheries management council member, and private consultants. All of us had some experience with various forms of cooperative research, and we were all interested in exploring what circumstances were appropriate for cooperative research and what it would take to make cooperative research the most effective. The committee met three times (Boston, Seattle, St. Petersburg), and at each location the committee heard testimony from a range of partici- pants in a variety of cooperative research projects. The committee listened to successes and failures and heard from individuals who were very sup- portive of cooperative research and people who had had unhappy experi- ences. While the examples the committee heard varied from region to v
v' PREFACE region, there was a general consistency throughout the country about what worked and did not work as cooperative research. The committee would like to thank those individuals who provided testimony to the committee. I would like to thank the committee mem- bers for their time and effort and the National Research Council staff, Terry Schaefer and Denise Greene, for their work. Ray Hilborn Chair
Acknowledgments This report was greatly enhanced by the participants of the multiple information-gathering activities held as part of this study. The committee would first like to acknowledge the efforts of those who gave presentations at the committee meetings. These talks helped set the stage for fruitful discussions in the closed sessions that followed. Daniel Cohen, Atlantic Cape Fisheries; Eric Powell, Rutgers Univer- sity; Dave Wallace, Wallace & Associates; km Weinberg, Northeast Fisheries Science Center; Hans Davidsen, commercial fisherman; Bill Dupaul, Virginia Institute of Marine Science; Paul Rago, National Marine Fisheries Service; Ron Smalowitz, consultant; Chris Glass, Manomet Center for Con- servation Sciences; Troy Hartley, Northeast Consortium; Earl Meredith, National Marine Fisheries Service; Craig Pendelton, Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance; Don Perkins, Gulf of Maine Aquarium; Laura Taylor- Singer, Gulf of Maine Aquarium; Robert Tetrault, commercial fisherman; Wendy Gabriel, National Marine Fisheries Service; David Goethel, com- mercial fisherman; Harry Mears, National Marine Fisheries Service; Anthony Chatwin, Conservation Law Foundation; Ilene Kaplan, Union College; Bruce Turris, Canadian Sablefish Association & Canadian Groundfish Research and Conservation Society; Gary Stauffer, Alaska Fisheries Science Center; Arne Fuglvog, commercial fisherman; lohn Gauvin, Groundfish Forum; km McManus, Trident Seafoods; Gary Painter, commercial fisherman; Elizabeth Clarke, Northwest Fisheries Science . . v''
- - - vIll ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Center; lennifer Bloesser, Pacific Marine Conservation Council; Terry Thompson, commercial fisherman; Danny Parker, commercial fisherman; Vidar Wespestad, Resource Analysts, International; Ralph Brown, com- mercial fisherman; Bruce Leaman, International Pacific Halibut Commis- sion; lulia Parrish, University of Washington; Craig Rose, Alaska Fisheries Science Center; Chris Lunsford, Alaska Fisheries Science Center; Paul Starr, New Zealand Seafood Industry Council; Martin Hall, Inter-American TropicalTuna Commission; Gerry Scott,Southeast Fisheries Science Center; Benny Gallaway, LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc.; Robert Hueter, Mote Marine Laboratory; Geof Lane, Gulf and South Atlantic Fisheries Foundation; Scott Nichols, Southeast Fisheries Science Center; Pascagoula Laboratory; Sal Versaggi, Versaggi Shrimp Company; ludy lamison, Gulf and South Atlantic Fisheries Foundation; Kerry O'Malley, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Steve Rebach, North Carolina Sea Grant; Ellie Roche, National Marine Fisheries Service, South- east Regional Office; Eric Sander, Florida Marine Research Institute; Karen Burns, Mote Marine Laboratory; Greg Didomenico, Monroe County Fisherman, Inc.; Bobby Spaeth, Madeira Beach Seafood; lohn Hunter, National Marine Fisheries Service, La lolla Laboratory; David Demer, National Marine Fisheries Service, La lolla Laboratory; Gerald DiNardo, National Marine Fisheries Service, Honolulu Laboratory; David Hamm, National Marine Fisheries Service, Honolulu Laboratory. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with proce- dures approved by the National Research Council's Report Review Com- mittee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: Vaughn Anthony, retired National Marine Fisheries Service assessment biologist, Boothbay, Maine lennifer Bloesser, Pacific Marine Conservation Council, Arcata, California
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AX John Gauvin, Groundfish Forum, Seattle, Washington Christopher Glass, Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, Manomet, Massachusetts Jutly Jamison, Gulf & South Atlantic Fisheries Foundation, Tampa, Florida Seth Macinko, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, Rhode Island Bonnie McCay, Rutgers University, Cook College, New Brunswick, New Jersey Andrew Solow, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts Robert Schoning, retired, former director, National Marine Fisheries Service, Corvallis, Oregon Richar~lYoung, commercial fisherman, Crescent City, California Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive com- ments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert Frosch, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Appointed by the National Re- search Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Re- sponsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
Appropriateness of Cooperative Research, 73 Working Together, 74 Project Management, 76 Communication of Results, 78 Reasons for Failure, 79 Making Cooperative Research Work, 80 9 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REFERENCES CITED APPENDICES A Statement of Task, 90 B Project Oversight, 91 C Committee and Staff Bios, 92 D Acronyms, 95 IX 82 88 90
Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION Charge to the Committee and Report Overview, 7 Cooperative and Collaborative Research, 8 Scientific Potential of Cooperative Research, 8 Social Context of Cooperative Research, 10 The Objectives of Participants, 10 2 EXPERIENCE WITH COOPERATIVE RESEARCH IN THE UNITED STATES Introduction andBriefHistory, 13 New England and Mid-Atlantic Scallops Surveys, 16 The West Coast Mesh Size Study, Ensuring Rigor and Experimental Design, 20 West Coast Volunteer Logbook Program, 23 Reducing Seabird Bycatch in Alaska Longline Fisheries, 26 Cooperative Finnish Resource Abundance Survey in the Mid-Atlantic Bight, 27 x' 1 7 13
xI' 3 EXAMPLES OF COOPERATIVE RESEARCH IN OTHER COUNTRIES Introduction and Perspective, 29 Sentinel Surveys: An Overview of Sentinel Fisheries in Eastern Canada, 29 Grand Banks Scotian Shelf Atlantic Halibut Longline Survey, 32 Fishermen and Scientists Research Society in Eastern Canada, 36 British Columbia Sablefish, 42 British Columbia Groundfish Trawl Fishery, 43 Cooperative Research in New Zealand, 44 Summary of International Experience, 49 4 SETTING RESEARCH PRIORITIES Identifying Cooperative Fishery Research Needs and Opportunities, 51 Developing Criteria for Prioritizing Cooperative Fisheries Research, 54 Alternative Processes for Prioritizing and Coordinating Cooperative Fishery Research, 56 CONTENTS 29 51 FUNDING, LEGAL ISSUES, AND SCIENTIFIC RIGOR 63 Funding Sources and Distribution, 63 Legal Aspects of Cooperative Research, 65 Ensuring Scientific Rigor, 72 6 INCENTIVES AND CONSTRAINTS TO COOPERATIVE RESEARCH National Marine Fisheries Service, 76 Academia, 80 Industry, 81 Other Constituent Groups, 84 OUTREACH AND COMMUNICATION Communication, 89 Overcoming the Perception of Arrogance, 91 Outreach, 91 The Role of Translators, 93 75 89
CONTENTS 8 WHAT WORKS AND DOESN'T WORK Reasons for Success, 95 Reasons for Failure, 106 Making Cooperative Research Work, 108 9 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Evaluating the Benefits of Cooperative Research, 111 Allocation of Funding, 1 12 Legal and Administrative Issues, 114 Communication, 117 REFERENCES APPENDIXES A STATEMENT OF TASK B PROJECT OVERSIGHT C COMMITTEE AND STAFF BIOGRAPHIES D ACRONYMS x''' 95 111 119 123 125 127 131