there is a need to provide guidance for a common set of indicators for the Puget Sound Region as well as recommended metrics and methods to determine condition and trends. 2014 Chinook Monitoring and Adaptive Management Report and Three Year Workplan Project List Review: Regional Policy Themes NOAA NOAA reviewers: Thomas Sibley Matt Longenbaugh Paul Cereghino Randy McIntosh Alison Agness Capturing All Strategies: The NOAA reviewers note that a lot more work is happening in the watersheds than what is captured in the results chains. This may be because those strategies have been developed since the 2005 plan was written or due to sensitivities around making strategies public. It is essential for plan updates and adaptive management to be captured in writing (and in Miradi) to reflect everything that the watersheds are doing. There are some very complex and innovative actions and approaches that can be shared across watersheds. Indicators: For the future, need to make sure that we are including relevant content from Bruce Crawford’s report, Methods and Quality of VSP Monitoring of ESA Listed Puget Sound Salmon and Steelhead, as well as the indicators that NOAA is looking at applying across the entire ESU. Watersheds should continue to work collaboratively to prioritize indicators to a more manageable level. H-Integration: The reviewers had a lengthy discussion on H-integration and how hatchery and harvest strategies could be used to leverage habitat strategies given that co-managers have greater control on hatchery and harvest. The reviewers recommend that an H-integration strategy may be best implemented at the regional scale as opposed to a watershed by watershed scale given that there is control at the local level on adaptive management of hatchery and harvest by only the co-managers. Some of the strategies presented by watersheds in this process may provide more coherence for a regional approach based on following the lead of co-managers in each watershed. The reviewers recommend a regional assessment across all watersheds to see where there are gaps on integration. No matter which direction we decide to take on H-integration, the reviewers believe it is important for the co-managers to be aware of and invited to participate in the M&AM work.
there is a need to provide guidance for a common set of indicators for the Puget Sound Region as well as recommended metrics and methods to determine condition and trends. 2014 Chinook Monitoring and Adaptive Management Report and Three Year Workplan Project List Review: Regional Policy Themes NOAA NOAA reviewers: Thomas Sibley Matt Longenbaugh Paul Cereghino Randy McIntosh Alison Agness Capturing All Strategies: The NOAA reviewers note that a lot more work is happening in the watersheds than what is captured in the results chains. This may be because those strategies have been developed since the 2005 plan was written or due to sensitivities around making strategies public. It is essential for plan updates and adaptive management to be captured in writing (and in Miradi) to reflect everything that the watersheds are doing. There are some very complex and innovative actions and approaches that can be shared across watersheds. Indicators: For the future, need to make sure that we are including relevant content from Bruce Crawford’s report, Methods and Quality of VSP Monitoring of ESA Listed Puget Sound Salmon and Steelhead, as well as the indicators that NOAA is looking at applying across the entire ESU. Watersheds should continue to work collaboratively to prioritize indicators to a more manageable level. H-Integration: The reviewers had a lengthy discussion on H-integration and how hatchery and harvest strategies could be used to leverage habitat strategies given that co-managers have greater control on hatchery and harvest. The reviewers recommend that an H-integration strategy may be best implemented at the regional scale as opposed to a watershed by watershed scale given that there is control at the local level on adaptive management of hatchery and harvest by only the co-managers. Some of the strategies presented by watersheds in this process may provide more coherence for a regional approach based on following the lead of co-managers in each watershed. The reviewers recommend a regional assessment across all watersheds to see where there are gaps on integration. No matter which direction we decide to take on H-integration, the reviewers believe it is important for the co-managers to be aware of and invited to participate in the M&AM work.
2014%20RITT%20&%20NOAA%20M&AM%20&%203YWP%20Review_South%20Sound.docx