360
R. Hamilton et al.
scientifi c data (e.g. bottom trawl, fi shery data) and LEK in the English Channel
showed good overall agreement between fi shers’ statements and scientifi c data with
both sources suggesting declines in some commercially important species (Rochet
et al. 2008 ) . The study noted that fi shers had an accurate perception of changes and
their time-frames, but not necessarily of their causes, and that fi shers had a greater
power than scientifi c survey data to detect recent changes. This suggests that fi shers’
perceptions have great potential as early warning signals. However, the two sources
differed in suggested causation for the observed changes; science suggesting overfi shing and fi shers suggesting that declines in cod had been due to movements away
from their fi shing ground. This example highlights the important role of science in
addressing causation and of LEK in being able to capture general longer term trends
more easily than is possible in typically short duration scientifi c surveys.
Although LEK on FSAs can be highly detailed, in our experience it is a combination of LEK and science that leads to effective forms of FSA management. Ideally,
the two-way exchange of information that occurs during the interview process can
advance management initiatives and develop a scientifi c perspective (Drew 2005 ) .
Scientists can play a valuable role by sharing their knowledge, answering questions
fi shers may have, and providing information on larval stages, recruitment and life
history parameters of aggregating fi sh. Such biological information is typically
absent from LEK (Foale 2006 ) which addresses the ‘what’ kind of question but not
necessarily the ‘why’ and the ‘how’. Judiciously developed questions and consistent and careful questioning can allow for a degree of quantifi cation of LEK which
can be very powerful when talking to politicians or others who might otherwise be
unreceptive to what may sometimes be seen as anecdotal information. Scientists can
also provide regional and global perspectives on FSAs -something even the most
knowledgeable fi shers typically lack- and one reason why workers must be familiar
with aggregating species.
Often informing fi shers of the critical biological role that FSAs play and the ease
with which they can be destroyed is the only catalyst required to have communities
initiate the process of managing their FSA (Hamilton et al. 2005a ) . Documenting
LEK regarding the presence of FSAs, or changes in landings from FSAs, is often
important for reinforcing what people have already experienced, and a better
understanding of aggregations can help communities make sense of what they have
learned from experience or tradition. Importantly, scientists should be open with their
collaborators regarding data collected and analysed and not expect to withhold it
until publication. Confi rming that FSAs form does not necessarily mean that they
all have to be protected. Moreover, it is not necessary to know the location of all
aggregations if seasonal protection is likely to be more effective. Depending on the
local context, seasonal rather than spatial protection may be more appropriate in
many places, especially where enforcement of distant sites is highly unlikely; the
best protected sites are those that nobody knows.
LEK is far more likely to be taken seriously by conservationists, scientists and
managers if validated, and scientists are more likely to be taken seriously if what they
say harmonizes with local understanding. LEK on FSA in Kimbe Bay, Papua New
Guinea provides one such example. UVC ‘snapshot’ surveys conducted at FSAs in
R. Hamilton et al.
scientifi c data (e.g. bottom trawl, fi shery data) and LEK in the English Channel
showed good overall agreement between fi shers’ statements and scientifi c data with
both sources suggesting declines in some commercially important species (Rochet
et al. 2008 ) . The study noted that fi shers had an accurate perception of changes and
their time-frames, but not necessarily of their causes, and that fi shers had a greater
power than scientifi c survey data to detect recent changes. This suggests that fi shers’
perceptions have great potential as early warning signals. However, the two sources
differed in suggested causation for the observed changes; science suggesting overfi shing and fi shers suggesting that declines in cod had been due to movements away
from their fi shing ground. This example highlights the important role of science in
addressing causation and of LEK in being able to capture general longer term trends
more easily than is possible in typically short duration scientifi c surveys.
Although LEK on FSAs can be highly detailed, in our experience it is a combination of LEK and science that leads to effective forms of FSA management. Ideally,
the two-way exchange of information that occurs during the interview process can
advance management initiatives and develop a scientifi c perspective (Drew 2005 ) .
Scientists can play a valuable role by sharing their knowledge, answering questions
fi shers may have, and providing information on larval stages, recruitment and life
history parameters of aggregating fi sh. Such biological information is typically
absent from LEK (Foale 2006 ) which addresses the ‘what’ kind of question but not
necessarily the ‘why’ and the ‘how’. Judiciously developed questions and consistent and careful questioning can allow for a degree of quantifi cation of LEK which
can be very powerful when talking to politicians or others who might otherwise be
unreceptive to what may sometimes be seen as anecdotal information. Scientists can
also provide regional and global perspectives on FSAs -something even the most
knowledgeable fi shers typically lack- and one reason why workers must be familiar
with aggregating species.
Often informing fi shers of the critical biological role that FSAs play and the ease
with which they can be destroyed is the only catalyst required to have communities
initiate the process of managing their FSA (Hamilton et al. 2005a ) . Documenting
LEK regarding the presence of FSAs, or changes in landings from FSAs, is often
important for reinforcing what people have already experienced, and a better
understanding of aggregations can help communities make sense of what they have
learned from experience or tradition. Importantly, scientists should be open with their
collaborators regarding data collected and analysed and not expect to withhold it
until publication. Confi rming that FSAs form does not necessarily mean that they
all have to be protected. Moreover, it is not necessary to know the location of all
aggregations if seasonal protection is likely to be more effective. Depending on the
local context, seasonal rather than spatial protection may be more appropriate in
many places, especially where enforcement of distant sites is highly unlikely; the
best protected sites are those that nobody knows.
LEK is far more likely to be taken seriously by conservationists, scientists and
managers if validated, and scientists are more likely to be taken seriously if what they
say harmonizes with local understanding. LEK on FSA in Kimbe Bay, Papua New
Guinea provides one such example. UVC ‘snapshot’ surveys conducted at FSAs in