Information science and the scientist. A look at information requirements and the technologies available to scientists in the pursuit of information

A review article looking at the type of information requirements commonly shared by scientists and their use of traditional information services. Areas covered include primary requirements of IFE (Institute of Freshwater Ecology) staff, pure versus applied research, informal and personal sources of information, and traditional library and information services. It goes on to describe how research into information systems and technology may improve the wider accessibility and use of information to the scientific community. Technologies covered include online databases, telecommunications, gateways, expert systems, optical technology and applications of CDROM.

Paciano II: the report of a conversation on whaling and science, 1-3 March 2008 (Paciano, Umbria)

In 2006 the UK-based charity, Global Ocean, with local support from the Third Millennium Foundation, convened a Conversation among specialists about the problems facing the conservation of whales. Called "A consultation on whaling", this gathering was held in the ancient village of Paciano, in Umbria near the border with Tuscany, 15 – 17 October 2006. There were 15 participants from 11 countries. Dr Kees Lankester served as moderator. The outcome was an Aide Memoire which served to guide the participants in the run-up to the 2007 meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), held in Anchorage, Alaska, in June. One point of agreement was that a second consultation should be held in the months following the Anchorage meeting, involving some but not necessarily all of the participants in the first, but concentrating this time on scientific issues – especially those encountered in the Scientific Committee of the IWC –with particular attention to informing a wider public about those scientific activities in relation to the problems confronting the IWC and the views of scientists about them. This document is the report of that Conversation, referred to as Paciano II. The moderator was Dr Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara and the Report was written by Kieran Mulvaney in consultation with all participants, and with reference to an Aide Memoire prepared by the Rapporteur, Dr Russell Leaper. The sponsor and organisers have agreed with the general sentiment expressed by participants in Paciano II that further such conversations should be held at roughly yearly intervals and they will try to satisfy that desire. Although these future gatherings would be concerned with the living ocean they would not necessarily be restricted in future to consideration of whales and whaling. Discussions are on-going for selection of a theme which is of both scientific interest and practical concern for conservation of marine life and management of the uses of ocean space. (Document has 18 pages)

Paciano II: a report of a conversation on whaling and science, 1-3 March 2008

In 2006 the UK-based charity, Global Ocean, with local support from the Third Millennium Foundation, convened a Conversation among specialists about the problems facing the conservation of whales. Called "A consultation on whaling", this gathering was held in the ancient village of Paciano, in Umbria near the border with Tuscany, 15 – 17 October 2006. There were 15 participants from 11 countries. Dr Kees Lankester served as moderator. The outcome was an Aide Memoire which served to guide the participants in the run-up to the 2007 meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), held in Anchorage, Alaska, in June. One point of agreement was that a second consultation should be held in the months following the Anchorage meeting, involving some but not necessarily all of the participants in the first, but concentrating this time on scientific issues – especially those encountered in the Scientific Committee of the IWC –with particular attention to informing a wider public about those scientific activities in relation to the problems confronting the IWC and the views of scientists about them. This document is the report of that Conversation, referred to as Paciano II. The moderator was Dr Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara and the Report was written by Kieran Mulvaney in consultation with all participants, and with reference to an Aide Memoire prepared by the Rapporteur, Dr Russell Leaper. The sponsor and organisers have agreed with the general sentiment expressed by participants in Paciano II that further such conversations should be held at roughly yearly intervals and they will try to satisfy that desire. Although these future gatherings would be concerned with the living ocean they would not necessarily be restricted in future to consideration of whales and whaling. Discussions are on-going for selection of a theme which is of both scientific interest and practical concern for conservation of marine life and management of the uses of ocean space. (19 page document)

The use of freshwater science in policy development

This article explores the diversity of scientific disciplines and paradigms, their relevance for policy development, how policy emerges throughout society,-and the mechanisms by which scientists can promote the value of science in policy formation. The author gives examples from various countries where freshwater science was used to inform policy.

Forensic Fisheries Science: Literature Review and Research Suggestions

Recent years have seen a dramatic increase in litigation against the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. Litigation may affect personnel throughout the agency, including scientists, whose work is often directly or indirectly influenced by complex legal requirements, but who may not be in a position to comment or engage in public dialogue. It may be helpful for scientists and other agency personnel to join the ongoing discussion in the legal community regarding the interface of science and law. This paper provides a starting point with a selected introduction to relevant legal literature in this area. It uses the phrase “forensic fisheries science” to describe the application of science to legal requirements in the fishery management context. It concludes with suggestions for future research that could assist NMFS scientists as they grapple with the challenge of using science to help the agency meet its complex legal requirements. Forensic: belonging to, used in, or suitable to courts of judicature or to public discussion and debate; argumentative, rhetorical; relating to or dealing with the application of scientific knowledge to legal problems (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary )

Annual report 2007 - North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES). Sixteenth meeting, Victoria, Canada, October 26-November 5, 2007

Report of Opening Session (p. 1). Report of Governing Council (p. 15). Report of the Finance and Administration Committee (p. 65). Reports of Science Board and Committees: Science Board Inter-Sessional Meeting (p. 83); Science Board (p. 93); Biological Oceanography Committee (p. 105); Fishery Science Committee (p. 117); Marine Environmental Quality Committee (p. 129); Physical Oceanography and Climate Committee (p. 139); Technical Committee on Data Exchange (p. 145); Technical Committee on Monitoring (p. 153). Reports of Sections, Working and Study Groups: Section on Carbon and Climate (p. 161); Section on Ecology of Harmful Algal Blooms in the North Pacific (p. 167); Working Group 19 on Ecosystem-based Management Science and its Application to the North Pacific (p. 173); Working Group 20 on Evaluations of Climate Change Projections (p. 179); Working Group 21 on Non-indigenous Aquatic Species (p. 183); Study Group to Develop a Strategy for GOOS (p. 193); Study Group on Ecosystem Status Reporting (p. 203); Study Group on Marine Aquaculture and Ranching in the PICES Region (p. 213); Study Group on Scientific Cooperation between PICES and Non-member Countries (p. 225). Reports of the Climate Change and Carrying Capacity Program: Implementation Panel on the CCCC Program (p. 229); CFAME Task Team (p. 235); MODEL Task Team (p. 241). Reports of Advisory Panels: Advisory Panel for a CREAMS/PICES Program in East Asian Marginal Seas (p. 249); Advisory Panel on Continuous Plankton Recorder Survey in the North Pacific (p. 253); Advisory Panel on Iron Fertilization Experiment in the Subarctic Pacific Ocean (p. 255); Advisory Panel on Marine Birds and Mammals (p. 261); Advisory Panel on Micronekton Sampling Inter-calibration Experiment (p. 265). 2007 Review of PICES Publication Program (p. 269). Guidelines for PICES Temporary Expert Groups (p. 297). Summary of Scientific Sessions and Workshops (p. 313). Report of the ICES/PICES Conference for Early Career Scientists (p. 355). Membership (p. 367). Participants (p. 387). PICES Acronyms (p. 413). Acronyms (p. 415).

Historical knowledge of sharks: ancient science, earliest American encounters, and American science, fisheries, and utilization

In western civilization, the knowledge of the elasmobranch or selachian fishes (sharks and rays) begins with Aristotle (384–322 B.C.). Two of his extant works, the “Historia Animalium” and the “Generation of Animals,” both written about 330 B.C., demonstrate knowledge of elasmobranch fishes acquired by observation. Roman writers of works on natural history, such as Aelian and Pliny, who followed Aristotle, were compilers of available information. Their contribution was that they prevented the Greek knowledge from being lost, but they added few original observations. The fall of Rome, around 476 A.D., brought a period of economic regression and political chaos. These in turn brought intellectual thought to a standstill for nearly one thousand years, the period known as the Dark Ages. It would not be until the middle of the sixteenth century, well into the Renaissance, that knowledge of elasmobranchs would advance again. The works of Belon, Salviani, Rondelet, and Steno mark the beginnings of ichthyology, including the study of sharks and rays. The knowledge of sharks and rays increased slowly during and after the Renaissance, and the introduction of the Linnaean System of Nomenclature in 1735 marks the beginning of modern ichthyology. However, the first major work on sharks would not appear until the early nineteenth century. Knowledge acquired about sea animals usually follows their economic importance and exploitation, and this was also true with sharks. The first to learn about sharks in North America were the native fishermen who learned how, when, and where to catch them for food or for their oils. The early naturalists in America studied the land animals and plants; they had little interest in sharks. When faunistic works on fishes started to appear, naturalists just enumerated the species of sharks that they could discern. Throughout the U.S. colonial period, sharks were seldom utilized for food, although their liver oil or skins were often utilized. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Spiny Dogfish, Squalus acanthias, was the only shark species utilized in a large scale on both coasts. It was fished for its liver oil, which was used as a lubricant, and for lighting and tanning, and for its skin which was used as an abrasive. During the early part of the twentieth century, the Ocean Leather Company was started to process sea animals (primarily sharks) into leather, oil, fertilizer, fins, etc. The Ocean Leather Company enjoyed a monopoly on the shark leather industry for several decades. In 1937, the liver of the Soupfin Shark, Galeorhinus galeus, was found to be a rich source of vitamin A, and because the outbreak of World War II in 1938 interrupted the shipping of vitamin A from European sources, an intensive shark fishery soon developed along the U.S. West Coast. By 1939 the American shark leather fishery had transformed into the shark liver oil fishery of the early 1940’s, encompassing both coasts. By the late 1940’s, these fisheries were depleted because of overfishing and fishing in the nursery areas. Synthetic vitamin A appeared on the market in 1950, causing the fishery to be discontinued. During World War II, shark attacks on the survivors of sunken ships and downed aviators engendered the search for a shark repellent. This led to research aimed at understanding shark behavior and the sensory biology of sharks. From the late 1950’s to the 1980’s, funding from the Office of Naval Research was responsible for most of what was learned about the sensory biology of sharks.

Age determination manual of the Alaska Fisheries Science Center Age and Growth Program

The Age and Growth Program at the Alaska Fisheries Science Center is tasked with providing age data in order to improve the basic understanding of the ecology and fisheries dynamics of Alaskan fish species. The primary focus of the Age and Growth Program is to estimate ages from otoliths and other calcified structures for age-structured modeling of commercially exploited stocks; however, the program has recently expanded its interests to include numerous studies on topics ranging from age estimate validation to the growth and life history of non-target species. Because so many applications rely upon age data and particularly upon assurances as to their accuracy and precision, the Age and Growth Program has developed this practical guide to document the age determination of key groundfish species from Alaskan waters. The main objective of this manual is to describe techniques specific to the age determination of commercially and ecologically important species studied by the Age and Growth Program. The manual also provides general background information on otolith morphology, dissection, and preparation, as well as descriptions of methods used to measure precision and accuracy of age estimates. This manual is intended not only as a reference for age readers at the AFSC and other laboratories, but also to give insight into the quality of age estimates to scientists who routinely use such data.