Peer Review Facilitation
Science Office Projects
A fundamental role of the Science Office is to link the ecological research and management communities. One way that we do this is by facilitating the peer review of planning and management documents prepared by government agencies and other organizations.
Following a request from an organization, Science staff assemble a panel of ecologists with appropriate expertise to review either one or a series of documents. A review panel chair or ESA staff may prepare a synthesis of all reviews if requested. Financial support for modest reviewer honoraria and ESA staff time is provided by the organization requesting the review. Organizations interested in assistance with a peer review should contact Science Director Dr. Clifford Duke (email csduke@esa.org, phone 202-833-8773 x 202).
We also maintain a list of scientists interested in providing reviews of future documents or programs within their areas of expertise. If you would like to be considered as a reviewer, contact Science Program Manager Corrie Mauldin (email cmauldin@esa.org, phone 202-833-8773 x 209). Examples of peer review facilitation by the Science Office are provided below.
Review of Historic Range of Variability Assessments
The Science Office is managing the scientific peer review of a set of ten assessments of the historic range of variability of Rocky Mountain Ecosystems for the U.S. Forest Service’s Region 2. The Office organizes a panel of five scientists to review each assessment; one of the reviewers serves as review panel chair, synthesizing all reviews. The Office works with the review panel chair to identify additional reviewers as needed, acts as a liaison between reviewers and authors to answer questions about the assessments, and transmits each individual review, as well as the synthesis, to the Forest Service upon completion. Five assessments (Medicine Bow National Forest, Big Horn National Forest, Pike and San Isabel National Forests, Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, and Grand Mesa National Forest) have been reviewed and reports submitted to the Forest Service. The remaining assessments in the series are being completed by the authors and will be reviewed in the future.
Other Peer Reviews
Science Office staff have also facilitated peer reviews of conservation assessments for the Greater sage-grouse and Gunnison’s sage grouse; a conservation strategy for the Greater sage-grouse; a Forest Service response to a Data Quality Act-based challenge of management recommendations for the northern goshawk; and a demographic report on the northern spotted owl.
