Facilitating Discussion with the National Marine Fisheries Service

Send this page
Published February, 2008
Keywords:

 

In recent years, considerable controversy has erupted around the stock level of groundfish (most notably cod) in the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank Fishery, off the eastern seaboard. There is a considerable discrepancy between the fishing industry and the scientific and management community on the stock level of groundfish in the fishery. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) manages the fishery, while its subsidiary, the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC), designs and conducts studies and experiments to monitor the health of the region’s fishery.

Fishermen and scientists learned that the gear used by the NEFSC in its groundfish population survey calibrated incorrectly, calling into question the actual groundfish population number the NEFSC study produced. In response to this problem, members of the commercial fishing industry and NMFS met to design and conduct an experiment to compare catch rates of the miscalibrated gear to gear properly calibrated. Throughout the experiment, both fishermen and NMFS scientists worked together to conduct survey tows for the comparative experiment. Once the data was collected, NMFS made it available to any interested party for independent analysis.

In order to be as transparent as possible, NMFS contacted CBI to facilitate a two-day workshop to determine areas of agreement and disagreement of the same data analyzed by both the NEFSC and the fishing industry. This “Workshop on Analysis of Trawl Survey Experiment” was held at the NEFSC in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, on January 14 and 15, 2003. CBI Senior Consultant John Forester and Associate Lawrence Dixon served as facilitators for the workshop.

Both NEFSC staff and fishing industry representatives presented their analytic findings and outlined areas of broad agreement, as well as, shared areas of concern. Gear experts were on hand to discuss implications of different gear configurations on catch and how it could impact the trawl survey. Through two-days of intensive presentations and deliberations, the working group generated a report titled, “Issues of Concern to be Considered by the Peer Review Panel.” This document represents the common concerns of both NMFS scientists and members of the fishing industry on the experiment and analysis of data. The document was forwarded to a group of independent peer reviewers to provide the definitive word on the study.

In addition to the core task, CBI was able to facilitate a discussion with NMFS, fishermen and environmental stakeholders to create a list of ways to improve surveys and future industry-NEFSC cooperation and research. The resulting document, “Considerations in the Design of New Fishery Independent Survey Systems,” is well aligned with many potential projects the NEFSC hope to undertake closely with the industry. Building on the momentum of this cooperation, participants were able to explore mechanisms to improve communication between scientists and fishermen and the possibility of improving understanding of the current trawl survey system through future tutorials.

 

For more information on this case, please contact CBI.