[CODATA-international] Arctic ? Re: October 2019: Publications in the Data Science Journal

Falk Huettmann fhuettmann at alaska.edu
Fri Nov 1 13:21:54 EDT 2019

Hi there, Mark et al.,

100% no!

So for the Arctic records then, U.S.,

where are -ONLINE OPEN ACCESS - the ARCTIC U.S. polar bear GPS and
telemetry tracking data, same for arctic fox,
and where are the bowhead whale data, killer whale data, all the seal data,
and the survey and trawling
data by U.S. vessels, with NOAA/NMFS directly involved  and during IPY?
People want to see and use them; that includes students

And where are the ARCTIC USDA data on Avian Influenza, and the FIA Forest
data for Alaska, all with GPS and geo-referencing  and metadata?

Where are the Arctic Bird Banding data, Golden Eagles included, Open Access
online ?
Bering Sea salmon and seabird survey data; 30 years of records there; where
are they and who can use them,
apart of a few agencies and their contractors ?

Please provide exact details then for people to use those data.

Again, Mark, that's FOR THE ARCTIC, U.S., with federal as well NSF and NIH
including permits of land-use, animal care and  vets approval.

And the devil here often sits in the detail instead and data are not really
useable (even when a URL exists),
that is, meaningful GPS coordinates and taxonomy, and usable data formats,
nor somebody available to talk to.
NetCDF is 100% NOT IT, that is for many  of the NOAA and NMFS climate data,
as an example.
IPCC are the others (ARCTIC) and so are the data related to Prudhoe Bay, or
Barrow, Arctic Drilling,
and the Bering Sea, all part of the ARCTIC U.S. you refer to.

Here a good one, as one example of many for you to solve:
How to get and use those data, with metadata, why not in GBIF, OBIS, hardly
Movebank for public download, e.g. in R ?

Please provide details  on those to us please Mark, all as you stated and
worked on for years, Arctic + IPY and beyond all with your direct
involvement .
What's the track record here ?.

In 'the U.S. Arctic' there are now also Japanese, Koreans, Indians and
Chinese working, apart of Russia as the main player, for over 50 years.
WHERE ARE THESE DATA, and why not pushed more, mandatory (as we all agree
on) ?

So instead of making such bold and well-sounding claims, I propose Mark,
you can first ask people who actually know and work with, and use and need
such data
for decades for a simple reality check and advise, and to actually progress.
We have enough empty promises indeed. I see them almost daily but I ask for
data open access online instead.

Re. journal data submissions received: does that not speak volumes by
itself, e.g. objectives of such a science and rewards, or who really cares ?

Thanks again; kindly from 'the Arctic'
    Falk Huettmann PhD, Professor
        Uni of Alaska Fairbanks

PS Instead of claimed progress on Open Access, I propose we can have a
publication and journal where the failures of NOT Open Access data sharing
are outlined and discussed.
It's gigantic and on the rise: Arctic, Antarctic, Asia and Africa etc etc

On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 8:44 AM Parsons, Mark <parsom3 at rpi.edu> wrote:

> On 1 Nov 2019, at 10:04, Mercury Fox <ceds at email.arizona.edu> wrote:
> they could change the norm overnight by simply tying the policy
> to the award and requiring open data as a deliverable.
> For the record, the NSF Arctic Program does just that, and they follow up
> and do QC, AND they fund an archive to make it possible.
> cheers,
> -m.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.codata.org/pipermail/codata-international_lists.codata.org/attachments/20191101/99588716/attachment.html>

More information about the CODATA-international mailing list