Download PDF - COINAtlantic

11 th International Symposium for GIS and Computer Cartography for Coastal Zones ManagementNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), and Social Sciences and Health Research Council(SSHRC) — to require that all data from publically funded research be made openly available in a timely manner.Meeting this standard will be a condition for all grantees to maintain funding from these agencies. However, it isalso anticipated that there may be exceptions to the policy provided in some circumstances that permit investigatorsto restrict access to data for limited periods. Examples from the OTN context could include refraining from reportinglocation information on endangered species that network investigators are tracking, in order to protect the animalsfrom illegal harvesting, and protecting thesis data for Highly Qualified Personnel (HQP) who are in training. Inanticipation of this, OTN has posted a revised policy at: members.oceantrack.org/data/datacollection/policyhighlights.The POST 2010 policy document can found at:http://www.postprogram.org/files/POST_Data_Access_Policy.pdf.DiscussionAcoustic telemetry presents interesting data policy issues because it involves an inherent conflict between the interestsof trackers (taggers), who generally want to keep their data private until they have had time to publish, andthat of receiver line (array) operators, who are generally required by their funders to make data public as soon aspossible. Both parties need each other: trackers need detections from receiver arrays in order to make conclusionsabout the behavior of the species they tag, and the line operators need the trackers to make useful discoveries inorder to justify the cost of the lines to funding agencies. Nearly all of the researchers on both sides agree that it isdesirable for all tracking data to be maintained for posterity and eventually to become fully public, so the main questionis how to make the data public as soon as possible. The policies arrived at by OTN (and previously POST) arecompromises that attempt to allow sufficient time for taggers to publish their work while satisfying the funders ofreceiver arrays.In practice, the data policies of POST and OTN have worked well, although they have not been universally accepted.A few subtle points are important to the long-term success of such policies: 1) requiring tracking metadata tobe submitted immediately while enabling trackers to keep those data temporarily private makes it less likely that thedata will be lost as trackers move on to other projects, priorities and jobs; 2) requesting equipment specificationsdirectly from the manufacturer greatly improves the ability of databases to acquire and keep important equipmentspecification together with tag release metadata, and 3) it is important to maintain flexibility to deal with individualcases, since researchers may need to keep a list of non-standard data fields private, or to modify the length or qualityof private data periods under some circumstances.Here is a generic interpretation of OTN’s data policy documents:Trackers and receiver line operators demonstrate their acceptance of a given data policy by simply providing allrequired metadata and data and authorizing equipment manufacturers to provide proof-of-ownership and instrumentspecifications directly to a regional data assembly centre. These data centres provide secure access facilitiesfor each identified owner from which metadata and data are processed and made freely and openly accessible. Incases where manufacturer specifications and tracker metadata have been provided, TagIDs can be subject to arenewable embargo based on tag life plus two years. In cases where a proof of a scientific permit for work on endangeredspecies is provided, TagIDs and release locations can be subject to a renewable embargo based on tag lifeplus ten years. TagIDs without manufactures’ proof-of-ownership and specifications are otherwise publically listedas mystery tags, thus inviting new collaborations. Updated tag detection histories are provided to tag owners whenevertheir tags are detected, as part of routine data processing. Detection histories of embargoed tags are onlyavailable to the owner or persons designated by the owner. Embargo periods may be shortened if permitted by theowner. The data centres maintain various public metadata and processing summaries as well as will routinely pushboth the raw and processed data into global scale archiving centres.A similar generic interpretation of POST data policy would only differ in terms of how the embargo period wascalculated:21