Secretariat of the Pacific Community ISSN 1025-7497 Issue 26 – December 2009 TRADITIONAL Marine Resource Management and Knowledge information bulletin Editor’s note Inside this issue In this issue we have two articles. In the first, Rintaro Ono and David J. Addison examine the fishing lore of Tokelau, focusing on fishing prac- Ethnoecology and Tokelauan tices, technologies and materials, and their relationship to fish ecology. fishing lore from Atafu Atoll, They examine Tokelauan classification of the marine ecosystem and the Tokelau ethnoecology of fish and molluscs, particularly the taxonomy and ecologi- R. Ono and D.J. Addison p. 3 cal knowledge related to the behaviour of fish and other marine life. Local perceptions of sea turtles In the second, Sarah Brikke briefly examines the perception of sea turtles on Bora Bora and Maupiti islands, by French Polynesians, and in particular, the perceptions of children. This French Polynesia reminded me of a delightful afternoon session during a coral reef confer- S. Brikke p. 23 ence held in the Maldives, in March 1996. Local school pupils made a series of sophisticated presentations about what was happening to “our reefs”. Those youngsters were so refreshing that I thought such a ses- sion should be included in all technical conferences. For sure, much more research needs doing on the perceptions of young people regarding envi- ronmental and resources issues. After all, “One day all this will be yours” (and the best of luck in trying to fix all your predecessors’ messes). So it would be good to have follow-up articles from our readers on the chil- dren’s art Ms Brikke examines. Such diversity seems essential in helping us both understand and over- come the complex issues facing us now. Everybody should be encouraged to speak up. Although much of that participation is happening via the new information technology systems, there is still room for print media. But people are often quite shy about contributing “hardcopy”; “Oh, I can’t write an article, I’ve never written one, What should I do? Please help.” Editor So, in that spirit I have abstracted below what I regard as the main points Kenneth Ruddle Asahigaoka-cho 7-22-511 from a useful short article that appeared in 2008 in the American Anthro- Ashiya-shi pologist. It could help you overcome your reticence and encourage you to Hyogo-ken submit something to me when you reconfirm that many “real academics” Japan 659-0012 Email: [email protected] can also be “real goof balls”. Production Information Section, Astounded by the number of authors submitting poor quality manu- Marine Resources Division SPC, BP D5, 98848 Noumea Cedex scripts, Tom Boellstorff, Editor-in-Chief of the American Anthropologist, New Caledonia wrote “How to get an article accepted at American Anthropologist (or any- Fax: +687 263818 where)” (American Anthropologist 110(3):281–283, September 2008). Boell- Email: [email protected] www.spc.int/coastfish storff gave five simple tips that he assured readers would greatly increase Produced with financial assistance from their chance of a favourable decision at any journal. They are as follows. Australia, France and New Zealand 2 SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management and Knowledge Information Bulletin #26 – December 2009 1. Be professional!: Never forget to “accept all changes in document” after using the “track changes” function of Microsoft Word. A surprising number of authors do; “As a result, deleted text, comments from preliminary readers, and so forth are all interspersed with the main text in a bewildering range of colors. In addition, many manuscripts are submitted ... with a shocking number of typographical and grammatical errors” (Boellstorff 2008:281). That’s guaranteed to annoy even the mildest man- nered editor! 2. Make sure data and assertions/claims are related: One of the most common problems in manuscripts submitted is the relationship between the argument and supporting data; “Often a manuscript will be concerned with Topic A, but the data presented speak to Topic B” (Boellstorff 2008:281–282). That is just silly. No reader will understand how an author reached her or his conclusions if the wrong data are provided! 3. Don’t over-generalize: Commonly, a manuscript either begins with or is built around sweeping claims unsupported by evidence that: could not be provided, because, say, we cannot prove that “humans throughout his- tory have sought to create forms of community based on their spiritual beliefs”. Such sweeping generalizations invite nitpickers and quibblers and do not really serve the argument at hand. Of course, it is fine to speculate about broader implications, but this must be done in a way that builds from the data at hand and properly hedges its claims as it moves outward from that data.” (Boellstorff 2008:282) 4. Use references and citations effectively: One of the commonest faults is that many authors seem to be unaware of other people’s work. This can be inferred because they fail to cite the work of others. How- ever, some authors clearly avoid citing others’ work in an attempt to appear creative. And yet others will inflate the number of works cited — but not actually referred to — in an attempt to demonstrate their own “scholarship”. Don’t be tempted; these ruses are transparent to experienced editors and readers! 5. Use an effective manuscript structure: If your manuscript is structurally unsound, your argument will be unclear. Boellstorff (2008:282) noted three main structural faults. The first is that manuscripts often lack a “Conclusion” or have a disproportionately brief one that is insufficient for tying a text together and summarizing the main argument. The second is that manuscripts often contain unbalanced sections, one of which might account for more than half the total length of the manuscript. Balanced subsections are generally best for making an effective argument. The third is that the assertions or claims set out in an “Introduction” often are not those discussed in the body of a text! Consistency is needed throughout an entire manuscript. Text, Introduction and Conclusion need to be carefully cross-checked to verify this before sending a manuscript to an editor. Finally, please do not forget to download the “SPC Special Interest Group newsletters and bulletins instructions to authors” (http://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/SIG-instructions.pdf) and send us your manuscripts formatted accordingly. Please pay particular attention to the style of the references. More than anything else, failure in the last item is what drives your otherwise benign Editor and Fisheries Infor- mation Officer up the wall, round the bend, and into the nearest bar and grill. (Needless to say, we quite enjoy these antics when the reason is good.) Kenneth Ruddle PIMRIS is a joint project of five international organisa- availability of information on marine resources to users tions concerned with fisheries and marine resource de- in the region, so as to support their rational develop- velopment in the Pacific Islands region. The project is ment and management. PIMRIS activities include: the executed by the Secretariat of the Pacific Community active collection, cataloguing and archiving of techni- (SPC), the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA), cal documents, especially ephemera (“grey literature”); the University of the South Pacific (USP), the Pacific Is- evaluation, repackaging and dissemination of informa- lands Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), and tion; provision of literature searches, question-and-an- the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP). swer services and bibliographic support; and assistance This bulletin is produced by SPC as part of its commit- with the development of in-country reference collec- Pacific Islands Marine Resources ment to PIMRIS. The aim of PIMRIS is to improve the Information System tions and databases on marine resources. SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management and Knowledge Information Bulletin #26 – December 2009 3 Ethnoecology and Tokelauan fishing lore from Atafu Atoll, Tokelau Rintaro Ono1 and David J. Addison2 Abstract Marine exploitation has various cultural implications. In this paper we discuss Tokelauan fishing lore, focusing on fishing practices, technologies and materials, and relate these to fish ecology. We examine the Tokelauan classification of the marine ecosystem and the ethnoecology of fish and molluscs, particularly focusing on Tokelauan folk taxonomy and ecological knowledge related to the behaviour of fish and other marine life. Introduction Atafu) from an ethnoecological perspective and for an English-speaking audience. Ethnoecologi- Marine exploitation, especially fishing, is the most cal studies seek to investigate questions about how important subsistence activity in Tokelau, and people conceptualise and exploit their ecosystems has multifarious cultural implications (Huntsman (Akimichi 1978; Conklin 1954; Frake 1961). The first and Hooper 1996; Mafutaga-a-Toeaina-o-Atafu-i- goal is to discuss Tokelauan fishing lore, focusing Matauala-Porirua 2008; Matagi Tokelau 1991). This on fishing practices and technologies, as well as has probably been the case ever since people first materials, and relating these materials to fish ecol- settled the island. A previous archaeological study ogy. The second goal is to examine the Tokelauan (Best 1988) suggested the possibility of up to 1,000 classification scheme of the marine ecosystem and years of human occupation in Tokelau. Zoo-archae- the ethnoecology of fish and molluscs, particularly ological analyses of Best’s excavated fish bones focusing on folk taxonomy and ecological knowl- have shown that Tokelauans exploited various fish edge related to the behaviour of fish and other habitats — from the inshore area to the open ocean marine life. (McAlister 2002). Despite the prehistoric and con- temporary importance of fishing in Tokelau, folk We collected fish and mollusc names from fisher- knowledge of fish behaviour, habitats and fishing men3 of different ages on Atafu Atoll. Identifica- technologies have rarely been published in Eng- tion was aided by the use of color drawings and lish (e.g.