NMFS is required by statute to consider the "best available information" when formulating management actions which may affect the status of protected marine animal populations, or which may have social or economic impact on humans.  Since the statute does not define "best available information," there has been much debate regarding the type of scientific (or other) information that should be considered when formulating such actions, and how such information should be treated in documents relating to the issue at hand.

The purpose of this proposal is to provide criteria for how (and whether) scientific information is categorized and used during the preparation of agency documents relating to management actions.  Three proposed levels (i.e., categories) of informational material are defined, and the proposed protocol for using such material is described.  
 
LEVEL 1: PEER-REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC STUDIES

TYPE OF MATERIAL

Level 1 materials are largely represented by papers in scientific journals that have been subjected to formal peer review (i.e., refereed) prior to acceptance and publication.  The materials also include the SARs.

NMFS POLICY AND PROTOCOL

Refereed papers are the primary currency of the scientific process, and NMFS routinely encourages scientists to publish all of their work as refereed papers so that such work becomes available for consideration and use by both managers and other scientists.  All scientific journal papers have theoretically undergone some level of formal review by referees who are considered sufficiently familiar with the species or issue concerned to provide an objective and qualified judgment regarding the quality of the work.  The SARs also fall into this category since they undergo formal review by one of the three SRGs, as well as being open to public comment.

Level 1 material which has been relied upon during the preparation of any NMFS document must be cited.  However, NMFS recognizes that the quality of peer review for scientific papers varies considerably from journal to journal, and even within journals.  Consequently, NMFS -- through the appropriate fisheries science center -- may seek additional formal review of a paper from qualified scientists either inside or outside the agency, and include the results of these reviews in NMFS documents relating to the issue at hand.
 
LEVEL 2: NON-PEER-REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC DOCUMENTS

TYPE OF MATERIAL

Level 2 materials are represented by complete documents such as reports, proceedings, or unpublished manuscripts that have not been subjected to a formal peer-review process, but that contain sufficient information to potentially permit such review to occur.
 

NMFS POLICY AND PROTOCOL

Non-peer-reviewed material may contain errors of fact, method, interpretation, and/or logic.  Indeed, it is rare for a manuscript submitted to a journal to be accepted for publication without changes -- sometimes minor, often major.  NMFS believes that uncritical acceptance of non-peer-reviewed information when determining management actions is unwise and potentially damaging to the resource being managed and to the management process itself.  Consequently, non-peer-reviewed material will not automatically be included in any NMFS document about the issue at hand.

However, in cases in which the material appears to be relevant, and is sufficiently detailed to allow for evaluation by qualified referees, the appropriate fisheries science center will solicit internal and/or external review of the material.  If the results of such review support the conclusions of the material, or are otherwise useful in management considerations, then those materials will be included in NMFS documents about the issue.

LEVEL 3: UNREVIEWED MATERIAL NOT IN DOCUMENT FORM

TYPE OF MATERIAL

Level 3 materials are represented by unreviewed work for which peer review is impossible because there is no written record, or a record which provides insufficient detail to adequately assess the quality of the work involved.  Examples include talks, abstracts from meetings, popular articles, and anecdotal information.

NMFS POLICY AND PROTOCOL

Because of the impossibility of verifying the scientific quality of the information involved in this category, such material will generally not be included in NMFS documents relating to an issue unless there is compelling reason to do so.  If the material appears to be of considerable importance to the management of a protected species, an effort will be made by the appropriate fisheries science center to secure a written summary of the work that is sufficiently detailed for it to be formally peer reviewed.  If this occurs, the material would become a Level 2 document and would be treated according to the protocols described above.