S o u t h e a s t B e r i n g S e a C a r r y i n g C a p a c i t y | ||||
What's New? |
Science |
People |
Field Operations |
Related Pages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Southeast Bering Sea Carrying Capacity
Senior Investigators Council (SINCO)
NOAA/PMEL Seattle, Washington
Tuesday, Dec 16, 1997
At the SEBSCC PI meeting (12/15-16/97), SINCO was charged with developing no more than three research objectives for the second half of SEBSCC. To accomplish this, all participants at the workshop submitted a question or hypothesis which they felt was vital toward attaining the project goals (to gain an understanding of the ecosystem and to develop pre-recruit indices for pollock). The questions fell primarily into the two distinct categories of "bottom-up" and "top-down" control of the pollock population and form the first two objectives. The third objective addresses the dramatic ongoing changes in the physical environment:
1. Determine how timing, duration, magnitude and species composition of primary and secondary production affects food availability for higher trophic levels.The council also felt that several items need to be addressed by the PMT and Project Office, including:2. Determine how spatial overlap and availability of juvenile pollock to predators affect the survival rate of juvenile pollock, and
3. Determine how changes in the physical environment and species composition impact food webs.
1. Shiptime is presently a factor which limits accomplishing the project's goals. The Coastal Ocean Program should add platform time (to that already supplied by OAR) to support the science. Perhaps there is time available on Russian research ships.2. Shiptime must be made available for fall 1998 research.
3. Funds need to become available to replace equipment that was lost.
4. There is a need for more integration of scientific results. The council suggests formation of three working groups with membership across the program components and inclusive of all PIs (as suggested by Al Tyler). These groups would meet once a year (not during the annual workshop) to produce a "status of research" document. In order to include new investigators who may be funded for the second research cycle, such groups should be formed after new proposals have been funded. We also recommend that one person attend all the working group meetings and then weave together the status reports into a single, complete annual document. The PMT needs to provide travel funds for this group.
Several council members wish to change the name of the group to more closely reflect who we are, i.e., not necessarily "senior" investigators. We suggest COIN, Council of Investigators.
Charter Membership Meeting Minutes Updated 12/97; send comments, corrections to FOCI Coordinator.