National Research Program on Design-based/Model

Download Report

Transcript National Research Program on Design-based/Model

Design-based/Model-assisted Survey Methodology for Aquatic Resources

Don L. Stevens, Jr.

Presented at THIRD ANNUAL CONFERENCE:

STATISTICAL SURVEY DESIGN AND ANALYSIS FOR AQUATIC RESOURCES

Department of Statistics Colorado State University September 10-11, 2004

R82-9096-01 This presentation was developed under STAR Research Assistance Agreement No. CR82 9096-01 Program on Designs and Models for Aquatic Resource Surveys awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to Oregon State University. It has not been subjected to the Agency's review and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency, and no official endorsement should be inferred SAC 2004 2

Discussion Outline State of the Program

• Personnel • Research

–Preview of Presentations

• Outreach / Tech Transfer

–Summary of Activities –Implications

SAC 2004 3

State of the Program

• Personnel – OSU Faculty • Alix Gitelman – Primarily supported by STARMAP • Alan Herlihy – Jointly supported by STARMAP & STAR program on watershed classification • Virginia Lesser – Director of Survey Research Center – PI on Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods • Don Stevens – Jointly supported by STARMAP – PI on Survey Design Methodology & Integration & Outreach SAC 2004 4

State of the Program

• Personnel – CSU Faculty • Scott Urquhart • Jay Breidt – PI on Non- Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods • Jointly supported by STARMAP – ISU Faculty • Jean Opsomer – UW Faculty • Loveday Conquest • Jean-Yves (Pip) Courbois – Former post-doc, now with NOAA-Fisheries SAC 2004 5

State of the Program

• Personnel – OSU Post-Doctoral Fellows • Ruben Smith • Breda Munoz-Hernandez – Leaving DAMARS for RTI this fall – OSU Research Associates • Dan Dalthorpe – Joining DAMARS this fall • Jeannie Sifneos – Jointly supported by STAR program on watershed classification – CSU Post-Doctoral Fellow SAC 2004 • M. Giovanna Ranalli – Jointly supported by STARMAP 6

State of the Program

• Personnel – OSU Graduate Students • Cynthia Cooper Leigh Ann Harrod (leaving DAMARS for GE) • Kathy Georgitis Susan Hornsby (EPA Region 9 Trainee) – UW Graduate Students • Rebecca Buchanan – USFWS Patuxent Labs intern – Incoming OSU Graduate Students • Bill Gaemon Jessica Merville SAC 2004 7

Dual Program Objectives • RESEARCH

: To support advances in (statistics) and hierarchical survey design and analysis and spatial and temporal modeling

• OUTREACH:

To develop and extend the expertise on design and analysis to States and Tribes SAC 2004 8

State of the Program Research

• Research is driven by issues that arise in aquatic monitoring – Indicator development/Monitoring Design/Analysis (huge area) • Research topics – Identified in RFA + our experience – Arise from collaboration with EPA, State, other STAR researchers SAC 2004 9

State of the Program Research

• Research presentations will describe on going research projects – Some will be near-publication status – Some will be snapshots of current progress – Some will be problem descriptions & proposed approaches • Comments, questions, advice are invited in all cases SAC 2004 10

State of the Program Research

• Three projects: – Survey Design Methodology for Aquatic Resources – Parametric Model-Assisted Survey Methods – Nonparametric Model-Assisted Survey Estimation for Aquatic Resources SAC 2004 11

Survey Design Methodology for Aquatic Resources

• Don Stevens, PI • Pip Courbois • Kathi Georgitis • Susan Hornsby • Loveday Conquest • Ruben Smith • Cynthia Cooper • Rebecca Buchanan SAC 2004 12

Survey Design Methodology

• Survey Design – Variance estimation • Model-assisted approaches • Evaluation of alternative estimators for spatially balanced designs – Maintaining spatially balanced designs • Design around existing points • Modify panel structure of an existing design – Design optimization – Incorporating existing information SAC 2004 13

Survey Design Methodology

• Survey Analysis – Trend estimation using panel designs – Modeling & displaying spatial pattern – Analyzing multi-scale, hierarchical designs – Incorporating non-design data in analysis SAC 2004 14

Survey Design Methodology

• Presentations for this meeting: –

Comparison of Variance Estimators for Two dimensional, Spatially-Structured Sample Designs.

Susan Hornsby and Don L. Stevens, Jr.

Comparison of Design-Based and Model-Based Techniques for Selecting Spatially Balanced Samples of Environmental Resource

s. Don L. Stevens, Jr.

Characterizing Design-Based Properties of a Spatial Sample to Quantify Design-Based Variance of Model-based Estimator

s. Cynthia SAC 2004 Cooper 15

Survey Design Methodology

• Presentations for this meeting: –

Sampling Strategies for Chinook-salmon Spawning Populations.

Jean-Yves (Pip) Courbois, –

Spatio-Temporal Modeling of the Abundance of Spawning Coho in Oregon Coastal Stream

s. Ruben A. Smith and Don L. Stevens, Jr., –

What is a Multi-Scale Analysis? Implications for Modeling Presence/Absence of Bird Specie

s. Kathi Georgitis, Alix Gitelman,, and Nick P. Danz SAC 2004 16

Survey Design Methodology

• Posters for this meeting: –

A Cost Analysis for Incorporating Human Judgment into Ecological Sampling.

Rebecca A Buchanan and Loveday L. Conquest, University of Washington and Jean-Yves Courbois, NOAA Fisheries, Northwest Fisheries Sciences Center, Seattle, WA Best Poster.) (This poster was displayed and discussed at the Research Symposium of the UW's Center for Water and Watershed Studies, and was judged the runner-up for the –

One-dimensional Point Processes in Ecology.

Jean-Yves Courbois, NOAA-Fisheries, Northwest Fisheries Sciences Center, Seattle, WA SAC 2004 17

Survey Design Methodology

• Posters for this meeting: –

Defining Scale and Landscape Classes: Implications for Modeling Species Abundanc

e. Kathi Georgitis, Alix Gitelman, Don L. Stevens Jr., Department of Statistics, OSU, Nick P. Danz, and JoAnn M. Hanowski, NRRC- UMD –

Two-stage Sampling Designs for Birds in Great Lakes Wetland

s. Ron Regal, Dept of Mathematics and Statistics,UMD, Don L. Stevens, Jr., Dept of Statistics, OSU, Nick P. Danz and JoAnn M. Hanowski, NRRC-UMD, and Robert W. Howe, Department of Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay SAC 2004 18

Survey Design Methodology

• Manuscripts – 3 published (

JASA, JABES

, TIES proceedings) – 1 in press

Environmetrics

– 1 submitted to

CJF

– 5 in preparation • Presentations – 8 (TIES, Graybill Conference, NABS, workshops) • Posters – 3 (TIES, UW Research Symposium) SAC 2004 19

Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods for Environmental Surveys

• Virginia Lesser, PI • Breda Munoz • Leigh Ann Harrod SAC 2004 20

Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods

• Imputation and adjustment – Draws on spatial structure + ancillary data – Treats non-ignorable missing data SAC 2004 21

Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods

• Presentations this meeting –

Use of Estimating Equations in Survey Methodolog

y. Leigh Ann Harrod and Virginia Lesser –

Adjustment Procedures to Account for Non-Ignorable Missing Data in Environmental Survey

s. Breda Munoz and Virginia Lesser –

A Weighting Class Adjustment Estimator for the Total Under a Stratified Sampling Design in a Continuous Domain

. Breda Munoz and Virginia Lesser SAC 2004 22

Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods

• Manuscripts – 1 submitted to

Environmetrics

– 2 in preparation • Presentations – 1 at TIES SAC 2004 23

Nonparametric Model Assisted Survey Estimation for Aquatic Resources (CSU Project 2)

• F. Jay Breidt, PI • Jean Opsomer • Giovanna Ranalli • Mark Delorey • Alicia Johnson • Siobhan Everson-Stewart • Plus others not supported by either DAMARS or STARMAP SAC 2004 24

Nonparametric Model Assisted Survey Estimation

• Combine landscape-level auxiliary data with field observations.

• Local polynomial survey regression estimation • cdf estimation • Non-parametric estimation using penalized splines SAC 2004 25

Non-Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods

• Presentations this meeting –

Nonparametric Survey Regression Estimation Using Penalized Spline

s. F. Jay Breidt, Jean Opsomer, Giovanna Ranalli and Mark Delorey SAC 2004 26

Non-Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods

• Posters this meeting –

Distribution Function Estimation in Small Areas for Aquatic Resource

s. Mark J. Delorey, Department of Statistics, CSU –

Nonparametric, Model-Assisted Estimation for a Two-Stage Sampling Desig

n. Mark Delorey and F. Jay Breidt, Department of Statistics, CSU SAC 2004 27

Non-Parametric Model Assisted Survey Methods

• Manuscripts – 4 published (

JABES, Survey Methodology,

proceedings) – 5 submitted (

JASA,Biometrics, Can. J. Stat.,Ap. Stat. (JRSSC)

– 10 in preparation • Presentations – 8 presentations (EMAP symposium, ENAR, seminars) SAC 2004 28

Outreach/Tech Transfer

• Both DAMARS & STARMAP have same tech transfer objectives, but have different emphases: – STARMAP -- learning materials – DAMARS -- demonstration projects SAC 2004 29

State of the Program Outreach

• Success in tech transfer depends on having States, Tribes, (& EPA) use techniques & tools – Foster client use of both design & analysis tools • “build it & they will come” doesn’t work • Need active participation in target projects – Cooperative agreement • Work with EPA • Work on EPA-sponsored projects • Work on projects share EPA goals • Use data generated by EPA projects SAC 2004 30

State of the Program Outreach

• Collaboration that brings statistical perspective to multi-disciplinary research team – Source for new challenges that drives the development of new methodology & theory – Requires high level of commitment – Substantial time requirement – Example: GLEI, an EaGLE STAR Program SAC 2004 31

Collaboration with GLEI G

reat

L

akes

E

nvironmental

I

ndicators • Kathi Georgitis visited GLEI in November – Identified opportunities for collaboration • where GLEI supplies data & ecological insight • DAMARS statistical insight – Working with Alix Gitelman(OSU), Nick Danz(GLEI), JoAnn Hanowski (GLEI) – Presentation & poster • Ron Regal (GLEI/ UMD) – Optimal allocation for 2-stage sampling in wetlands – See poster by Regal, et al.

SAC 2004 32

State of the Program Outreach

• Demonstration Projects – Archetypes used as models – Real-life aquatic monitoring by real State agencies – Push the envelope of State-level monitoring – Design to State-articulated needs – Make them succeed!

SAC 2004 33

Outreach- Demonstration

• San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances (RMP) • West Coast Tidal Wetland Monitoring and Assessment Venture (CRAM) • Sampling Coho salmon in Oregon coastal streams (ODFW) – Aquatic Monitoring in the Northwest SAC 2004 34

RMP

• Designed monitoring plan for San Francisco Bay –

Pulse of the Estuary, 2000 Update

– Re-design team: SFEI, USEPA Region 9, DAMARS, USGS, others – Nice example of using prior information to guide design • Implemented in 2001 – Rotating panel GRTS – Intensity varies by Bay segment – Separate designs for water column & sediment SAC 2004 35

RMP

• Re-design report out for peer review SAC 2004 36

SAC 2004 37

CRAM C

alifornia

R

apid

A

ssessment

M

ethod • Funded by EPA • Joint effort – SFEI – SCCWRP –CCC –DAMARS –WED –Region 9 SAC 2004 38

CRAM C

alifornia

R

apid

A

ssessment

M

ethod • Modeled on O hio RAM • Extended to cover CA – Salt marshes – Tidal influenced • DAMARS (Stevens) represented on the Core Development Team – Metric/indicator development – Planning for verification/validation study – Pilot assessment SAC 2004 39

CRAM Metrics

• •

Landscape Context

– % of AA w/Buffer – Ave Buffer Width – Buffer Condition

Hydrology

– Source of Water – Hydroperiod – Upland connection SAC 2004 40

CRAM Metrics

Abiotic Structure

– Abiotic Patch Richness – Topographic Complexity – Sediment Integrity •

Biotic Structure

– Organic Matter Accumulation – Biotic Patch Richness – Vertical Structure – Interspersion/Zonation – Plant Comm Integrity SAC 2004 • 41

CRAM Metrics

Stressor Index

– Hydrology – Abiotic Structure – Biotic Structure – Adjacent Land Use SAC 2004 42

Stressor Index

Hydrology

– Point Sources (POTW or other non-stormwater) – Non-point Source Discharges (urban runoff, ag drainage) – Flow diversions or inflows – Dams (reservoirs, detention basins, recharge basins) – Flow obstructions (culverts, paved stream crossings) – Weir/drop structure, tide gates – Dredged inlet/channel – Engineered channel (riprap, armored channel bank, bed) – Ditching – Dike/levees – Groundwater extraction SAC 2004 43

SAC 2004 44

ODFW

• Focus is on Coho Salmon – High visibility issue in NW (OR, WA, CA, BLM, BPA, USFS, USFWS, NOAA, USEPA) – Rotating panel GRTS is basic sampling design for The Oregon Plan for Salmon & Watersheds – ODFW, OWEB, ODEQ have become our advocates SAC 2004 45

ODFW

• Ideal test bed for design & analysis – Historical data, both probability & convenience – Dynamic frame – Missing data, ignorable & non-ignorable – Ancillary data – Rotating panel through time – Small area estimation • Primary question: Are management efforts having an impact?

SAC 2004 46

ODFW

• Oregon Plan for Salmon & Watersheds has been in place for over 5 years – Major synthesis/analysis effort is currently underway – New statistical questions are being raised • How to account for finite support of point sample • Appropriate role of reference data • Appropriate metric for spatial covariance SAC 2004 47

SAC 2004

Pacific salmon on the Washougal River, in Washington.

photo by Tom and Pat Leeson 48

Pacific Rim Salmon

Monitoring Strategy for the Conservation of Pacific Salmon

State of the Salmon

a joint program of Ecotrust and the Wild Salmon Center

SAC 2004 49

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 50

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Oregon State University

Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 51

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 52

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Oregon State University

Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 53

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 54

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Oregon State University

Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 55

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 56

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Oregon State University

Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 57

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 58

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Oregon State University

Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 59

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 60

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Oregon State University

Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 61

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 62

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Oregon State University

Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 63

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 64

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Oregon State University

Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 65

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bonneville Power Administration Fisheries and Oceans Canada Hokkaido Institute of Environmental Sciences Hokkaido Fish Hatchery Idaho Fish and Game Khabarovsk Salmon Laboratory Kamchatka Salmon Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon State University Salmon Recovery Funding Board USDA Forest Service US Environmental Protection Agency US Geological Survey Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Salmon Center Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project SAC 2004 66

Pacific Rim Salmon

key elements • A sampling design that imposes three hierarchical levels of organization uniquely defined by biology, space, and time (Level 1, Level 2, Level 3).

• An approach that implements sampling within each Level using fixed and rotating panels tailored to provide statistically valid assessments of status and trends.

SAC 2004 67

Pacific Rim Salmon

key elements • An approach that, to the greatest extent possible, provides for a seamless integration of existing monitoring programs with new monitoring initiatives.

• A focus on four key parameters (distribution, diversity, abundance, and productivity) that can provide an integrated measure of salmon SAC 2004 population viability.

68

Pacific Rim Salmon

key elements • An effort to forge synergistic relationships with in-country fisheries management and conservation entities, as well as international organizations focusing on conservation of salmon and their ecosystems.

SAC 2004 69

SAC 2004 70

SAC 2004 71

SAC 2004 72

Columbia Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Program (CSMEP)

Collaboratively inventory existing monitoring data

relevant to evaluating the status of salmon, steelhead, bull trout in the Columbia Basin •

Collaboratively design

improved monitoring and evaluation methods • Coordinate state and tribal

implementation

of pilot or large scale monitoring programs SAC 2004 73

CSMEP

• Lead agency: Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority • Co-sponsors: NOAA-F USFWS, WDFW, ODFW, IDFG, MFWP, Fish Passage Center, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (Nez Perce, Yakima, Umatilla, Warm Springs Tribes) and the Colville Tribes • Also involved: Northwest Power and Conservation Council & Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership SAC 2004 74