Candidate Q & A: Leanne Roulson
Note: Also see the official candidate statement. Voting will open on May 15. Check your email for voting instructions and note that only members who have renewed for 2018 are eligible to vote. With the 150th anniversary of AFS approaching, can you explain what the Society stands for now and how it should prepare itself to succeed in the next 150 years? AFS’s role now is focused on professional development and communication within the fisheries profession. Our communication conduits of journals and society meetings have been the go-to for generations of fisheries scientists. With the advent of lightning fast communication venues such as blogs and social media, AFS is competing to stay relevant while still providing the necessary peer review of emerging science that is the basis for our strong reputation. In the coming years, I would like to see AFS develop ways to respond to emerging science so that we can continue to be a source for best practices, professional growth, and inspiration in the fisheries world. I have expanded on these topics in the questions that follow. What is one role that AFS does not currently fulfill that you believe could be important in the future and why? I would say that AFS could expand its role as a source for timely science information. We lead inside our profession as a source for state-of-the-art science, but the integral role of science in common life makes it even more important for AFS to increase its profile as a source for fisheries management information for more than just the research and agency communities. As fisheries-related events hit the headlines (invasive species, fish kills, consumption alerts), it is important that we make an effort to help the public understand why these events are noteworthy and how the fisheries managers in their communities are working to support healthy waters.In a wider context, I support the work AFS is doing now to expand our relationships with decision makers in our government. As policies grounded in science are challenged, it is critical that AFS be the source for what the fisheries management and research communities have documented about issues like imperiled species, coastal management, watershed impacts, and aquaculture. We have reached outside of our usual circle to have a Policy Director whose training is in how law and policy works. Ms. Winters is a critical part of how AFS has increased its presence “on the hill,” run webinars for chapters grappling with local policy challenges, and helped AFS leadership decide when to weigh in or join with other like-minded groups on science-related issues. I believe this is a good example of how AFS can be savvier in recruiting diverse talent to facilitate work that is important to AFS’s mission, but not part of a typical fish biologist’s preparation. Science is being challenged in government and in our society. What can AFS do to better respond to this challenge and ensure that our institutions persist and the science that they develop are used properly and effectively in resource management? As scientists, we recognize that uncertainty and replication are integral to science moving forward. However, these concepts are not often understood by the people at the forefront of government and business. They prioritize action and return. It is essential that AFS maintain its reputation as an objective, frank communicator of how policy and management affect fisheries and aquatic resources. Objective means that we present the accurate science, and frank means that we do it in a way that is understandable and connected to the concerns of other groups. The recently formed Science Communication Section is a great step towards providing assistance to our membership in how to talk to a variety of audiences. I have given presentations at AFS meetings and with current university students on the importance of being understood by your audience. Our science and the pursuit of scientific knowledge is laudable, but if we are not able to impart how what we’ve learned can be integrated into resource management or policy, then its value will go unrealized. One of the things I have valued most about being a consultant and being involved in AFS at the Division level is that I get to hear about similar issues from different perspectives. My work is not limited to one state, so I hear about native species conservation in the mountains and in the deserts, and I see how the struggles are often linked to getting the public to value the habitat or the species. The most effective managers are those who can place the ecological need into a cultural context and give the decision makers understandable, robust, relatable reasons for their projects or policies. How can AFS better contribute to increasing diversity in the profession? There is no lack of qualified people out there. There is a lack of opportunity and support for less traditional populations entering and sticking with science and technology education and careers. This year both of our 2nd VP candidates are women, which is great. To get past the point where we notice that the candidates are not men, AFS should actively work to address implicit bias. The workshop at the Tampa meeting was an excellent start, and I would advocate for adding this type of training to every meeting, similar to the “AFS Leadership at all Levels” model that is offered at most Division and Parent Society meetings. In addition, current upper-level scientists need to vocally support, attend, and be open to these kinds of trainings. As scientists, we are trained to recognize patterns and make connections. Recognizing implicit bias is one way to acknowledge that some of the patterns we see in our current colleague population are not the only patterns to replicate when we hire new employees, network at meetings, or recruit students. To welcome all types of scientists, we have to get past the filters and expectations for what our colleagues should look and sound like. AFS can also support opportunity equity by continuing to provide parental support
