PORTLAND – New conservation rules for New England’s groundfish fleet should move forward despite a highly publicized error in the way federal researchers counted fish during a two-year period, according to international experts asked to review the data.

But the scientific review isn’t expected to bring to an end the debate over whether dramatic new fishing cutbacks are justified. Sens. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., are calling for more studies to settle other unanswered questions about fisheries science.

The scientists said current population estimates for cod, haddock and other groundfish are valid. But they recommended further research into what are the optimum sizes of fish populations off the New England coast.

Estimates of healthy population levels have been another point of controversy because federal law requires that overfished species be restored within 10 years. In general, a larger optimum population size will require more aggressive rebuilding and more severe restrictions.

“Everybody would love to get to those targets if it’s possible,” said Maggie Raymond, co-owner of a Portland fishing boat and spokeswoman for the Associated Fisheries of Maine. “But what is the cost of doing that, especially what is the cost if you find out it was just a theory – you can’t really do it?”

A federal judge in Washington last winter ordered drastic fishing cutbacks in New England in order to meet the 10-year deadline for rebuilding about a dozen species of groundfish. Rules under consideration for next year include a possible 50 percent cutback in the number of days that each boat is allowed to fish.

The rule-making process was disrupted last year by the discovery that a federal research vessel had been using flawed trawling gear while counting fish the past two years.

Doubts about federal fisheries data led to an outcry by fishermen and calls for more research by political leaders.

With new rules pushed back for eight months, five fisheries experts from around the world met in New Hampshire in February to review the error and other questions about groundfish science.

In separate reports submitted last week, the scientists said there is no evidence to show that the research error affected population estimates for groundfish.

Despite the controversy, using the data is “scientifically justifiable,” said Andrew Payne, a British researcher who was chairman of the review group.

Members of the fishing industry still distrust the data, Raymond said.

Snowe and Kennedy called on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to resolve the doubts before moving forward with cutbacks. “Congress did not intend for science-based management to be based on potentially erroneous scientific conclusions,” they wrote in a letter last week to NOAA Administrator Conrad Lautenbacher.