Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~' <br /> <br />illtimately, much of the responsibility for <br />changing the rules rests with our elected repre- <br />sentatives. But responsibility for change also rests <br />in part with fisheries scientists and managers. We <br />must be effective stewards, and we must ensure <br />that our elected representatives and the public <br />have the opportunity to learn the truth about our <br />river resources. Part of the job as scientist and <br />manager must include a search for solutions to <br />inefficiencies in government. Scientists are often <br />unable or unwilling to translate their empirical <br />information into a language that can be under- <br />stood by elected representatives or the general <br />public. Most of us have not been trained to commu- <br />nicate effectively with the public, and we are com- <br />monly not rewarded for doing so. Describing the <br />contemporary condition of rivers to the public and <br />proposing change is not in conflict with the tradi- <br />tional role of providing good science. We have to <br />communicate what we know to the public, fishing <br />industry, fishers and, especially, policy makers. <br />Our [mdings often lay dormant in agency re- <br />ports, peer-reviewed journals, field notes, and <br />symposia proceedings. We spend too much time <br />talking to each other. Most of our literature cannot <br />be understood by anyone but us and certainly not <br />by most policy makers. Our knowledge of how <br />rivers work is substantial, and we need to dissemi- <br />nate that knowledge much more widely. <br />We need the help of the media, and we need to <br />assist the media to bring the crisis in our rivers to <br />the attention of the public. We need to be part of <br />the effort to build a solid base of political support <br />for the wise multiple use and management of riv- <br />ers. We need to convert knowledge of river ecosys- <br />tems into useful information for action by decision <br />makers. <br />In the Mississippi River basin, fishery agencies <br />have agreed to work together to "overcome" the <br />inefficiencies of government organization. Out of <br />common concern came the Mississippi Interstate <br />Cooperative Resource Agreement (MICRA). :MI- <br />CRA had it's official beginnings in 1989, when <br />agreements were developed and signed by a major- <br />ity of Mississippi basin state fishery management <br />agencies. However, the movement began earlier, <br />when an ad hoc committee of American Fisheries <br />Society members formed a nucleus of managers <br />that recognized the need for ecosystem perspec- <br />tives when treating issues of interjurisdictional <br />fisheries in the Mississippi River basin. <br />The Mississippi River ecosystem drains 41% of <br />the contiguous United States, which includes all or <br /> <br />STAN MOBERLY AND WEB SHEETS 3 <br /> <br />portions of 28 states. The drainage basin is the <br />largest in the United States and the fourth largest <br />in the world (4.8 million km2), exceeded only by the <br />Amazon, Congo, and Nile basins. The drainage <br />includes the Ohio, Missouri, Tennessee, Arkansas, <br />and Red Rivers, among others, and the river dis- <br />charges over 14,000 m3/s of nutrient-rich fresh <br />water into the Gulf of Mexico. Recent studies by the <br />National Marine Fisheries Service indicate that the <br />Mississippi River is probably the single most sig- <br />nificant environmental factor influencing the Gulf <br />of Mexico and its fisheries. This is one example of <br />the importance of the ecosystem and emphasizes <br />why the system should be of interest and concern <br />to everyone in the basin, and in the country as well. <br />:MICRA began from a concern among fisheries <br />managers over how to coordinate management <br />activities for species such as paddlefish, which <br />have interstate ranges. Literally all of the manage- <br />ment agencies in the basin realized we cannot <br />manage fisheries in large interstate rivers in iso- <br />lation. We must manage resources with an ecosys- <br />tem perspective. :MICRA was developed for just <br />that reason. It provides an opportunity to begin <br />formally opening lines of communication with <br />other management groups in the basin who have <br />interest and influence over what happens to the <br />basin's water and habitat. By 1 September 1989 a <br />core group of states had signed the agreement to <br />initiate the process. During the remainder of 1989 <br />and 1990, all 28 state natural resource agency <br />directors in the basin signed onto the project. Early <br />in 1991 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was the <br />first federal agency to join the :MICRA signatories. <br />At present, several federal resource agencies and <br />two Indian tribes have signed the agreement. <br />The goal of :MICRA is to improve the conserva- <br />tion, development, management, and use of inter- <br />jurisdictional fishery resources in the Mississippi <br />River basin through improved coordination and <br />communication among the responsible manage- <br />ment entities. This concept is not new, but it has <br />never been attempted by resource agencies on such <br />a grand scale. <br />:MICRA will not duplicate any existing organiza- <br />tional network but will use its coordinative re- <br />sources to enhance and maximize the efficiency of <br />existing programs, institutions, and facilities. It <br />will be managed by an interagency Steering Com- <br />mittee composed of personnel employed by member <br />states and entities. Each signatory will have a seat <br />on the steering committee. The Steering Commit- <br />tee will be chaired by one of the members on a <br />