Vivian M. Nguyen

Generation of Priority Research Questions to Inform Conservation Policy and Management at a National Level

Integrating knowledge from across the natural and social sciences is necessary to effectively address societal tradeoffs between human use of biological diversity and its preservation. Collaborative processes can change the ways decision makers think about scientific evidence, enhance levels of mutual trust and credibility, and advance the conservation policy discourse. Canada has responsibility for a large fraction of some major ecosystems, such as boreal forests, Arctic tundra, wetlands, and temperate and Arctic oceans. Stressors to biological diversity within these ecosystems arise from activities of the countrys resource-based economy, as well as external drivers of environmental change. Effective management is complicated by incongruence between ecological and political boundaries and conflicting perspectives on social and economic goals. Many knowledge gaps about stressors and their management might be reduced through targeted, timely research. We identify 40 questions that, if addressed or answered, would advance research that has a high probability of supporting development of effective policies and management strategies for species, ecosystems, and ecological processes in Canada. A total of 396 candidate questions drawn from natural and social science disciplines were contributed by individuals with diverse organizational affiliations. These were collaboratively winnowed to 40 by our team of collaborators. The questions emphasize understanding ecosystems, the effects and mitigation of climate change, coordinating governance and management efforts across multiple jurisdictions, and examining relations between conservation policy and the social and economic well-being of Aboriginal peoples. The questions we identified provide potential links between evidence from the conservation sciences and formulation of policies for conservation and resource management. Our collaborative process of communication and engagement between scientists and decision makers for generating and prioritizing research questions at a national level could be a model for similar efforts beyond Canada. Generación de Preguntas de Investigación Prioritarias para Informar a las Políticas y Gestión de la Conservación a Nivel Nacional

On the sustainability of inland fisheries: Finding a future for the forgotten

At present, inland fisheries are not often a national or regional governance priority and as a result, inland capture fisheries are undervalued and largely overlooked. As such they are threatened in both developing and developed countries. Indeed, due to lack of reliable data, inland fisheries have never been part of any high profile global fisheries assessment and are notably absent from the Sustainable Development Goals. The general public and policy makers are largely ignorant of the plight of freshwater ecosystems and the fish they support, as well as the ecosystem services generated by inland fisheries. This ignorance is particularly salient given that the current emphasis on the food-water-energy nexus often fails to include the important role that inland fish and fisheries play in food security and supporting livelihoods in low-income food deficit countries. Developing countries in Africa and Asia produce about 11 million tonnes of inland fish annually, 90 % of the global total. The role of inland fisheries goes beyond just kilocalories; fish provide important micronutrients and essentially fatty acids. In some regions, inland recreational fisheries are important, generating much wealth and supporting livelihoods. The following three key recommendations are necessary for action if inland fisheries are to become a part of the food-water-energy discussion: invest in improved valuation and assessment methods, build better methods to effectively govern inland fisheries (requires capacity building and incentives), and develop approaches to managing waters across sectors and scales. Moreover, if inland fisheries are recognized as important to food security, livelihoods, and human well-being, they can be more easily incorporated in regional, national, and global policies and agreements on water issues. Through these approaches, inland fisheries can be better evaluated and be more fully recognized in broader water resource and aquatic ecosystem planning and decision-making frameworks, enhancing their value and sustainability for the future.

Acoustic telemetry and fisheries management

This paper reviews the use of acoustic telemetry as a tool for addressing issues in fisheries management, and serves as the lead to the special Feature Issue of Ecological Applications titled Acoustic Telemetry and Fisheries Management. Specifically, we provide an overview of the ways in which acoustic telemetry can be used to inform issues central to the ecology, conservation, and management of exploited and/or imperiled fish species. Despite great strides in this area in recent years, there are comparatively few examples where data have been applied directly to influence fisheries management and policy. We review the literature on this issue, identify the strengths and weaknesses of work done to date, and highlight knowledge gaps and difficulties in applying empirical fish telemetry studies to fisheries policy and practice. We then highlight the key areas of management and policy addressed, as well as the challenges that needed to be overcome to do this. We conclude with a set of recommendations about how researchers can, in consultation with stock assessment scientists and managers, formulate testable scientific questions to address and design future studies to generate data that can be used in a meaningful way by fisheries management and conservation practitioners. We also urge the involvement of relevant stakeholders (managers, fishers, conservation societies, etc.) early on in the process (i.e., in the co-creation of research projects), so that all priority questions and issues can be addressed effectively.

Disentangling the roles of air exposure, gill net injury, and facilitated recovery on the postcapture and release mortality and behavior of adult migratory sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in freshwater.

We sought to improve the understanding of delayed mortality in migrating sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) captured and released in freshwater fisheries. Using biotelemetry, blood physiology, and reflex assessments, we evaluated the relative roles of gill net injury and air exposure and investigated whether using a recovery box improved survival. Fish (), captured by beach seine, were allocated to four treatment groups: captured only, air exposed, injured, and injured and air exposed. Only half of the fish in each group were provided with a 15-min facilitated recovery. After treatment, fish were radio-tagged and released to resume their migration. Blood status was assessed in 36 additional untagged fish sampled after the four treatments. Compared with fish sampled immediately on capture, all treatments resulted in elevated plasma lactate and cortisol concentrations. After air exposure, plasma osmolality was elevated and reflexes were significantly impaired relative to the control and injured treatments. Injured fish exhibited reduced short-term migration speed by 3.2 km/d and had a 14.5% reduced survival to subnatal watersheds compared to controls. The 15-min facilitated recovery improved reflex assessment relative to fish released immediately but did not affect survival. We suggest that in sockeye salmon migrating in cool water temperatures (∼13°–16°C), delayed mortality can result from injury and air exposure, perhaps through sublethal stress, and that injury created additive delayed mortality likely via secondary infections.

Mobilizing New Science into Management Practice: The Challenge of Biotelemetry for Fisheries Management, a Case Study of Canada's Fraser River

Natural resources that are “commons” or held in public trust are notoriously difficult to govern. In the absence of exclusive property rights, authorities face the twin challenges of setting limits on the amount that may be harvested (a sustainability challenge) and determining how the harvest should be distributed (an equity challenge). These decisions, which are often controversial on their own, are particularly difficult in fisheries management, where

How Long Is Too Long in Contemporary Peer Review? Perspectives from Authors Publishing in Conservation Biology Journals

Delays in peer reviewed publication may have consequences for both assessment of scientific prowess in academia as well as communication of important information to the knowledge receptor community. We present an analysis on the perspectives of authors publishing in conservation biology journals regarding their opinions on the importance of speed in peer-review as well as how to improve review times. Authors were invited to take part in an online questionnaire, of which the data was subjected to both qualitative (open coding, categorizing) and quantitative analyses (generalized linear models). We received 637 responses to 6,547 e-mail invitations sent. Peer-review speed was generally perceived as slow, with authors experiencing a typical turnaround time of 14 weeks while their perceived optimal review time was six weeks. Male and younger respondents seem to have higher expectations of review speed than females and older respondents. The majority of participants attributed lengthy review times to reviewer and editor fatigue, while editor persistence and journal prestige were believed to speed up the review process. Negative consequences of lengthy review times were perceived to be greater for early career researchers and to have impact on author morale (e.g. motivation or frustration). Competition among colleagues was also of concern to respondents. Incentivizing peer-review was among the top suggested alterations to the system along with training graduate students in peer-review, increased editorial persistence, and changes to the norms of peer-review such as opening the peer-review process to the public. It is clear that authors surveyed in this study viewed the peer-review system as under stress and we encourage scientists and publishers to push the envelope for new peer-review models.

Envisioning the Future of Aquatic Animal Tracking: Technology, Science, and Application

Electronic tags are significantly improving our understanding of aquatic animal behavior and are emerging as key sources of information for conservation and management practices. Future aquatic integrative biology and ecology studies will increasingly rely on data from electronic tagging. Continued advances in tracking hardware and software are needed to provide the knowledge required by managers and policymakers to address the challenges posed by the worlds changing aquatic ecosystems. We foresee multiplatform tracking systems for simultaneously monitoring the position, activity, and physiology of animals and the environment through which they are moving. Improved data collection will be accompanied by greater data accessibility and analytical tools for processing data, enabled by new infrastructure and cyberinfrastructure. To operationalize advances and facilitate integration into policy, there must be parallel developments in the accessibility of education and training, as well as solutions to key governance and legal issues.

Bycatch mortality of endangered coho salmon: impacts, solutions, and aboriginal perspectives

We used biotelemetry and human dimensions surveys to explore potential solutions to migration mortality of an endangered population of coho salmon caught as bycatch in an aboriginal beach seine fishery. From 2009 to 2011, 182 wild coho salmon caught as bycatch in the lower Fraser River (Canada) were radio-tagged and tracked as they attempted to complete their migrations to natal spawning areas over 300 km upstream. Failure to survive to reach terminal radio receiving stations averaged 39% over three years. This mortality estimate is low compared to those obtained from telemetry studies on other salmon fisheries in the Fraser River. However, this value is markedly higher than the mortality estimate currently used to manage the fisherys impact. It is also in contrast to the perceptions of the majority of aboriginal fishers, who did not think survival of coho salmon is affected by capture and release from their fishery. Increased probability of survival was associated with lower reflex impairment, which is consistent with previous findings. Reflex impairment was positively correlated with entanglement time, suggesting that greater efforts by the fishers to release bycatch from their nets quickly would minimize post-release mortality. Survey responses by aboriginal fishers also suggested that they are receptive to employing new bycatch handling methods if they are shown to increase post-release survival. However, attempts to facilitate revival of a subset of captured fish using cylindrical in-river recovery bags did not improve migration success. Fisheries managers could use the new information from this study to better quantify impacts and evaluate different harvest options. Since aboriginal fishers were receptive to using alternate handling methods, efforts to improve knowledge on minimizing reflex impairment through reductions in handling time could help increase bycatch survival. Such a direct integration of social science and applied ecology is a novel approach to understanding conservation issues that can better inform meaningful actions to promote species recovery.

A roadmap for knowledge exchange and mobilization research in conservation and natural resource management.

Scholars across all disciplines have long been interested in how knowledge moves within and beyond their community of peers. Rapid environmental changes and calls for sustainable management practices mean the best knowledge possible is needed to inform decisions, policies, and practices to protect biodiversity and sustainably manage vulnerable natural resources. Although the conservation literature on knowledge exchange (KE) and knowledge mobilization (KM) has grown in recent years, much of it is based on context-specific case studies. This presents a challenge for learning cumulative lessons from KE and KM research and thus effectively using knowledge in conservation and natural resources management. Although continued research on the gap between knowledge and action is valuable, overarching conceptual frameworks are now needed to enable summaries and comparisons across diverse KE-KM research. We propose a knowledge-action framework that provides a conceptual roadmap for future research and practice in KE/KM with the aim of synthesizing lessons learned from contextual case studies and guiding the development and testing of hypotheses in this domain. Our knowledge-action framework has 3 elements that occur at multiple levels and scales: knowledge production (e.g., academia and government), knowledge mediation (e.g., knowledge networks, actors, relational dimension, and contextual dimension), and knowledge-based action (e.g., instrumental, symbolic, and conceptual). The framework integrates concepts from the sociology of science in particular, and serves as a guide to further comprehensive understanding of knowledge exchange and mobilization in conservation and sustainable natural resource management.

How do potential knowledge users evaluate new claims about a contested resource? Problems of power and politics in knowledge exchange and mobilization.

This article examines how potential users of scientific and local/traditional/experiential knowledge evaluate new claims to knowing, using 67 interviews with government employees and non-governmental stakeholders involved in co-managing salmon fisheries in Canadas Fraser River. Research has consistently shown that there are major obstacles to moving new knowledge into policy, management, and public domains. New concepts such as Knowledge Exchange (KE) and Knowledge Mobilization (KMb) are being used to investigate these obstacles, but the processes by which potential users evaluate (sometimes competing) knowledge claims remain poorly understood. We use concepts from the sociology of science and find that potential users evaluate new knowledge claims based on three broad criteria: (1) the perceived merits of the claim, (2) perceptions of the character and motivation of the claimant, and (3) considerations of the social and political context of the claim. However, government employees and stakeholders have different interpretations of these criteria, leading to different knowledge preferences and normative expectations of scientists and other claimants. We draw both theoretical and practical lessons from these findings. With respect to theory, we argue that the sociology of science provides valuable insights into the political dimensions of knowledge and should be explicitly incorporated into KE/KMb research. With respect to practice, our findings underline the need for scientists and other claimants to make conscious decisions about whose expectations they hope to meet in their communications and engagement activities.