Minutes of the U.S. GLOBEC Scientific Steering Committee Meeting
Boulder, CO --- April 10-11, 1997
(distributed 8 May 1997)
DAY ONE (Thursday, 10 April 1997)
The meeting began at 0830. Present from the SSC were Beardsley, Botsford, Dagg,
Fogarty, Grant, Haidvogel, Hollowed, Huntley, Loeb, Mountain, Ortner, Pearcy,
Powell, Reilly, Schumacher, Strub and Torres. Hofmann and Francis were unable to
attend. Also present were Batchelder (U.S. GLOBEC office), Goldberg (U.S. GLOBEC
office), John Knauss (Dean Emeritus, Scripps), Ken Denman (IOS), Bruce Frost
(Univ. Wash.), Ed Houde (U. Maryland), Peter Wiebe (WHOI), Ted Durbin (URI), John
Kindle (NRL-Stennis), Paul Bissett (NRL-DC), Robert Buddemeier (Univ. Kansas),
Judy Gray (U.S. GLOBEC Program manager), Don Scavia (COP), Jim Yoder (NASA-day
two only), Phil Taylor (NSF) and Sean Powers (NSF).
Powell reviewed the agenda. The morning of the first day was devoted to
scientific presentations of the results to date of the Georges Bank program.
Powell introduced the "internal review committee" members, Knauss, Denman, Frost,
and Houde, and expressed his gratitude that they had agreed to participate in the
review of the program in general and to attend this SSC meeting in particular.
Powell noted that Friday morning would be devoted to discussion of the Northeast
Pacific (NEP) Program, and of related programs in the Pacific (e.g., PNCERS,
PICES).
The fall SSC meeting will be at Rutgers University on 9-10 October 1997. Next
springs meeting will be 16-17 April 1998 in Washington, DC.
GEORGES BANK NW ATLANTIC PROGRAM
Presentations were made by Peter Wiebe (Introduction/Overview), Dave Mountain
(Physical Variability), Ted Durbin (Zooplankton Ecology--Distribution and
Dynamics), Bob Beardsley (Physical Oceanography--Stratification Study and
Exchange Processes), Dale Haidvogel (Large-scale Modeling of the North Atlantic
Basin), and Mike Fogarty (Predator Abundances, Predation Pressure and Ecological
Changes in the Georges Bank Ecosystem).
In his introduction, Wiebe described the rationale, target species (cod and
haddock larvae, Calanus and Pseudocalanus copepods) and program elements
(broadscale surveys, process studies, modeling, retrospective studies) of the NW
Atlantic program on Georges Bank. Some of the more interesting results so far
are the importance of hydroids as predators of both the copepods and larval fish,
and the importance of microzooplankton prey to first feeding, yolk-sac, cod
larvae. Wiebe described a combined retrospective/modeling effort in which
historical MARMAP data on zooplankton abundance and distribution are being
assimilated into circulation models of the region to project the future
distribution and abundance of the copepods--first without consideration of vital
rates, and then after inverting the model, with consideration of copepod vital
rates (i.e., growth, reproduction, and mortality). Similar efforts to assimilate
biological and physical data into circulation models will be done with data
collected during the GLOBEC program.
Mountain used deep-water salinity to show how the Gulf of Maine (GOM)circulation
has varied interannually from 1995 to 1997. There have been major changes in
water properties of the GOM, which appear to be related to temporal shifts in the
proportion of water entering the GOM from the Scotian Shelf (cold, fresh) and
slope water (warm, salty). The variability is not local in origin, which points
out the need to consider regional connections and provides an opportunity for
regional comparisons, especially with the programs that have been ongoing and are
planned for the Scotian Shelf. The take-home message from his presentation was
that the physical variability in the GOM/GB system is climate variability, in
that it is driven by large time and space scale processes. This variability can
be identified in retrospective analyses, and may provide a proxy for the types of
changes that might occur as a result of climate change.
Durbin showed how Calanus reproduction occurred early in the year (perhaps in
Nov-Dec), since in January there were many naupliar stages on the GB. The
winter-spring cohort of Calanus matures in April-May. In stratified regions, a
second generation of nauplii was spawned in June, but did not result in older
copepodite stages on the bank. On the shallowest crest regions, there were no
Calanus nauplii after May, despite high proportions of reproductive females.
These patterns may be the result of intense predation on the crest and later in
the summer, perhaps by hydroids. Studies of carbon and nitrogen growth rate, and
molting rate show similar spatial and temporal patterns. This suggests that
molting rates may be useful in estimating C and N growth rates--which are much
more difficult and labor intensive to measure.
Haidvogel emphasized the dynamical interactions between the coastal regions and
the open ocean. Of particular interest in the GB region are the tides, basin
scale currents and pressure fields, and mesoscale variability, such as warm core
rings. The rationale for looking at the physical dynamics at larger spatial
scales is that there is substantial non-local forcing to the circulation on GB
and there are long time scale variabilities. Haidvogel will be working with
Lynch to develop coupled finite element models of the GOM, GB, and entire western
North Atlantic--i.e., a regional modeling system that includes mesoscale
prediction, with coupling to at least the GOM/GB and NY Bight coastal regions.
Fogarty spoke about long-term basic changes that have occurred in the GB
ecosystem, especially within the fish. The COP study of predation on GB is
directed toward developing multispecies management advice. The principal
research goal is to examine the effects of the vertebrate predator community on
the GB target species. Cod and haddock landings from GB have varied dramatically
since 1890, with the present landings so low, that most of the bank has been
closed to harvesting. After the distant water fleet was excluded from fishing
the bank in 1977, the domestic fleet expanded and consistently imposed fishing
mortalities on both the haddock and cod that exceeded what the populations could
sustain. It was shown how cod and haddock recruitment in the past 20 years have
not been synchronous and how cod appear to be somewhat more resilient, with
limiting levels for stock persistence that are lower than haddock. It is
believed that this greater resilience is due to a "bet-hedging" strategy in which
cod spawn for a protracted period (ca. 4 mos) on the bank, and thus some of the
offspring are likely to encounter favorable transport and feeding conditions and
survive. Conversely, haddock spawning is narrowly focused in time. If
conditions are not favorable, then the entire year class can be impacted;
however, if conditions are favorable, then extremely large year classes can
occur. Since the 1960's-70's the abundance of groundfish has declined
dramatically, whereas the abundance of pelagic species (herring and mackerel) and
elasmobranchs (skates and sharks) on the bank has increased dramatically. The
herring and mackerel are planktivores that consume ca. 2% of their body weight
per day. These changes in the predominant fish species in the ecosystem have had
impacts, both as competitors and predators, on the groundfish resources.
GEORGES BANK PHASE III AO
Wiebe summarized the draft of the AO for Phase III. Phase III will focus on
cross-frontal exchange of water and organisms, where the forcing functions are
believed to be tides, winds, seasonal heating/cooling, and offshore forcing.
Broadscale surveys will continue to quantify the seasonal and interannual
variability in the abundance and distribution of the target species. There is an
increased emphasis on interactive modeling at sea, and on assimilating past and
real-time data into models. Synthesis of Phase I and Phase II data should
continue so that the data are made widely available. Looking toward potential
future operational monitoring of the GB ecosystem, there should be some emphasis
now to develop indices of ecosystem status--i.e., can we identify a suite of core
observations that could feed a coupled biophysical ecosystem model that could
provide predictions.
During the discussion, the issue of how to scale up from rather small-scale
studies (frontal processes) to climate change phenomena was raised. Denman
argued that cross-frontal exchange is the analog of a "thunderstorm weather
event" in atmospheric sciences--i.e., weather not climate. Schumacher felt the
key was to understand the process and then make the link to climate change
scenarios. Mountain asserted that there is sufficient rationale to expect that
climate change will influence cross-frontal exchange dynamics and therefore
biological processes. Wiebe responded with a resounding "yes" in answer to
Reilly's question about whether the region selected for broad-scale surveys is
the correct region, based on the results of Phase I and Phase II. Despite a lot
of discussion about standardization of methods and modeling, Houde encouraged the
program to diversify in modeling approaches. Powell asked that the SSC carefully
read the AO and provide written comments to Batchelder by 1 May 1997.
TRANSITION TO OPERATIONAL MONITORING
Judy Gray noted that there are Fisheries Management issues, Fisheries Prediction
Issues, and Research Issues, and they are often not the same. U.S. GLOBEC on
Georges Bank is directed toward obtaining an improved understanding of the
ecosystem and how the physical forcing controls the distribution and abundance of
the target species. At the conclusion of Phase III, we want to be able to make
recommendations on how to conduct a core measurement program to supplement
fisheries management based on NMFS surveys and commercial catches. She reviewed
how the Shelikof Strait FOCI program is providing recruitment prediction within
six months of spawning that is being used in determining quota recommendations
for the Gulf of Alaska pollock fishery. A small committee of Gray, Torres,
Mountain, and Schumacher (added later) agreed to meet with Mike Sissenwine and
some key members of the GB executive committee to determine what information
might be of use to fishery management in the NW Atlantic and to explore how to
transition an expensive, comprehensive monitoring program (now) to a
cost-effective, information-rich (valuable) monitoring effort, maintained by
NOAA, in the future.
SCIENCE TALK (THURSDAY)
Following lunch on Thursday, John Kindle and Paul Bissett gave a science talk on
the physical and biological modeling of the U.S. west coast eastern boundary
current that will be done as part of a 5 year Naval Research Laboratory (NRL)
initiative to begin in FY99. The project is called CoBALT (Coupled Biophysical
Dynamics Across the Littoral Transition). The project hopes to be able to take
advantage of advances in numerical modeling, the abundance of remote sensors that
will be collecting surface data, and in situ data from past and future programs,
especially CalCOFI and the NEP GLOBEC program. To begin, a high-resolution west
coast Princeton Ocean Model (POM) will be embedded in a global (1/4 degree, 5.5
layer) model. Moreover, the POM model will be coupled to a high resolution
bioptical model (currently available as a 1D model). Preliminary model runs of
the west coast POM, with 1/12 degree resolution and 30 vertical levels showed
good agreement with tide-gauge data from Neah Bay, WA, and Crescent City and San
Francisco, CA. Additionally, the representation of coastal filaments and an SST
bias within 100 km of the coast were improved after assimilating (nudging?) sea
surface temperature data. Paul Bissett showed results of the 1D bioptical model
for the Sargasso Sea, that showed good agreement between observed and predicted
pigment distributions and optical properties. Their goal is to incorporate a
modified bioptical model, perhaps including more kinds of higher trophic level
organisms, into the POM model of the west coast. NRL is very interested in
obtaining more information about dominant (= important) species, so that more
types of zooplankton and perhaps fish can be included in the model. To date, the
model is primarily a nutrient-pigment model, and it needs to include more
information about specific grazer types.
COMPARISON/SYNTHESIS OF GLOBEC REGIONAL STUDIES
Fogarty led a brainstorming session on how to best accomplish comparisons across
U.S. GLOBEC regional efforts and between GLOBEC studies and other, similar
studies, like FOCI, SPACC, so that the knowledge of how ecosystems respond to
climate change and physical forcing is more than the sum of the component
regional studies. He prefaced the brainstorming session with some remarks on how
the studies might need to consider a priori how to undertake cross-regional
comparisons. He noted that U.S. GLOBEC was already including retrospective
comparative studies --by examining a single location for multiple years and
evaluating past periods. He used the framework established in the long-range
plan (e.g., GLOBEC's identification of categorical types of ecosystems--banks,
EBC's, Open Ocean, Southern Ocean) to direct the discussion. Ideally, one would
like to have studies of multiple banks (or EBC's, etc.) to perform cross-regional
comparisons, since these systems could be considered "replicates". Such
comparisons are still possible, for example, using GLOBEC's GB study and the
Canadian GLOBEC studies of the banks on the Scotian Shelf. Or by eventual
comparison of GLOBEC studies in the CCS with studies undertaken by SPACC in other
EBC's. Fogarty emphasized that U.S. GLOBEC should attempt to extract common
themes from the various regional programs. Identifying common response variables
(biological observations of target species) and covarying factors (physics, other
species) would be a start. For example, one possible response variable could be
population variability in calanoid copepods. Although the GLOBEC studies in
different regions examine different species, they have very similar life history
characteristics. Fogarty suggested that U.S. GLOBEC organize and hold a workshop
to explore this intercomparison/synthesis issue.
Hollowed stated that thinking about making these comparisons is important and
ties in nicely with a workshop that CCCC's REX group will have in Pusan, Korea
this fall. A goal of that workshop is to facilitate comparative experiments in
coastal Pacific regions--esp. in relation to physical forcing. It would be
helpful to have some members from each of these workshops (Pusan and a potential
U.S. GLOBEC) at the other. Buddemeier noted that LOICZ had taken an approach of
first identifying ecosystem types and then globalizing, in an attempt to better
understand coastal biogeochemical cycles. Fogarty noted that a valid, robust
classification scheme was a requirement to make cross-regional and within-type
comparisons. The tradeoff of classifying by species or life history type versus
physical setting was discussed briefly and should be considered at any future
workshop on this topic. Loeb felt that focusing on species could create
difficulties in comparing systems like the NW Atlantic and Southern Ocean where
there is little overlap in target species. She felt that a focus on the dominant
forcing and dominant species would be more feasible for regional comparisons.
Pearcy noted the natural overlap in species type (gadids) between the Georges
Bank program and FOCI. Huntley felt that perhaps the comparisons should be made
at a more basic level: the essence of GLOBEC is the linkage between population
dynamics and physical forcing. I.e., How is it that the populations maintain
themselves in their habitat? Fogarty commented that this type of comparison was
more qualitative than quantitative. The question of how the results of a
workshop on regional intercomparisons will feed into the international program
was raised. Fogarty felt that a white paper from the meeting could be a bridge
to other international programs--i.e., if they felt the approach was appropriate
they could conform their programs, to the extent possible, to be intercomparable
with U.S. efforts. Ortner and Wiebe emphasized the importance of making the
sampling designs comparable--with at least the biophysical models being
comparable. Others felt that the ecosystems might be sufficiently different to
require different techniques, although there should be enough overlap in
observations and techniques to provide a database for comparison. Strub
mentioned that SPACC has as a goal an intercomparison of a number of different
EBC systems. Botsford noted, however, that comparative studies require a common
element, and even in SPACC, the systems and species have differences. Mountain
argued that the systems chosen by U.S. GLOBEC (banks, NEP, So. Ocean) are very
different. They should be sampled the best way possible to understand how
physics influences population dynamics, and comparisons will be done on
generalities. He noted that it would be more reasonable to compare GLOBEC
studies with other similar non-GLOBEC regional studies, like TASC and the NE
Atlantic. Wiebe emphasized the importance of common protocols, and for early and
sustained communication among the U.S. GLOBEC regional programs. He noted that
for Calanus in the Atlantic there exist a number of programs providing
comparison: U.S. GLOBEC; Mare Cognitum; UK GLOBEC; TASC, Canada GLOBEC on the
Scotian Shelf. The goal of GLOBEC is to understand how climate change impacts
marine animal populations at lots of places on the globe. Finally, Schumacher
felt that a small workshop to develop commonalities and to explore the
interregional comparison concept in greater detail would be valuable. The
workshop should produce a document with guidelines on how to make regional
comparisons more feasible. He noted that cross-frontal exchange is a major
emphasis in both the COP study in the Bering Sea and in GLOBEC's Georges Bank
program.
DAY TWO (Friday, 11 April 1997)
NORTHEAST PACIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DISCUSSION
Batchelder summarized how the Northeast Pacific (NEP) Implementation Plan (IP)
was developed (a historical review) and described the key elements of the plan.
The details of the IP are not repeated here. The IP was published by the U.S.
GLOBEC coordination office in December 1996 as U.S. GLOBEC report no. 17. An AO
was released by NSF and NOAA in November 1996, soliciting proposals to conduct
retrospective analysis, modeling and pilot monitoring of the NEP ecosystem. Judy
Gray summarized the response to the scientific community to the AO. Fifty-one
proposals were received. Most requested funds for three years. Total funding
requested averaged ca. $7.5M/year--this compares to ca. $2.8M available/year.
There were 20 monitoring proposals, 16 retrospective analysis proposals, and 10
modeling proposals. The remaining proposals covered more than one of the program
elements (e.g., perhaps both monitoring and retrospective analysis). There
appeared to be a relatively even balance in the number of proposals and funds
requested between the Coastal Gulf of Alaska (CGOA) and the California Current
System (CCS), and among subjects (physical oceanography, zooplankton ecology, and
fish ecology). There was significantly more modeling proposed for the CCS than
for the CGOA, which probably reflects that the Coastal Ocean Processes (CoOP)
program only solicited proposals for modeling of the CCS.
Mountain argued that in the end, we want a coherent NEP program, that will permit
comparisons between the CGOA and CCS. Powell suggested that he draft a letter to
the agencies asking them to communicate some relevancy guidelines to the panel
review. Fogarty asked if it were possible for someone from the SSC to provide an
overview of the whole NEP program to the panel. Wiebe noted that such a
mechanism was used years ago in the Warm Core Ring program. Powell noted that
the agencies preferred something written and noted that the CoOP SSC had met
earlier in the week to draft a similar letter detailing the core CoOP activities.
Botsford felt there should be a statement emphasizing the development of coupled
models that link physics to populations of commercially important species. Strub
suggested that the letter emphasize the goals of the program, not specific
bulleted items in the AO. The committee came to consensus that at a minimum, the
letter should emphasize: 1) need for coupled biophysical models in both the CCS
and CGOA; 2) start pilot monitoring in both regions; 3) need a balance among
regions and among elements (modeling, retrospective analysis, monitoring), and 4)
retrospective studies and monitoring that will aid the design of future process
studies and full-scale monitoring. Powell agreed to circulate a draft letter to
the SSC for comments by 14 April. Comments should be returned to Powell by 16
April. He and Roman (Chair of CoOP) would coordinate the respective programs
letters and forward them to the agencies.
PACIFIC NORTHWEST COASTAL ECOSYSTEM REGIONAL STUDY (PNCERS)
Scavia noted that objective of the Pacific Northwest Coastal Ecosystem Regional
Study (PNCERS) program was described at our October 96 meeting by Greg McMurray,
executive director for the program. Briefly, PNCERS is a 5 year long COP-funded
project that has goals of examining both natural and anthropogenic variability as
it relates to coastal ecosystem health in the Pacific Northwest. An ultimate
goal is to provide better data for managing coastal ecosystems and marine
resources. Scavia pointed out that the domain of the PNCERS program is the very
nearshore and estuarine system. The program is structured around salmon
habitat--assuming that salmon, because they pass from freshwater to estuarine to
marine systems, may be an integrator of the health of the coastal ecosystem.
PNCERS received planning letters in response to an AO released late last year.
Two multidisciplinary project teams were requested to prepare and submit full
proposals, of which one team will be selected after a panel review in late May.
Scavia would like to see COP's PNCERS team and U.S. GLOBEC NEP coordinated, much
the same as the NW Atlantic GLOBEC program has been coordinated with COP's study
of predation on Georges Bank. It was noted that there might be some overlap,
particularly in the analysis of retrospective data sets between the programs.
Another concern was that some key observations, e.g., sampling of target species,
might be assumed to be conducted by the other program. Judy Gray noted that she
would be reading the two full PNCERS proposals, so she would be in a position to
identify (and avoid) overlap, and to consider potential data gaps. Judy agreed
to provide an update on the funded PNCERS project at the October meeting.
NASA RESEARCH IN THE MISSION TO PLANET EARTH
Yoder noted that within the Mission to Planet Earth (MTPE) is a biological
oceanography program broader in scope than just satellite ocean color. A primary
objective in the recent NASA research announcement (included in the briefing
book) was to, "Understand biological variability of major coastal and open ocean
ecosystems at seasonal to interannual time scales, their responses to changes in
physical climate, and the resulting effects on productivity, including
interannual and longer term changes in abundance of commercially important fish
stocks" Sounds a lot like U.S. GLOBEC. Future NASA AO's will be relevant to
both the GB and NEP programs of GLOBEC. He noted that these AO's represent a
change in the way NASA operates. No longer will most NASA research funds be
directed to relatively closed shop groups. Now, proposals will be requested by
research announcements, undergo mail and panel reviews (NSF style), and the most
relevant, highest quality science will be funded. Yoder reviewed the various
types of data products, their resolutions, and the timeliness (i.e.. real-time or
delayed) that will be available from satellite remote sensing during the next
5-10 years, including OCTS, radar scatterometer, TOPEX altimeter, SAR radar,
AVHRR Pathfinder reprocessed SST data. Future sensors, especially from Japan
will be coming on-line. An improved color and scatterometer will be launched,
probably in 1999. Since Yoder is only at NASA on an interim basis, he suggested
that U.S. GLOBEC invite his successor to future SSC meetings, so that future NASA
research announcements can be better coordinated with GLOBEC's regional programs.
PICES
Hollowed summarized the PICES REX (Regional Experiment) team recommendations
(included in the briefing book). The terms of reference (TOR) include: 1) to
promote and coordinate research activities related to the Climate Change and
Carrying Capacity program; 2) to foster communication among PICES members of
advancements in technology or research findings (using various media, incl.
workshops, newsletters); 3) to encourage the establishment of component programs;
and, 4) to identify linkages between regional studies and basin-scale studies.
The primary recommendation is to hold a workshop to 1) identify and prioritize
retrospective and process oriented research that could be conducted to allow
regional comparisons; 2) standardize plankton sampling among the regions; 3)
identify key species within the REX regions; and, 4) identify methods for
monitoring the distribution and abundance of selected species. The REX workshop
will be held in Pusan, Korea (associated with the Annual PICES meeting) on 17-18
October 1997.
SCIENCE TALK (FRIDAY)
Stewart Grant spoke on global phylogeography of sardines and anchovies. Examples
were shown that demonstrate how genetic data on these small pelagics is useful
for establishing taxonomic relatedness, examining biogeographic patterns at a
variety of spatial and temporal scales, quantifying genetic differentiation, and
examining population persistence. For example, comparative studies show that
geographic complexity greatly influences genetic subdivision among populations.
Populations of Mediterranean anchovies show genetic differences over short
distances, whereas anchovy populations along unbroken coastlines, South Africa or
California for example, are largely genetically homogeneous. These data suggest
that in environments lacking strong alongshore transport, populations can diverge
(in genetic terms) relatively rapidly. On a larger geographic scale, the
analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) indicates different levels of divergence
between regional populations of anchovies in the old and new worlds. The
Argentinean, Chilean, and Californian anchovies are genetically very distinct
from one another, whereas the Japanese, Australian, southern African and European
anchovies appear to represent populations of a single species.
In contrast to anchovies, sardine populations within a region tend to show less
genetic subdivision, even in the Mediterranean. On a larger scale, the
distribution of mtDNA variants among regions shows a very different ocean-wide
pattern from anchovies. In this case, Indian and Pacific Ocean sardine
populations represent a single species and Mediterranean anchovies another
species. However, the genetic dissimilarity between Japanese and sardines in the
CCS indicates that the recent partial recovery in California populations is not
due to an influx of sardines from Japan.
LOICZ
Bob Buddemeier provided an overview of how the LOICZ (Land Ocean Interactions in
the Coastal Zone) program fits within the IGBP framework. He suggested that
since both LOICZ and GLOBEC were now core programs in the IGBP, we should explore
complementary interests. He reviewed the aim of the LOICZ program which places a
priority on the impacts of human activities directly (as opposed to the climate
system) on the coastal zone, and especially on biogeochemical cycling and fluxes
through the coastal zone. The program also emphasizes the initiation of new work
in tropical regions where the coastal zone is most highly populated. Linking
research on the natural and socioeconomic aspects of human impacts is a high
priority. LOICZ's approach is to develop a typology of coastal ecosystems that
share common features/properties, then to develop data on specimens for each of
these classes. Using these improved estimates for each type, and extrapolating
to other ecosystems of the same type, will allow improved estimates of the global
role of the "coastal zone" on biogeochemical interactions and other research
foci. Buddemeier noted that LOICZ has no pre-existing research community or
program funding base. Rather, the science is being conducted by a distributed
network of coastal researchers. The eventual goal is to use local studies for
methods development and to scale-up using the coastal typology framework. Powell
agreed to write a letter to Mike Roman, co-chair of the U.S. LOICZ committee,
expressing U.S. GLOBEC's interests in coordinating GLOBEC and LOICZ in the U.S.,
where there are complimentary interests that such coordination would benefit both
programs.
SOUTHERN OCEAN
Huntley informed the committee of the status of a GLOBEC program in the Southern
Ocean. GLOBEC International is moving toward putting a coordinated multinational
Southern Ocean GLOBEC program together. The GLOBEC southern ocean implementation
plan will be discussed and revised as appropriate at a meeting in San Diego in
July of this year. Hopefully, many of the recommendations of the existing IP
will be acted upon following that meeting. Steve Reilly has agreed to be interim
chair (during Eileen Hofmann's "sabbatical") of the U.S. GLOBEC Southern Ocean
subcommittee. Other members on the committee will be Torres, Loeb, Huntley and
Dagg. We agreed that Southern Ocean activities would be a priority for
discussion at the October SSC meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
We briefly discussed a number of requests for U.S. GLOBEC support of travel by
scientists to workshops/meetings. Some of these meetings were suggested by
discussions that took place during the previous (Oct 1996) and present SSC
meeting. Others were requested from scientists not on the committee.
The priorities for meetings/workshops appeared to point to:
- cross-region comparisons, theory and practice, how we get there;
- planning for synthesis at multiple levels in US GLOBEC;
- community modeling needs in the California Current System.
Other SSC priorities include:
- a TASC symposium on Calanus finmarchicus (not timed until 1999 and yet defined)
- a workshop on the genetics of marine organisms in the NEP
- Gulf of Mexico workshop
Other suggestions:
- a workshop on food quality, diet and secondary production in the sea
It was also noted that there would need to be a meeting of all of the
investigators funded by the present NEP AO (when they become known) to foster
cooperation among 1) modelers, data analysts, and monitors and 2) Coastal Gulf of
Alaska and California Current projects. It was suggested that it would also be
valuable to include several Georges Bank PI's and perhaps a few others from
related NEP programs at such a "scoping out" meeting. Some funds might be needed
to support attendees from non-GLOBEC activities.
The meeting adjourned at 1530.
Quote of the Meeting (QOTM):
"I think SeaWIFS will be launched this summer, but I don't know which direction
it will go when launched."
-- Yoder