Report of the ICES/IOC Steering Group on GOOS (SGGOOS)

ICES SGGOOS Report 2006 ICES Oceanography Committee

ICES CM 2006/OCC09 REF. ACME, ACE

Report of the ICES/IOC Steering Group on GOOS

(SGGOOS)

24-25 April 2006

ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer H.C. Andersens Boulevard 44-46 DK-1553 Copenhagen V Denmark Telephone (+45) 33 38 67 00 Telefax (+45) 33 93 42 15 www.ices.dk [email protected]

Recommended format for purposes of citation: ICES. 2006. Report of the ICES/IOC Steering Group on GOOS (SGGOOS), 24-25 April 2006, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen. ICES CM 2006/OCC09. 26 pp. For permission to reproduce material from this publication, please apply to the General Secretary.

The document is a report of an Expert Group under the auspices of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarily represent the views of the Council.

© 2006 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea.

ICES SGGOOS Report 2006 | i

Contents

1 Opening of the meeting ........................................................................................... 2

2 Adoption of the agenda ........................................................................................... 2

3 Presentations ............................................................................................................ 2 3.1 Regional/international ICES and GOOS Activities ......................................... 2

3.1.1 Update on GOOS Steering Committee Meeting (Franciscus Colijn)................................................................................................. 2

3.1.2 Update from EuroGOOS (Hans Dahlin)............................................. 3 3.1.3 Report on ICES Workshop on Review of the ICES Committee

and Expert Group Performance [WKREP] - (Adi Kellerman) ........... 4 3.2 GOOS Pilot Projects and other Regional Observation Programs .................... 5

3.2.1 Update on REGNS/PGNSP/NORSEPP (Sarah Hughes).................... 5 3.2.2 Update on IBIROOS (Gregorio Parrilla) ............................................ 6 3.2.3 Update on the Ferry Box program (Franciscus Colijn)....................... 7 3.2.4 ICES Data Management in relation to GOOS (Julie Gillin)............... 8 3.2.5 Update on GoMA-GOOS (David Mountain)...................................... 9

4 ToR a) Identify and steer the development of global and regional linkages between ICES and GOOS bodies ......................................................................... 10 4.1 Review and make recommendations on how SGGOOS and ICES can

assist in the implementation of COOP-GOOS............................................... 10 4.2 Review, evaluate and revise SGGOOS Implementation Plan; address any

recommendations coming out of the ICES Expert Groups review and evaluation ...................................................................................................... 11

5 ToR b) Identify and steer the development of components and activities of ICES contributing to the Global Ocean Observing System, as well as GOOS products relevant to ICES ........................................................................ 12 5.1 Review (intersessional) ICES data centre user survey list of improved

data products and identify those relevant to GOOS; identify and make recommendations on additional GOOS-relevant data products..................... 12

5.2 Report on status and make recommendations on ICES CTD/VOS system to provide real-time or near-real time delivery of environmental data from ICES co-ordinated research vessel surveys (S. Hughes) ............................... 13

6 ToR c) Identify and steer the development of regional ICES and GOOS pilot projects to demonstrate the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context .................................................................................................... 14

7 ToR d) Identify and steer the development of appropriate outreach activities to disseminate information about ICES and GOOS and to articulate the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context ......... 15 7.1 Update and review SGGOOS website ........................................................... 15 7.2 Update, review and agree on final form and content of ICES-GOOS flyer... 15 7.3 Make recommendations for GOOS plenary lecture and display for 2006

ICES ASC...................................................................................................... 16 7.4 Publicize ICES annual status reports (e.g. on climate and zooplankton)

within the GOOS community ........................................................................ 16

8 Any other business................................................................................................. 16

9 Next meeting of SGGOOS..................................................................................... 16

ii | ICES SGGOOS Report 2006

10 Action points for SGGOOS members in 2007..................................................... 16

Annex 1: SGGOOS list of participants ....................................................................... 17

Annex 2: Agenda........................................................................................................... 19

Annex 3: SGGOOS Terms of Reference 2006............................................................ 21

Annex 4: Recommendations ........................................................................................ 23

Annex 5: Proposal for an ICES-SGGOOS flyer ........................................................ 24

Annex 6: Implementation plan for the ICES Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) cooperation.............................................................................................. 25

ICES SGGOOS Report 2006 | 1

Executive summary

Membership

• SGGOOS lists 22 members in 2006, including national, ICES, GOOS and IBTS representatives.

• Chairs are Antonio Bode (ICES) and David Mountain (GOOS) • The meeting of the Steering Group in 2006 was attended by 10 members, plus 2

invited experts.

Regional/international ICES and GOOS activities

• Pilot regional actions as REGNS and NORSEPP are showing first analytical results of integrated ecosystem analysis. Preliminary results focus on parameter associations and regime shifts.

• Further developments in data quality control, assimilation and analysis are encouraged.

• EuroGOOS allows for the good integration of new regional systems (e.g. IBIROOS) and specific projects (e.g. MERSEA).

• Ferry Box is a good example of a project that demonstrates a new observational capability at regional scales. The continuation and extension of the system as a GOOS Pilot Project is encouraged.

Regional and global linkages between ICES and GOOS

• The ICES Data Centre has a key role in the development of ICES-GOOS activities. SGGOOS encourages the centre’s plans to facilitate open access to the data, data sharing and the implementation of a the new ICES data policy.

• SGGOOS recommends action by the ICES Delegates to encourage institutions in their member states to promote the quality control and real-time sharing of oceanographic data being collected in existing sampling programs.

• To promote ICES involvement in the implementation of Coastal GOOS, participation by a senior ICES representative at the 3rd GRA Forum in November 2006 is recommended.

• The review of the SGGOOS Implementation Plan concluded that the main tracks are still valid to fulfil the objectives of ICES-GOOS collaboration. The eventual merging of the relevant SGGOOS, PGNSP and WGPBI activities in a new Working Group on Operational Ocean Products and Services (WGOOPS) is recommended.

Outreach

• A new SGGOOS flyer was designed with the aim of having it ready for distribution at the 2006 ICES ASC and appropriate GOOS meetings. The information and design of the flyer will help in future dissemination actions, as the SGGOOS poster, and web page updates.

• A plenary lecture on the implementation of coastal GOOS will be organised for the 2007 ICES ASC. The lecture will be followed by specific presentations of ICES Status Reports as example GOOS products.

2 | ICES SGGOOS Report 2006

1 Opening of the meeting

The ICES General Secretary (Gerd Huboldt) gave a warm welcome to the ICES Office in Copenhagen. After a short briefing on the use of the local facilities by Vivian Piil (Departmental Secretary of ICES Science Programme), the meeting was opened by the Chairs on 24 April 2006. Invited members (Julien Mader, from Spain, and Remment ter Hofstede, from The Netherlands) were welcomed to the group. This year the group also benefited from the attendance to some of the sessions by Julie Gillin (Data Centre) and Bill Anthony (Technical Editor), from the ICES staff. A total of 12 experts attended to this meeting (Annex 1). Most non-attending SGGOOS members had given notice and/or delegated through other members their contributions. The representation of some countries (e.g. Portugal), however, is still lacking. The SGGOOS members expressed regret that funding limitations again precluded the attendance of the IOC representative.

2 Adoption of the agenda

The agenda for the 2006 meeting was quickly reviewed and adopted with some minor adjustments. The final revised agenda is attached as Annex 2.

3 Presentations

3.1 Regional/international ICES and GOOS Activities

3.1.1 Update on GOOS Steering Committee Meeting (Franciscus Colijn)

The ninth session of the IOC-WMO-UNEP-ICSU Steering Committee of the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) took place in Paris, France on 6–8 March 2006. While all aspects of GOOS were addressed at the meeting, a major focus was on the implementation of Coastal GOOS (COOP-GOOS). The implementation strategy for Coastal GOOS was published in 2005 and subsequently endorsed by I-GOOS and the IOC Assembly. A global network of regional systems is envisioned. A number of GOOS Regional Alliances (GRAs) are already active and in order to meet Coastal GOOS goals broad coordination and collaboration between regions will be required. A suggested way forward is the formation of a joint GOOS-GTOS Coastal Panel, to be identified as J-PICO. GTOS, like GOOS, has a coastal component. Terms of Reference for J-PICO were proposed. Pilot projects were identified as an important means to enable implementation of GOOS. Two projects familiar to ICES were endorsed as pilot projects: the Ferry Box project (see 3.2.3) and the CPR program.

The 3rd GRA Forum will take place in Cape Town, South Africa in November 2006. It will be held back-to-back with the Pan African LMEs/GOOS-Africa leadership workshop on Operational Oceanography and Remote Sensing. A major goal of the Forum is to prioritize recommendations in the COOP-GOOS implementation strategy for implementing a Global Coastal Network (GCN).

Capacity building is an important goal within IOC. Opportunities and mechanisms to promote capacity building also were discussed at the meeting. SGGOOS feels that ICES participation in the 3rd GRA Forum would be important for both GOOS and ICES in planning the implementation of the Coastal GOOS. ICES can represent the biological side of ocean observing, as well as the application of those observations to societal needs through it advisory functions related to fisheries management, marine environmental quality and ecosystems. The adjoining Pan African leadership workshop also could offer ICES the opportunity to contribute to capacity building through its expertise in the application of ocean observations to fishery stock assessment and management.


3.1.2 Update from EuroGOOS (Hans Dahlin)

Global systems (e.g. VOS, SOOP, GLOSS,…) have existed for many years. Today JCOMM is the governing body of the global systems and also responsible for the further implementation of GOOS. This is been developed through regional alliances (GRA), presently 13, which are responsible for the bottom-up process meeting the global requirements. Preparations for an Arctic GOOS Alliance are in progress. New initiatives, such as ARGO (GOOS) and GEOSS have also been implemented.

The main strengths of global systems are founded on the co-operation built on intergovernmental agreements or decisions; they include many strong participants with regional contributions (GRA) and allow for an engagement of the academic community, SCOR, and private initiatives. They have weak points, however, related to difficulties to get long term commitments (as the main funding mechanism remains in national initiatives), the slow implementation process due to the annual cycle of intergovernmental organisations and the different capability of individual GRAs. In addition sometimes the scale of their products is of little interest for end users. Despite these shortcomings, a multitude of operational national services are produced with sustained funding (see the EuroGOOS Website).

National agencies responsible for GOOS activities benefit from being close to the users (government, “national commitments”, agencies, research organisations, public, ...), receiving sustained funding of infrastructure and operations, having fixed responsibilities and the authority to make agreements. Their oceanographic operation is limited, however, because the responsibility for national oceanography often divided between several agencies, institutes and ministries, all competing for the same funds. In some cases, there are additional difficulties because of the misunderstanding of their role in the national operational system and the establishment of commercial arrangements instead of free access to data and products.

Regional co-operation has a key role in the implementation of GOOS, and particularly Coastal GOOS, because they meet the top-down requirements from regional conventions and directives, are built on existing national services, thus providing a cost-effective production of data and services jointly developed by the participating nations. This cooperation makes best practice accessible to all countries and users, despite reticence to change procedures by some agencies, and other limitations as those set by national policies. The eventual possibilities to get funding from regional (e.g. European) sources have been identified also as a cause of delay in their implementation.

EuroGOOS is a catalyst, organiser and promoter of GOOS activities at the European level by improving the members’ capability to carry out their duties, fostering a sustained production of required services at scales larger than national, finding the most efficient use of members’ available resources and aiming at the establishment of a sustainable governing system for European operational oceanography. At present, observational programs, covering from meteorology to harmful algal blooms or oil spills, were well established, with products delivered in real-time ranging from 24% (nutrients) to 100% (sea level). Most countries are producing forecasts for various variables. The use of models, mainly related to waves and dispersion, increased to the point that synthesis and coordination will be required to extend their applications from national to regional scales. Ecosystem modelling needs further implementation in most countries. Demonstration projects (as SEPRISE and MERSEA) are identified as effective ways to achieve national coordination at the European level.


Projects:MerseaSEPRISEECOOP?

Task TeamTask TeamOOS

EuroGOOSWGDQME

Coastal system

Coastal system Coastal

system Coastal system

Coastal system

Coastal system

Coastal system

Coastal system

Coastal system

Regional Network Regional Network Regional Network

Global Network

InternationalCommittee

WMO/JCOMM


Godae/pogoInternationalCommittee

Data Standards

EuropeanNetwork







EuroGOOSWGDQMEEuroGOOSWGDQMEEuroGOOSWGDQME

Coastal system

Coastal system Coastal

system Coastal system

Coastal system

Coastal system

Coastal system

Coastal system

Coastal system

Regional Network Regional Network Regional Network

Global Network


WMO/JCOMM


Godae/pogoInternationalCommittee

Data Standards

EuropeanNetwork

Figure 3.1.2.1: Framework for the integration of national, regional and international GOOS activities.

3.1.3 Report on ICES Workshop on Review of the ICES Committee and Expert Group Performance [WKREP] - (Adi Kellerman)

ICES finds itself in a changing world: rapid advances in technologies (e.g. miniaturization, remote sensing techniques) lead into new methodologies and fields of research, or new disciplines in marine research. In addition, human activities are reaching far beyond coastal areas and below the ocean surface layer. To meet the new challenges ICES organised WKREP in Copenhagen (European Environmental Agency, 15 March 2006) attended by 39 participants (31 Committee and Expert Group Chairs and National Delegates). The meeting also benefited from a presentation by Alan Edwards (EC DG Research) on “Challenges to Marine Science in the next Decade”, with information of the new opportunities for ICES work expected in the forthcoming VII EU Framework Programme. The meeting had a very good and open plenary discussion with very constructive subgroup contributions leading the way towards a new structure of the ICES Science Programme.

The objectives of the meeting were to propose modifications of the Committee and Expert Group structure that will improve Client satisfaction, efficiency and effectiveness of the ICES Committees and their Expert Groups, and to consider how the Expert Groups can be given a more prominent role in ICES and in society in general. The primary focus of the review process was on Expert Groups. The conclusion was that most of them function well, however communication needs to be improved, both within the Science Programme and with Advisory Programme. The Committees, however, function less well and require better content and commitment. The need for a forum for strategic discussions in ICES was also identified.

Improving communication, commitment, identification of needs, flexibility, and continuity were the main topics of the plenary and subgroup discussions. Responsiveness between the science and advisory bodies as well as within and across disciplines was identified as a key element. At the same time, excellent contents and attractiveness of the EG is required to improve commitment. Implementing the Ecosystem Approach to Management (identification of needs) requires new layers of knowledge and a new culture of cross-disciplinary


communication. A new flexible structure must be able to cope with future challenges and new issues not limited to short-term commitment. Continuity of EG will protect corporate knowledge and experience, allowing bottom-up innovation. The challenge is to align science priorities with Member Country priorities and with ICES Strategic Goals. The participants also recommended an increase in strategic planning and a reduction in micromanagement in the activities of the Consultative Committee (ConC).

WKREP Conveners (Michael Sissenwine, Harald Loeng, and Paul Connolly) will report to ConC and MCAP for the adoption of the required resolutions. The full text of the WKREP meeting report can be found at http://www.ices.dk/reports/CONC/2006/WKREP06.pdf.

3.2 GOOS Pilot Projects and other Regional Observation Programs

3.2.1 Update on REGNS/PGNSP/NORSEPP (Sarah Hughes)

Recent developments on the Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of the North Sea (REGNS) were reported from material provided by Andrew Kenny (CEFAS, UK). The objective of REGNS is to look at ways in which the existing ICES structure (data centre & working groups) can input into the periodic production of regional integrated assessment. This objective was channelled in the delivery of a pilot Integrated Assessment (not advice) on the North Sea Ecosystem by September 2006. Integrated assessment (IA) is not traditional status reporting, which are descriptive, more like ‘combined assessments’, very good at describing state. IA is an holistic approach, not restricted to assessing a single (or a few) pressure and state changes, although they do integrate pressure and state changes. These ‘first order integrated assessments’ are usually activity specific (e.g. fisheries, offshore extraction etc.) and research driven.

The required information for REGNS is supplied by 19 WG, including topics as eutrophication, conservation, pollution, fisheries and climatic variability. The parameters analysed for the North Sea ecosystem overview came from a large data set (126 parameters x 200 squares x 55 years x 12 months = 16.5 million raw data), values comprising plankton (47 species recorded between 1950 and 2004), sea birds (49 species between 1980 and 2004), fish (9 species and 4 assessment metrics between 1965 and 2004) and physical oceanography parameters (17 parameters between 1973 and 2004). In addition, the participants identified the need for habitat, benthic invertebrate and mammal data. The analysis also required grid referenced data and time-series analysis (annual averages for the North Sea for each parameter) and spatial analysis (an average over all years for each square for each parameter). This assessment is on-going, but one first result was the identification of the abrupt change in the North Sea in 1987–88, described as a “regime shift” (Beaugrand, G. 2004. Progress in Oceanography 60: 245–262), but also 1965 and 1979. Clear gradients in space and time emerged, apparently related to the flux of sea water into the Northern North Sea. The analytical procedures revealed that the ‘weight’ given to the parameters needs further investigation, since not all parameters are of equal ecological significance. The input of experts will be required. Another preliminary conclusion is that sub-regions can be defined to undertake thematic assessments. Among the lessons learnt are the realisation of time necessary to understand the IA concept and definitions, mainly because differences in user needs, the difficulties in accessing the actual data (unexpected from the relative simplicity to identify data sources) and the finding of too many vested interests. Data gathering and checking, a job in itself, is not complete. Furthermore, new methods for analysis will be required. Nevertheless, REGNS acknowledges the participation of members of the 19 ‘Source’ Working Groups who responded to requests for expert input and the provision of data, and all participants at the REGNS meetings. It is hoped that this type of integrated assessment will help the future design of monitoring programmes and the setting of realistic policy targets for management purposes.

http://www.ices.dk/reports/CONC/2006/WKREP06.pdf


The pilot project on the North Sea (NORSEPP), jointly run by ICES and EuroGOOS after the development of the Planning Group for the North Sea Project (PGNSP), has produced several reports on oceanographic and fish stock conditions for the North Sea for 2005. The latest report can be downloaded from: http://www.ices.dk/marineworld/NORSEPP3and4qtr205.pdf. These reports concentrate on physical oceanography parameters derived from hydrographic and circulation models supported by observations, but biological information is limited due to insufficient coverage in some laboratories.

Figure 3.2.1.1: Time-series of southwards fluxes (in) across the northern boundaries to the North Sea shown as averages for the 1st Quarter (January-March) over the period 1955–2004. The northern boundaries are made up of the section between Orkney and Shetland (OrSh) and the western and eastern parts of the Fe-Shetland section (FeSh). From Skjodal et al. REGNS Working Document.

3.2.2 Update on IBIROOS (Gregorio Parrilla)

Information on the development of the Iberian-Biscay-Ireland Operational Oceanography System (IBIROOS) was based on materials provided by Alicia Lavin and Sylvie Pouliquen. The IBIROOS region includes part of the Celtic Sea, all the Bay of Biscay, the western Iberian margin, and the Gulf of Cádiz. Its main objective is to develop and implement an Iberian, Biscay, Irish regional observation system for optimal and sustainable monitoring and forecasting in this marine region using state-of the art remote-sensing, in-situ, numerical modelling, data assimilation and dissemination techniques. This objective will be implemented in partnership with international communities and agencies. Close co-operation between national governmental marine laboratories and agencies in the countries surrounding the area will allow the collection of observations, model operations and production of forecasts, services and information for the industry, the public and other end users. The partnership will include EuroGOOS members (IFREMER, Mercator-Ocean and Metéo-France –France-, IEO and Puertos del Estado –Spain- and IMR- Ireland-) as well as other agencies (IST, Universidade de Lisboa, Instituto Hidrografico and IPIMAR –Portugal-, NOC –UK-, Meteo Galicia, IIM – CSIC and AZTI –Spain-, and IRD –France-). The system will be built on existing monitoring programs and activities at sea and at the coastline. Many of these oceanographic observatories are based on long term projects addressed to assess practical needs. The collected data should fulfil operational needs as well as temporary and long-term demands from scientific research and the national policy on sustainable use of coastal regions and calamity prevention. Identified users include: transport, harbour operation and design, fisheries, aquaculture, construction and engineering, energy production, coastal protection, environmental protection and preservation and recreation. In addition, forecasts and other products will be of use for both scientific and management purposes. Presently, IBIROOS is developing the Strategic Plan, by identifying observation needs, models (from regional to coastal scales), users and services to be provided, and data management and exchange.

http://www.ices.dk/marineworld/NORSEPP3and4qtr205.pdf


Figure 3.2.2.1: Existing observing systems (left) and models (right) in the IBIROOS region.

3.2.3 Update on the Ferry Box program (Franciscus Colijn)

The EU-funded Ferry Box Program, which began in 2003, was completed in the fall of 2005. A colourful flyer about the program and a CD with a detailed report of the program were handed out. The project installed systems on ferries to measure a suite of oceanographic parameters along nine ferry track lines. The project has shown that ships of opportunity (SoO) can cost effectively collect and deliver quality oceanographic data that could be valuable for a number of applications. An example was shown of the monitoring of an algae bloom in the southern North Sea during 2005 by a ferry that runs between Cuxhaven (DE) and Harwich (UK). The ferry data clearly document the temporal and spatial development and decline of the bloom along the transect line. The Ferry Box chlorophyll data compared well with values along the ferry’s track line derived from the ENVISAT/MERIS satellite. The Ferry Box data could be used to calibrate the satellite data, particularly in turbid class-2 waters near the coast. To make these direct comparisons, a hydrodynamic model was used to adjust for the water movement between the times of the ferry observations and the satellite pass.

The ferry box approach has a number of advantages and disadvantages compared to remote sensing by satellites. It can measure a wide range of parameters directly and can have a high frequency of observations without the limitations of cloud cover. A disadvantage is that it measures only along a single track line and does not provide a wide-spatial coverage. As suggested by the chlorophyll example above, data from the Ferry Box systems and from satellites complement each other, particularly in conjunction with hydrodynamic models, and can result the type of integrated data products envisioned by GOOS.

With the end of the formal EU project the issue now becomes can the Ferry Box sampling be continued and expanded as a source of information for GOOS? At the Paris meeting of the GOOS Steering Committee in March, the Ferry Box concept was adopted as a Pilot project for the Coastal Implementation of GOOS. To begin the initiation of a Pilot project, relevant persons in the JCOMM SOOP team have been contacted.


Figure 3.2.3.1. Ferry Box lines.

The Ferry Box lines http://www.Ferrybox.org

3.2.4 ICES Data Management in relation to GOOS (Julie Gillin)

The ICES Data Centre has a small staff, with five full or part-time data managers, three scientific programmers and one administrative programmer. ICES has large data holdings in three major categories or disciplines: Environment, Oceanography and Fisheries. Under Environment are data on contaminants and biological effects, fish disease and biological communities (e.g., abundance/biomass of phytoplankton, zooplankton, phytobenthos and zoobenthos). Currently these data are stored in “flat” ASCII files. Under Oceanography are standard physical and chemical oceanographic data, largely from CTD measurements, but represent data from over the last 125 years. Cruise summary reports (i.e., ROSCOP summaries) also are stored. The Oceanography data sets also are stored in “flat” ASCII files. Under Fisheries are data from several trawl surveys (e.g., the IBTS), preliminary catch data submitted by various countries for the ICES region, and summary tables from the ICES fish stock assessments. The Fisheries data sets are stored in relational databases.

ICES itself does not collect these data sets, but receives them through its member countries or other sources. The different data sets are accepted in a variety of formats and, overall, are somewhat uncoordinated. Internationally the ocean community is moving towards a distributed database model with open access, and the Data Centre is committed to that vision. It has a phased plan to migrate its various data holdings to a single, integrated relational database, DOME (Database on Oceanography and Marine Ecosystems) over the next few years. In addition to better support its customers the Data Centre envisions becoming a web portal for easy and open access to available, relevant datasets. In an important first step toward the new vision of data management, the ICES Council adopted a new Data Policy in October 2005 (http://www.ices.dk/datacentre/Datapolicy.asp). This policy provides for the open access to data now being submitted to ICES and indicates that appropriate meta-data should accompany data submissions.

http://www.ices.dk/datacentre/Datapolicy.asp


External DatabasesIntegrally linked to ICES

database Raw data stored

in ICESRaw data stored

elsewhere

ICES Web Portal

ICES Internal DATABASESand Data Mining Software

Aggregated dataFisheries

EnvironmentOceanographyContaminant

External AggregatedDATABASES

Large International projectsor Regional Nodes

External Survey Databases

GIS, Aggregation & retrivel toolsOther National and

International Web Portals

Metadata

ICES Working GroupsAdvice to Commisions

NEAFCEC DG Fisheries

IBSFCNASCOOSPAR

HELCOMEC DG Environment

World-Wide Users

Figure 3.2.4.1: ICES Data Centre vision of the new web portal as a hub for distributed oceanographic, fisheries and environmental data.

SGGOOS endorses the Data Centre’s movement toward integrating its data sets in a relational database structure and its commitment to open access to its data holdings where possible. Its vision of becoming a web portal to its internal and to other external data sources will be a significant benefit to the ICES community. The revised Data Policy is an important step toward the new world of ocean data management.

3.2.5 Update on GoMA-GOOS (David Mountain)

The goal of the GoMA-GOOS project is to demonstrate the usefulness of an integrated ocean observing system in support of an ecosystem approach to fishery management. The project is a joint effort by the Fisheries and Oceans Canada, through the Bedford Institute of Oceanography (BIO) and the US National Marine Fisheries Service, through the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC). Since the project was reported upon at the 2005 SGGOOS meeting and in Session P of the 2005 Annual Science Conference progress has been made in a number of areas. A report of the workshop to develop the objectives for ecosystem based fisheries management to be used in the project has been issued (http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/crd/crd0606/). The data access infrastructure that will provide the wide variety of data needed to support the GoMA-GOOS project is being developed and implemented through the Gulf of Maine Ocean Data Partnership (GoMODP) (http://www.gomoos.org/coml/bin/view). Currently the Partnership is focusing effort on assisting the regional data collecting organizations in registering their data sets with appropriate metadata through one of the national data registries. The Partnership has collaborated with the NASA Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) to create a web-portal for the Partnership at GCMD (see ‘Collaborations’ at http://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov). This site allows easy access to the metadata for all data sets registered as being part of the GoMODP.

http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/crd/crd0606/

http://www.gomoos.org/coml/bin/view

http://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/


The Partnership also is continuing to assist partners in making their data sets accessible via one of the established web-based data transfer protocols (e.g., OPeNDAP and DIGIR).

Figure 3.2.5.1.

Limitations in personnel and fiscal resources at both BIO and NEFSC have slowed progress in the project. However both organizations are committed to accomplishing the project and view it as an important step toward implanting an ecosystem approach to fishery management.

Example of web access to GoMA-GOOS data through the GoMODP portal.

4 ToR a) Identify and steer the development of global and regional linkages between ICES and GOOS bodies

4.1 Review and make recommendations on how SGGOOS and ICES can assist in the implementation of COOP-GOOS

This point jointly addresses ToR (a) subtopics i) and ii). The group acknowledged the success in the presentation of ICES-GOOS activities in Theme Session P during 2005 ICES ASC. To the three main areas of interest (pilot projects, ecosystem forecasting and operational oceanography), only ecosystem forecasting was rather weakly addressed, reflecting the state of this aspect in marine science. Other topics, as ecosystem policy and practice, were also covered. The success of this activity calls for a continuation in future ASC.


Pierre Yves Le Traon (IFREMER, France), although not attending the meeting, reported by mail on interactions between the Global Data Assimilation Experiment (GODAE) and the new IGBP-SCOR project focusing on ocean biogeochemical cycles and ecosystems (IMBER). This could led to the setting up of a GODAE/IMBER pilot project with the objectives to develop the use of operational oceanography products for ecosystem research and fishery management. This activity seems to be quite relevant to the SGGOOS and is one means to develop the links between GOOS and ICES. Report on progress on this activity at the next meeting is expected.

SGGOOS had a lengthy discussion on how it and ICES could assist in the implementation of COOP-GOOS. A good starting point was to review the recommendations made by Tom Malone in his plenary lecture at the 2002 ICES Annual Science Conference, which still seemed quite relevant. He recommended that ICES play an active role in the design and implementation of COOP-GOOS by:

1) specifying its requirements for data and data products from GOOS; and

2) actively participating in the design and implementation of the coastal module. He also identified the successful completion of pilot projects such as NORSEPP as important proof of concept for GOOS.

ICES will be both a data provider to GOOS and a client of GOOS by using GOOS products in the advisory functions of ACFM, ACME and ACE. The presentation made by Julie Gillin (see 3.2.4) shows that ICES is taking appropriate steps to be able to support GOOS objectives as a data provider. As a client, one of the most important ways ICES can support GOOS is by articulating its requirements for data and data products, as recommended by Tom Malone. An operational system needs clients who use and depend upon the system’s products and thus help justify the cost of the system. However, articulating its needs for data products, particularly in relation to fishery management, is difficult for ICES since environmental data is not generally used in current stock assessment activities. A step in that direction has been made by the Working Group on Regional Ecosystem Descriptions (WGRED). In both its 2005 and 2006 reports WGRED has identified environmental information that could be useful in the assessment of a wide range of fish stocks. SGGOOS then considered where within ICES could/should the ICES operational needs for environmental data products be articulated. It was pointed out that the Working Group on Modelling Physical Biological Interactions (WGPBI) has made a recommendation that an ICES working group on operational oceanography be formed by bringing together SGGOOS, PGNSP and the operational interests of WGPBI. The justification for this recommendation is that operational oceanographic systems like Coastal GOOS are being implemented; the ICES advisory system will depend on the products of these systems; and an operational oceanography working group would be the appropriate body to formulate the ICES requirements and coordinate an ICES contribution to GOOS. SGGOOS agrees with the WGPBI recommendation and endorses it.

SGGOOS believes that ICES needs to be actively involved in the implementation of COOP-GOOS, as suggested by Tom Malone in 2002. To begin that involvement SGGOOS recommends (as also indicated in 3.1.1 above) that ICES have senior representation at the 3rd GRA Forum this November in Cape Town, South Africa.

4.2 Review, evaluate and revise SGGOOS Implementation Plan; address any recommendations coming out of the ICES Expert Groups review and evaluation

The SGGOOS Implementation Plan was thoroughfully reviewed. The title was changed to acknowledge that there is not a formal ICES-GOOS Programme but joint activities instead. The group agreed on keeping the link with IOC and the main four elements, as they were directly related to the objective of improving the collaboration between ICES and GOOS.


Some changes were made in specific actions envisaged, mainly under topics 2 (ICES activities contributing to GOOS) and 3 (development of ICES and GOOS pilot projects). One major recommendation is the eventual merging of the relevant SGGOOS, PGNSP and WGPBI activities in a new Working Group on Operational Ocean Products and Services (WGOOPS). Actions to encourage the production and dissemination of ICES Status Reports were also recommended. The revised implementation plan is included as Annex 6.

5 ToR b) Identify and steer the development of components and activities of ICES contributing to the Global Ocean Observing System, as well as GOOS products relevant to ICES

5.1 Review (intersessional) ICES data centre user survey list of improved data products and identify those relevant to GOOS; identify and make recommendations on additional GOOS-relevant data products

The user survey list of improved data products was not available by the time of the SGGOOS meeting. This activity will be conducted in the coming year.

Information on one of these products (The ICES-FishMap), however, was provided by Remment ter Hofstede. ICES has recently opened up access to the fish data collected by research vessels around the North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat in the form of an online mapping system named ICES Fishmap (http://www.ices.dk/marineworld/ices-fishmap.asp). It allows the creation of distribution maps for fish species, by selecting on years, quarters, ages and size-classes. These data are derived from the DATRAS survey database kept at the ICES Secretariat and will be updated annually. ICES-FishMap also offers a section (pdf-files) with detailed information on the presented species, the surveys used, the factors affecting the distribution, the fish communities, and the limitations of the data presented.

Figure 5.1.1.

Example of an ICES FishMap page for sprat showing a map of spatial distribution and information on the biology of the species

http://www.ices.dk/marineworld/ices-fishmap.asp


ICES-Fishmap is the outcome of an EU co-funded project under the same name, and was a cooperative exercise involving the Netherlands Institute for Fisheries Research (RIVO), the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS), and the Secretariat of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES).

ICES-FishMap currently holds data for 15 species, but the ultimate goal is to produce an electronic and paper atlas for a much larger area than the North Sea, that provides information on preferably all fish species present.

5.2 Report on status and make recommendations on ICES CTD/VOS system to provide real-time or near-real time delivery of environmental data from ICES co-ordinated research vessel surveys (S. Hughes)

ICES hydrographic data can contribute to GOOS climate observations, some of this data is already collated in a delayed mode in the IAOCSS. However these data could also be an extremely valuable input to forecasting models and data assimilation products (i.e. FOAM Model, North Sea SST maps and others) when delivered in real- or near-real time. Reporting of data in this way would clearly be a valuable ICES contribution to GOOS. As the system is currently mainly for physical data, the members of the Working Group on Oceanic Hydrography (WGOH) were surveyed to determine how many are already using this system, and obtain feedback as to the ease of use, pitfalls, etc. The ultimate objective was to promote the implementation of this system on oceanographic cruises.

The system to report data in real time (via GTS) is already in place and being used by a number of institutes already (e.g. BSH, IFREMER). Other institutes involved in GOOS-type initiatives are starting to transmit data more frequently. It is possible to report data from XBTs, CTDs and underway systems (TSRs). There is already an obligation on nations to report such data (JCOMM). Despite this it appears that many institutes undertaking scientific cruises in the ICES area do not report any data through this system.

The survey among 14 WGOH organizations and institutes from 10 countries asked the following questions:

• Do you already transmit data in real time (yes to institute/yes to GTS/no)?

• Would your institute be prepared to transmit this data in future? (definitely/possibly)

The organizations (and countries) surveyed were: FRS, CEFAS and NOC (UK), IOPAS (Poland), AWI and BSH (Germany), IEO and AZTI (Spain), BIO (Canada), SMHI (Sweden), IMR (Norway), MRI (Iceland), NIOZ (The Netherlands) and MI (Ireland).

The results indicate that meteorological data are transmitted via GTS in the majority of cases but still some institutes are not participating. Much less participation is found with hydrographic data: less than half of the institutes transmit data in real-time and only 3 use the protocols for the GTS system for CTD or underway data. The potential for transmission is much higher for fixed stations (buoys), however, and some institutes have definite plans for implementing the system in the near future. The conclusion is that there is still a long way to reach a real-time delivery of marine observations into ICES-GOOS activities.


The SGGOOS discussed some of the possible limitations of a wider use of CTD/VOS data, mainly identified as the separation between data collectors and users. The institutes should be encouraged to establish the appropriate links between real-time data users (modellers, product developers,…) and data collectors (observational programs, cruise chief-scientists, …). The GTS system, initially developed for the exchange of meteorological data, revealed appropriate for oceanographic data. Current procedures rely on the network access to actual data through the appropriate links to individual institutions, instead of sending the data to a centralised data-base. The experience of EuroGOOS in this field, with a specific group dedicated to data exchange issues, must be taken into account. One further concern was the requirement for procedures for quality-control in the exchange of oceanographic data (e.g. salinity corrections), which may be critical for some applications (but not for others). The group recommends that ICES (e.g. the General Secretary) ask the collaboration of Delegates in the development of activities within their national institutes directed to the implementation of the technical means to transmit and store oceanographic data, with the aim of having a wider use of the data in real-time products. This is identified as a key ICES-GOOS activity.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Met Data XBT Data CTD Data Underway Fixed

NoFuture PotentialDefinite PlansYes - GTSYes - Institute

Figure 5.2.1: Results of the CTD/VOS survey on WGOH participants. The questions were: Do you already transmit data in real time (yes to institute/yes to GTS/no)? and Would your institute be prepared to transmit this data in future? (definitely/possibly).

6 ToR c) Identify and steer the development of regional ICES and GOOS pilot projects to demonstrate the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context

The group discussed the updates on REGNS, NORSEPP, PGNSP. IBIROOS, GoMA-GOOS and Ferry Box (parts 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, and 3.2.5). SGGOOS acknowledged the progress with programs as NORSEPP in developing the periodic status reports. Concerns were expressed on the lack of some data: for instance periodic phyto- and zooplankton biomass or abundance surveys are not made at some institutes. In the overall, the data analysis in progress (e.g. REGNS) is seen as a valuable first approach for the implementation of integrated ecosystem analysis at regional level. The identification of parameter associations and system shifts, however, must evolve into more specific ecosystem analysis in the near future. Most of these


pilot programs already report their activities to GOOS. ICES and GOOS must disseminate these findings with specific activities (e.g. workshops).

The group also welcomed other initiatives that will expand and consolidate the observational capacity at regional scales. IBIROOS is conceived as a system within EuroGOOS, with long-term objectives complementary to specific projects (as ECOOP). A different approach is illustrated by GoMA-GOOS which builds on existing individual programs, each with specific objectives. The advantages and shortcomings of both approaches were briefly reviewed. In both cases, the commitment of national and individual institutes is identified as crucial for sustaining regional programs. Finally, the Ferry Box project is an appropriate example of technical and logistic implementation of a regional observational system, with technological and commercial products and possibilities for easy implementation in other areas. In addition, the data produced by the project is incorporated in oceanographic databases (BODC). The group supports the dissemination of the Ferry Box final report at appropriate audiences (e.g. JCOMM meeting on ships of opportunity in April 2007, EuroGOOS paper, …) to ensure the continuity of the operation and the integration of new routes.

7 ToR d) Identify and steer the development of appropriate outreach activities to disseminate information about ICES and GOOS and to articulate the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context

7.1 Update and review SGGOOS website

The SGGOOS website is currently hosted by GOOS-IOC. Recent changes in the main GOOS web page has made difficult the access to the old link (although the information can be still accessed from internal menus). GOOS office informed on financial difficulties for having a specific dedication to updating and transform the SGGOOS web page. The group agreed in sending GOOS at least an update of the members list and the new Action Plan to update the current information. A request for a clear link to the page from the main GOOS page will be also made. A. Bode offered to provide suggestions for a new layout of the SGGOOS web page for 2007.

7.2 Update, review and agree on final form and content of ICES-GOOS flyer

A new version of the ICES-SGGOOS flyer was presented by A. Bode. In this version, the suggestions made by the group in 2005 were followed. The text was modified according to recent changes in the relevant sections of both ICES and GOOS action plans and objectives. The main text was reduced to highlighted boxes, and colour graphics and background were included. The proposed contents and layout were discussed and a balance between ICES and GOOS information was agreed. The objective of the flyer is to disseminate the benefits of the collaboration for both GOOS and ICES communities during the next 3 to 5 years. Practical considerations on the layout were discussed with B. Anthony (ICES Technical Editor) who agreed to take a closer look to the new version and provide suggestions to improve it. Also, he will make an estimate of the possible final costs of producing 1000 copies. The group aimed at having the flyer ready for distribution at the ICES ASC in Maastrich, in September 2006. An estimate of the costs is expected by early June 2006. Both the ICES General Secretary and GOOS Director will be asked to share the printing costs. F. Colijn also offered to cover part of the printing by his institute. The group members agreed on having specific mentions to the sponsors in the flyer. Keith Alverson and Albert Fischer (from IOC) also agreed to send suggestions on the flyer content by e-mail. The current proposed version of the flyer is included as Annex 5.


7.3 Make recommendations for GOOS plenary lecture and display for 2006 ICES ASC

Given recent reviews in some important GOOS actions (mainly related with the implementation of Coastal GOOS programs), the group agreed on delaying the proposal of a plenary lecture to ICES ASC in 2007 (Helsinki). H. Dahlin will make a preliminary contact Tom Malone (GOOS Scientific and Technical Committee member) for subsequent formal invitation by ICES.

7.4 Publicize ICES annual status reports (e.g. on climate and zooplankton) within the GOOS community

Dissemination of the main ICES-GOOS products to date (i.e. annual status reports) was identified by the group as one of the key actions to improve collaboration between both communities. Specific requests will be made to both GOOS and ICES to include visible web links to the appropriate ICES reports.

8 Any other business

None.

9 Next meeting of SGGOOS

The group decided to accept the invitation from Luis Valdés, Director of the Oceanographic Centre of the Instituto Español de Oceanografía in Gijón (Spain) to hold the SGGOOS meeting in this centre from 23 to 24 April 2007.

10 Action points for SGGOOS members in 2007 • A. Bode will finish the preliminary version of the flyer incorporating the

suggestions and materials provided by the group members (May 2006). • B. Anthony will provide technical advice and an estimate of the printing costs of

the flyer. The chairs will contact ICES and GOOS Directors and F. Colijn for supporting the printing costs (end June 2006).

• H. Dahlin will make a preliminary contact with Tom Malone for the ASC Plenary Lecture in 2007.

• H. Dahlin will report on the 3rd. Forum of the GOOS Regional Alliances (November 2006)

• D. Mountain will request Keith Alverson to support for updating the SGGOOS web page with links to ICES Status Reports.

• D. Mountain will contact Jeff Napp to update on GOOS-related PICES activities. • P.Y. Le Traon will report on the progress of GODAE/IMBER contacts. • S. Hughes will review ICES data centre user survey list to identify products

relevant to GOOS and update on progress of ICES CTD/VOS system. • G. Harrison will review the relevant ICES WG reports to identify GOOS-related

products. • All participants will review available project reports (as NORSEPP and Ferry

Box) to highlight benefits of a GOOS approach in the ICES context. • A. Bode and D. Mountain will coordinate intersessionally with the chairs of

WGPBI and PGNSP to consider the recommendation to form a working group on operational oceanography.


Annex 1: SGGOOS list of participants

NAME ADDRESS PHONE/FAX EMAIL

Bill Anthony ICES HC Andersens Boulevard 44-46 1553 Copenhagen V Denmark

[email protected]

Antonio Bode (Co-Chair)

Centro Oceanográfico de A Coruña Apdo 130 E-15080 A Coruña Spain

TEL: +34 981 205362 FAX: +34 981 229077

[email protected]

Franciscus Colijn

GKSS Institute for Coastal Research Max Planck Strasse 1 DE-21502 Geesthacht Germany

TEL: +49 4152 871533

[email protected]

Hans Dahlin

SMHI SE-601 76 Norrköping Sweden

TEL: +46 11 495 8305 FAX: +46 11 495 8350

[email protected]

Julie Gillin

ICES HC Andersens Boulevard 44-46 1553 Copenhagen V Denmark

[email protected]

Dr Glen Harrison

Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans Bedford Institute of Oceanography P.O. Box 1006 Dartmouth, NS B2Y 4A2 Canada

TEL. +1 902 426-3879 FAX. +1 902 426-9388

[email protected]

Remment ter Hofstede Wageningen IMARES Postbus 68 1970 AB Ijmuiden The Netherlands

[email protected]

Sarah Hughes

Fisheries Research Services Marine Laboratory P.O. Box 101 375 Victoria Road Aberdeen AB11 9DB United Kingdom

[email protected]

Adi Kellermann

ICES HC Andersens Boulevard 44-46 1553 Copenhagen V Denmark

[email protected]

Julien Mader

AZTI Herrera kaia, Portualde z/g 20110 Pasaia, Gipuzkoa Spain

[email protected]


NAME ADDRESS PHONE/FAX EMAIL

David Mountain (Co-Chair)

Northeast Fisheries Science Center NOAA 166 Water Street Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026 USA

[email protected]

Gregorio Parrilla

Instituto español de Oceanografia c/ Corazón de Maria 8 28002 Madrid Spain

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Annex 2: Agenda

Agenda Day 1 (Monday April 24, 2006)

9:30 Welcome and Introductions

10:00 Update on GOOS Steering Committee Meeting (Franciscus Colijn)

10:40 Update from EuroGOOS (Hans Dahlin)

11:30 Coffee break

11:45 Report on ICES Workshop on Review of the ICES Committee and Expert Group Performance (WKREP) (Adi Kellerman)

12:15 Update on REGNS/PGNSP/NORSEPP (Sarah Hughes)

13:00 Lunch

14:00 Update on IBIROOS (Gregorio Parrilla)

14:30 Update on the Ferry Box program (Franciscus Colijn)

15:15 ICES Data Management in relation to GOOS (Julie Gillin – ICES Data Manager)

Presentation and discussion

16:00 Coffee

16:15 Update on GoMA-GOOS (David Mountain)

16:30 ToR (a): Identify and steer the development of global and regional linkages between ICES and GOOS bodies:

i) Review (intersessional) and make recommendations on how SGGOOS can

assist in the implementation of COOP-GOOS;

ii) Review (intersessional) and make recommendations on the role ICES can

play in the implementation of COOP-GOOS;

iii) Review (intersessional), evaluate and revise SGGOOS Implementation Plan; address any recommendations coming out of the ICES Expert Groups

review and evaluation.

18:00 Close


Agenda Day 2 (Tuesday April 25)

09:00. ToR (b): Identify and steer the development of components and activities of ICES

contributing to the Global Ocean Observing System, as well as GOOS products

relevant to ICES:

i) Review (intersessional) ICES data centre user survey list of improved data

products and identify those relevant to GOOS; identify and make

recommendations on additional GOOS-relevant data products;

ii) Report on status and make recommendations on ICES CTD/VOS system to

provide real-time or near-real time delivery of environmental data from

ICES co-ordinated research vessel surveys.

10:30 Coffee

11:00 ToR (c): Identify and steer the development of regional ICES and GOOS pilot projects to demonstrate the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context:

i) review, through presentations, highlight best practices and make

recommendations to further develop and implement regional pilot projects,

including NORSEPP, GoMA-GOOS, PICES, etc.

Discussion of presentations from Day 1.

12:00 TOR d: Identify and steer the development of appropriate outreach activities to

disseminate information about ICES and GOOS and to articulate the benefits of

taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context:

i) update (intersessional) and review SGGOOS website;

ii) update (intersessional), review and agree on final form and content of ICESGOOS flyer;

iii) make recommendations for GOOS plenary lecture and display for 2006

ICES ASC;

iv) publicize ICES annual status reports (e.g. on climate and zooplankton)

within the GOOS community.

13:00 Lunch

14:00 Continue discussion of ToR (d).

15:00 Other business

(i) ToRs for 2007

(ii) Dates/venue for 2007 meeting

16:00 Close


Annex 3: SGGOOS Terms of Reference 2006

The ICES-IOC Steering Group on GOOS [SGGOOS] (Co-Chairs: A. Bode, Spain and D. Mountain, USA) will meet in Gijón, Spain from 23–24 April 2007 to:

(a) Identify and steer the development of global and regional linkages between ICES and GOOS bodies:

(i) Review the outcome of the 3rd. Forum for GOOS Regional Alliances regarding the implications for ICES involvement in GOOS implementation.

(ii) Review the outcome of the GOOS/GSSC-POGO gap analysis for GEO Workplan regarding the implications for ICES involvement in GOOS implementation.

(b) Identify and steer the development of components and activities of ICES contributing to the Global Ocean Observing System, as well as GOOS products relevant to ICES:

(i) Review (intersessional) ICES data centre user survey list of improved data products and identify those relevant to GOOS; identify and make recommendations on additional GOOS-relevant data products;

(ii) Report on progress of ICES CTD/VOS system to provide real-time or near-real time delivery of environmental data from ICES coordinated research vessel surveys.

(c) Identify and steer the development of regional ICES, PICES and GOOS pilot projects to demonstrate the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context:

(i) Review, through presentations, highlight best practices and make recommendations to further develop and implement regional pilot projects.

(ii) Review NORSEPP quarterly reports, evaluate the data products and propose strategies for the transition to the operational mode.

(iii) Review Ferry Box reports, evaluate the data products and propose strategies for the transition to the operational mode.

(iv) Review the outcome of discussions with WGPBI and PGNSP on the recommendation to form a working group on operational oceanography that would combine the roles of the groups.

(d) Identify and steer the development of appropriate outreach activities to disseminate information about ICES and GOOS and to articulate the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context:

(i) Make recommendations for GOOS plenary lecture and display for 2007 ICES ASC.

(ii) Publicize ICES annual status reports (e.g. on climate and zooplankton) within the GOOS community.

(iii) Update (intersessional) and review SGGOOS website.

(iv) Develop a contribution on GOOS activities in the ICES area for the ICES Newsletter in 2007.

SGGOOS will report by DATE to the attention of the OCC Committee.


Supporting Information PRIORITY: The activities of this joint ICES-IOC Steering Group must be considered essential for

the participation of ICES as an active regional partner in GOOS. SCIENTIFIC JUSTIFICATION AND RELATION TO ACTION PLAN:

Term of Reference a) Action Plan 1.7, 5.13, 5.13.1 (i) To provide annual summaries of GOOS activities to inform both the ICES and IOC communities and to recognize potential areas for collaboration. (ii) Progress towards implementing GOOS activities within ICES, and promoting ICES activities to GOOS communities. Term of Reference b) Action Plan 1.7, 5.13, 5.13.1 (i) To foster collaboration on data exchange and use within ICES and to raise awareness on data products needed for GOOS-related work. (ii) To promote the use of real-time data. Term of Reference c) Action Plan 1.7, 5.13, 5.13.1 (i) To promote and extend the development of GOOS regional projects in the ICES area. (ii) NORSEPP is a major ICES pilot project designed to test capabilities for ecosystem monitoring in an operational context. This project was an initiative arising from this Steering Group (iii) The outcome of the Ferry Box project may provide the basis for improved routine monitoring at regional scales. (iv) The initiation of the new working group is a consequence of the evolution of SGGOOS and other ICES WG. Term of Reference d) Action Plan 5.10 (i) A plenary lecture was driven by the 2004 and 2005 action points and recommendations. The immediate implementation of Coastal GOOS justifies a major dissemination event within ICES. (ii) The flyer is needed to advertise GOOS activities within ICES, and alert GOOS communities about the activities of ICES. It will be widely distributed at many venues, and will be updated every 5 years. (iii) Information can be readily obtained through the website by scientists, users and service providers but this information needs regular updates and should be clearly visible. (iv) The ICES Newsletter is a key dissemination agent for GOOS activities and its benefits within the ICES community.

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS:

N/A.

PARTICIPANTS: GOOS, EuroGOOS, and other relevant GOOS bodies are free to contribute to the Group. Delegates are asked to ensure good representation of all ICES disciplines in this Group. Ideal participants are those already connected with GOOS activities in member countries.

SECRETARIAT FACILITIES:

None.

FINANCIAL: No financial implications. LINKAGES TO ADVISORY COMMITTEES:

Marine monitoring activities are closely relevant to the interests of all ICES Advisory Committees.

LINKAGES TO OTHER COMMITTEES OR GROUPS:

All ICES Science Committees have an active interest in this Group. Amongst the closely aligned Working Groups are many of the Oceanography Committee’s Groups and IBTSWG under LRC.

LINKAGES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS:

IOC, EuroGOOS, PICES.

SECRETARIAT MARGINAL COST SHARE:

ICES:100%


Annex 4: Recommendations

RECOMMENDATION ACTION 1. Better dissemination of ICES Status Reports To ICES web manager: Place a

direct link in the main page of the ICES web site

2. Formal invitation for a GOOS plenary lecture at the 2007 ICES ASC (after preliminary contacts were made in November 2006)

To ICES General Secretary.

3. Request to ICES Delegates for collaboration in the development of activities within their national institutes directed to the implementation of the technical means to transmit and store oceanographic data.

To ICES General Secretary

4. Merging of the relevant SGGOOS, PGNSP and WGPBI activities in a new Working Group on Operational Ocean Products and Services (WGOOPS)

To CONC (and subsequently to PGNSP and WGPBI )


Annex 5: Proposal for an ICES-SGGOOS flyer


Annex 6: Implementation plan for the ICES Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) cooperation

(Revised in April 2006 by the ICES/IOC Steering Group on GOOS)

The Implementation Plan for the ICES and GOOS Programme consists of four main elements, viz:

1 ) the development of global and regional linkages between ICES and GOOS bodies;

2 ) the identification and/or development of components and activities by ICES that may contribute to GOOS;

3 ) the development of regional ICES and GOOS Pilot Projects to demonstrate the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context; and

4 ) the development of appropriate outreach activities to disseminate information about the programme

Details of the four elements of the Implementation Plan are as follows:

1 ) The development of global and regional linkages between ICES and GOOS bodies

a ) IOC will co-sponsor the Steering Group on GOOS, including co-chairing it,

and nominate GOOS representatives to join that Group as appropriate. b ) In order to ensure that ICES interests are being conveyed to the various

GOOS Committees at national, regional and global levels a networking process will be established by putting national IOC-GOOS Programme representatives in contact with the national ICES representatives on the Steering Group. IOC and ICES will provide contact details for IOC-GOOS and ICES national representatives through the Steering Group web site with a request that contact be made.

c ) IOC (specifically EuroGOOS) will work with ICES to determine which of the ICES activities meet the GOOS Principles and would be best suited for adoption as elements of GOOS, either in an operational or a research sense including technology demonstrators or other forms of pilot projects.

d ) The Steering Group will consider how ICES might assist in “capacity building” to enable developing countries to participate in and benefit from GOOS.

e ) IOC and ICES will develop co-operative arrangements to enhance mutual awareness through: i ) the attendance of ICES Representatives at meetings of the

Intergovernmental Panel for GOOS (I-GOOS), Coastal GOOS, and the GSC

ii ) the attendance of GOOS Senior officer(s) or their representatives at the appropriate ICES meeting(s).

f ) EuroGOOS will be a Member of the Steering Group; g ) Any other relevant regional or national GOOS Programme will be able to

participate in the Steering Group with a view to seeking common grounds and exploiting complementarity.

h ) The Steering Group will nominate ICES representatives, with the approval of the ICES Council, to serve as advisors to selected IOC-GOOS design panels and committees as appropriate.


2 ) The identification and/or development of components and activities by ICES that may contribute to GOOS a ) SGGOOS should identify existing ocean monitoring activities as

components of the ICES and GOOS Cooperation. b ) The Oceanography and other ICES Committees and their working groups

should work together to produce and tailor summary products on a periodic basis, at least annually, exploiting the results of the ICES contributions to GOOS. These will take into account the needs and timing of the Fish Stock Assessment Working Groups.

c ) The Oceanography and other ICES Committees, with the aid of the Steering Group as appropriate, will disseminate the ICES ROC Report on Ocean Climate produced by the Oceanic Hydrography Working Group, and other status reports as appropriate, as working examples of ICES products.

d ) The Steering Group will review progress in the development of the data and information management systems needed to ensure that data and products from the ICES and GOOS Programme are made available in the most appropriate time frames to meet the needs of the main customers for such outputs (including the ICES advisory process).

3 ) The development of regional ICES and GOOS pilot projects to demonstrate

the benefits of taking a GOOS approach in the ICES context

a ) The Steering Group should identify appropriate partners and recommend pilot demonstration projects, which may eventually become permanent operational subsystems, in ICES regional seas.

b ) The relevant activities of SGGOOS, PGNSP and WGPBI should merge and consolidate to develop a new Working Group on Operational Ocean Products and Services (WGOOPS).

4 ) The development of appropriate outreach activities to disseminate

information about the programme

a ) The Steering Group, with the assistance of the IOC and ICES Secretariats, will develop an appropriate web page as a vehicle for advertising the development of the programme and its results.

b ) The Steering Group should consider the development of a series of appropriate workshops and specific GOOS sessions at ICES Annual Science Conferences to facilitate engagement of the wider community in the development of the Programme.

c ) The Steering Group should ensure that ICES involvement in the implementation of GOOS is communicated efficiently and effectively to appropriate national ICES and GOOS representatives and EuroGOOS.

Documents

Report of the ICES/IOC Steering Group on GOOS (SGGOOS)