ICELAND, - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

has not resulted in research institutes replacing these people with those trained in
community ecology. Institutional inertia ensures that non-manipulative studies
coupled with modelling remain the order of the day.
Does this really matter Who cares if scientists just repackage their old
techniques to fit into the latest directive from their political masters I argue that it
does matter, and that if we want to understand humanity’s impact on marine
ecosystems, we need to expose abuses of the process of conducting science when we
encounter them.
I’ll take the example of Norwegian research into the commercially important
fish populations of the Barents Sea. I use it to demonstrate that by supporting
politically palatable - but poorly conducted – science, the Norwegian establishment
has not only directed attention towards a non-issue (marine mammal consumption),
they have not focused on the real issue – fisheries mismanagement, so allowing the
real problems to propagate.
This discussion addresses Norwegian research in the Barents Sea, rather than
Icelandic research. But the players, both biological (fish populations, marine
mammals), and human (the science and fisheries management establishments of both
Norway and Iceland) are similar, sometimes identical. The Norwegian research has
been ongoing for longer, and so it’s possible to draw some lessons from it.
Background: fish and fishing in the Barents Sea
Capelin is a small fish found throughout the oceans of the Arctic and is an important
component in the Barents Sea ecosystem. (However, please remember that this
15