Do you feel that you know how to apply EBM to the issue(s) or situation(s) you described? Why or why not?
#	Response Date	Comment
1.	Thu, 9/6/07 8:16 PM	trying to engage partners on many levels; opening channels of discussion; partnership funding all being attempted
2.	Fri, 9/7/07 12:28 PM	Yes, some ecosystem considerations are applied once the subdivision meets the regulatory process. Some are not, since EBM implies a complexity that exceeds the information available, for example.
3.	Mon, 9/10/07 8:25 PM	For the most part. The data exists, the area is well defined and mapped adequately. But in terms of EBM, the human dimension is better valued. Therefore, the economic impact of a dredging project on cod habitat isn't properly balanced. I.e. the cod isn't valued as highly as coastal property (even if an economic assessment may show otherwise--the natural resource valuation routinely gets ignored in the face of a more tangible human valuation).
4.	Mon, 9/17/07 4:09 PM	No. We do not have sufficient data, no models, little to no capacity to develop them or sufficient staffing and time to engage with stakeholders at the level required.
5.	Tue, 9/18/07 2:46 PM	We try to incorporate the concept of EBM in answering the questions as a ray of hope for our (human) addressing such complex issues. The concept is usually greeted w/ a sigh of relief and a better understanding of the intricacies of these issues.
6.	Tue, 9/18/07 7:14 PM	In my experience, EBM has been used on a case-by-case basis and in different ways by different divisions of the same agency or agencies within our state. So, my response would be that I and others need more training in what EBM is expected to be, so that we can be more consistent in applying EBM principles.
7.	Tue, 9/18/07 9:17 PM	I'm not the manager, but I certainly can provide the ecosystem knowledge we have to bear on a particular issue. Unfortunately, there is not a great knowledge base of coastal ecology and hydrology from which to draw.
8.	Wed, 9/19/07 12:51 PM	See above
9.	Wed, 9/19/07 2:03 PM	n/a
10.	Wed, 9/19/07 2:49 PM	Not really. It would be helpful to have a checklist or lens...sort of a "how-to-guide" of steps I should take to incorporate EBM into a given decision or planning process.
11.	Thu, 9/20/07 1:21 AM	No because it hasn't been comprehensively considered.
12.	Thu, 9/20/07 11:07 AM	Not really. What factors of the ecosystem are the most important to consider. Surely you can't consider all impacts on all aspects of the ecosystem. Also scale issues - how large of an ecosystem do you consider? Also what are the indicators - are they appropriate for my particular situation and local areas?
13.	Thu, 9/20/07 12:37 PM	Sort of. We lack some basic info.
14.	Thu, 9/20/07 3:39 PM	not really. been trying to do it for most of my nearly 30 years in the field. the issues are complicated and we need tools to help present the issues in ways that are understandable to the public and local officials who most often are the decision makers unless, of course, those at the top release large sums of money for infrastructure and technical assistance and direct most of the capital spending to areas that demonstrate their willingness and commitment to manage and direct growth accordingly
15.	Fri, 9/21/07 8:39 AM	We are trying to optimize definitions, objectives and approaches as part of our research
16.	Fri, 9/21/07 1:34 PM	Yes. Long standing relationships between the partners, and use of tools such as structured decision-making, peer review of science, management, and listing actions.
17.	Fri, 9/21/07 4:44 PM	lack of background data, lack of coordianting body, lack of joint efforts
18.	Fri, 9/21/07 5:19 PM	yes
19.	Fri, 9/21/07 6:10 PM	No. There is no clear guidance or consensus on how to approach EBM. Working for a networked (coordinating) agency requires consensus building, and consensus building has largely not started.
20.	Fri, 9/21/07 7:01 PM	yes
21.	Fri, 9/21/07 7:28 PM	No. For all the above reasons - what is the minimal multi-trophic level dataset needed? what model(s) is/are available that can actually reach a necessary level of predictability for managers who may need to limit resource users who may take them to court over the restrictions? How to best deal with the intra-agency initial resistance to change? How get funds that focus on an EBM goal so it gets done ?
22.	Fri, 9/21/07 7:45 PM	Yes.
23.	Fri, 9/21/07 7:53 PM	The goal is ecological sustainability over the long term, which means holding human uses below the threshold of the ecosystems minimal maintenance requirements. We are reinventing the wheel here, so I know we are not sure of what we're doing because landings data are not available on which to base estimated allowable landings.
24.	Fri, 9/21/07 8:21 PM	yes
25.	Fri, 9/21/07 11:20 PM	Not really. As I've noted, PCCS is a science and research institution, and not a resource management agency.
26.	Sun, 9/23/07 3:27 AM	Not really, at this point it seems like "new wine in old bottles" or "old wine in new bottles" not sure which--maybe both--either way we have a ways to go---but it is moving discussions and communication in a way that is different from that which we know was not successful in the past.
27.	Mon, 9/24/07 1:23 PM	In principal yes, but generaly methods and data are insuficient
28.	Tue, 9/25/07 3:24 PM	N/A
29.	Tue, 9/25/07 5:19 PM	I think so or at least know how to get started but without the agency committing itself to the process it's hard to know.
30.	Tue, 9/25/07 5:58 PM	we could do it, but it won't contribute to the larger effort if we do not use common terminology and examples...
31.	Tue, 9/25/07 6:52 PM	No, because the objectives have not been clearly articulated
32.	Tue, 9/25/07 7:05 PM	as above
33.	Thu, 9/27/07 1:27 PM	Yes and no. Analytical methods to assess impacts of different EBM approaches are lacking, and as noted above, federal law prevents EBM particularly if EBM involves removing dogfish biomass from key cod nursery grounds. Biomass for all species must be increased to very high targets even if that objective is unachievable or unwise. Low fishing mortality targets to achieve high dogfish biomass prevent anything more than very low removals (i.e., very low bycatch amounts are allowed by the federal government).
34.	Thu, 9/27/07 7:05 PM	The Goverment of Nova Scotia has yet to implement it Coastal Managment Framework. Once this work begins, there will be a need to communicate with other departments and jurisdictions about how they currenly manage the coast and what information or EBM pratices could assist in this effort.
35.	Wed, 10/3/07 6:23 PM	To a certain extent, if the science is available