Search

The collection of articles in this volume of NAPA Bulletin describes various types of social science research currently conducted in support of federal and state fisheries management by anthropologists and sociologists studying fishing‐dependent communities and fisheries participants. The contributors work for NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS); various state fisheries agencies; in academia; or as contract researchers. These articles represent a wide geographical range, employ a diverse set of methods, and demonstrate different research goals ranging from responding to specific statutory or management requirements to establishing broader baseline social information to exploring the theoretical constructs that constrain or advance the field of applied anthropology in fisheries. This introduction provides background to the recent expansion of anthropological capacity in U.S. fisheries management and the divergent methods employed by practitioners. The range of methods includes classic ethnography and survey methods, cultural modeling, participatory research, and quantitative indicators‐based assessment. The compilation of articles presents an opportunity to think about standardizing some methodological approaches for certain types of tasks, while expanding the array of accepted methodologies available to anthropologists advising fisheries managers.

This article is based on research conducted in two fishing communities in Louisiana that were heavily impacted in 2005 by Hurricane Katrina: Grand Isle and the Empire‐Venice area. The authors conducted research in June and August 2006 to better understand the impacts of Hurricane Katrina on these communities. Previous research had been conducted in these communities by the same researchers in 2004. The baseline data obtained in 2004 proved invaluable for understanding the nature of the fishing industry in these communities before Hurricane Katrina struck. The 2006 research focused on changes in the fishing industries, the individuals, and the communities following the hurricane. It also examined the challenges for recovery and implications for fishing management in these communities. The two coastal communities in this study are heavily involved in the commercial shrimp fishery that before the storm had been overcapitalized for years. The eye of the storm passed over Empire‐Venice and, as a result, this area received more damage than Grand Isle. In both areas, homes were destroyed, boats were sunk, and lives were changed forever. A year later, both areas are still struggling to recover from the hurricane. This article focuses on the methods the authors used for research in these communities after the storm: semistructured ethnographic interviews, photography, and mapping. It also reports on some of the findings. The authors conducted interviews with fishermen, people who work in fishing related businesses, and other community members who could provide them with information regarding the impacts of Hurricane Katrina on these communities and the state of the fisheries.

Some indigenous villages in the Amazon now host tourists who visit their villages on a regular basis. For these visits, villagers dress up in traditional costumes and perform traditional dances. They also sell handicrafts. This host-guest interaction provides much needed income in a region that offers few permanent jobs. By showcasing their culture for tourists, villagers are preserving some elements of their traditional culture by continuing to make clothing similar to what their ancestors wore, performing dances based on dances that have been handed down from their ancestors, and continuing to make traditional handicrafts. This article is a case study of three villages in the Peruvian Amazon. The villagers in this study actively seek to participate in tourism for the income it brings in, and for the implications for cultural preservation. Indirectly, tourism in this area is also helping to preserve forested areas. Villages who can derive some of their income from tourism may be able to delay excessive clearance of land for the production of market crops, or the logging of pristine forests for timber.