Oregon Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative |
Oregon's Coastal Salmon Restoration
Initiative (OCSRI) is a collaboration of inter-governmental and
community based effort focused on conserving and restoring native
coastal salmon populations. Development and implementation of
a monitoring program is a crucial component of the overall strategy.
The monitoring program:
As a crucial part of Oregon's Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative, state and federal agencies, and other groups have made major commitments to the development and support of this monitoring program. These commitments must be maintained.
Concurrent with the release of the
Draft Proposal for a Comprehensive Monitoring Program for OCSRI
in August, 1996, work began on the formation of a Monitoring Group
responsible for further development and implementation of the
monitoring program. The Monitoring Group is comprised of representatives
from participating state and federal agencies, watershed associations,
and other groups. The initial task of the Monitoring Group was
to identify and further develop the description of agency monitoring
activities, working primarily in areas of assurance of implementation
and coordination. Next, the group began to respond to issues
identified through the process of peer review and to provide public
opportunities to comment on, and participate in, continued development
of the plan. Finally, the group created monitoring Issue Teams
and gave them the responsibility to evaluate the effectiveness
of proposed monitoring measures relative to the factors of decline
identified by the Collaborative Issues Discussion Project.
Peer Review
In general, responses from the peer
review of the Draft Monitoring Proposal were very supportive of
the plan while acknowledging the difficulty and complexity associated
with such a large program. In particular, there was strong support
for the approach to sampling design, integration of tasks, and
shared responsibility for reporting, and acting on the information.
Most of the critical comment focused on the need to get past
the plan and actually fund and implement the program. All reviews
strongly supported the need for a comprehensive, well integrated
monitoring plan and the broad scope of the monitoring proposal.
A sampling of some critical comments:
The Monitoring Group took these comments
seriously and has worked to resolve these, and other, issues raised
through the peer review process. Changes in organization were
made and more explicit links between the monitoring and policy
and management were developed. Changes found throughout this
draft reflect the review process. New actions designed to address
linkage between monitoring and policy are specifically addressed
later in this chapter in sections describing Program Structure
and Organization and Monitoring Support for Adaptive Management.
Public Comment and Participation
From November 1996 until January
1997, a series of public scoping sessions and planning meetings
were held to involve stakeholders and other interested parties
in determining the common direction of the OCSRI Monitoring Plan.
Representatives from state and federal agencies, watershed councils,
soil and water conservation districts, private interest groups,
tribes, university professors and extension agents, and other
entities participated in each of two scoping sessions. These
groups formed the Monitoring Plan Advisory Team. Their active
participation, feedback, and contribution revealed an active commitment
to an evolutionary process of refining and improving the state-wide
Monitoring Plan. This process continues to date. Interest in
the objectives, purpose, and logistics of the Monitoring Plan
was keen and many excellent suggestions, ideas, and courses of
action have been incorporated into the Monitoring Plan as a result
of these scoping session forums.
Input from the scoping sessions was
similar to that received from the peer review process, though
often more directed at the immediate needs for guidance and support
identified by the participants. A common theme, expressed most
clearly by one participant: "We need standards (protocols)
to follow for monitoring, regional databases to enter results,
review by technical advisors, and we need to share equipment and
expense."
Questions, responses, and suggestions
were generally structured around the proposed monitoring Tasks.
Participants frequently identified programs and new opportunities
for cooperation (local Soil and Water Conservation District programs
and expertise from OSU Extension Service in particular) that will
be incorporated into the monitoring plan and the Monitoring Group
process.
A complete summary of the Scoping
Session Record is in Appendix II. The summary includes a discussion
of OCSRI strategy, a synthesis of background information, and
a summary of agency actions and databases relevant to the monitoring
effort. The scoping session solicited monitoring questions from
participants, these are summarized and referenced to specific
items in the plan. Many participants emphasized the importance
of developing trust and shared ownership in OCSRI overall and
the monitoring program in particular.
Implementation
Progress toward implementation of the monitoring program has occurred at both organizational and action levels. Work plans and job assignments for participants in the Monitoring Group have been formally adjusted. Short term funding support for monitoring program leadership was secured. Monitoring Issues and Protocol Teams, small groups with representation from the Monitoring Group and subject area experts were formed. These groups evaluate monitoring relative to issues associated with the decline in salmon populations, assess the adequacy of monitoring actions, and continue development of shared monitoring protocols.
The members of the Monitoring Group
have responsibility for the ongoing development, evaluation, and
adaptation of monitoring Tasks, and of the monitoring elements
organized under the Tasks. They
have also developed a process by which the Monitoring Group will
make recommendations based on monitoring results to the Inter-agency
planning. Changes and development of the monitoring elements
of individual agencies are detailed in the State Agency Measures
section (Section 17B). Continued efforts to improve integration
and coordination of these monitoring elements remains as a major
of the Monitoring Group. Highlights of progress relevant to
specific programs are included in the discussion of individual
tasks.
Structural Changes From the
August 1996 Draft Plan
A comparison of this draft to the August 1996 Monitoring Proposal shows the following structural changes:
This description of the monitoring
program of Oregon's Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative (OCSRI)
outlines the essential components of a strategy to collect and
integrate information on the status of salmon populations and
factors that influence the quality of their habitat. The objectives
of the monitoring effort are to develop accurate information on
the status of salmon populations and their habitats, detect declines
or increases in abundance, determine the effectiveness of measures
designed to improve conditions for salmon, and provide the analysis
needed to help develop adaptive management strategies for agencies,
private landowners, and individuals with interests in this resource.
The monitoring program proposed to meet these objectives has five primary components:
Currently funded programs, such as
the surveys of adult coho spawner abundance, provide established
and tested protocols for data collection and reporting. Analysis
of the spawner survey data, however, also shows an example of
the need to expand programs to provide resolution at meaningful
regional and biologic scales. Existing monitoring programs within
both state and federal agencies provide a starting point for more
comprehensive efforts. Both new and expanded programs are needed
to provide resolution at appropriate spatial and temporal scales,
applying sufficient sampling effort to support scientific confidence
in the results.
The OCSRI monitoring effort must
also provide program leadership and integration sufficient to
ensure the quality and availability of information, manage effort
and cost, and integrate various monitoring elements within a coherent
context of quantifiable objectives. This structure will demonstrate
the commitment of the OCSRI process to create an open, scientifically
sound, yet flexible process through which state and federal agencies,
private and industrial landowners, and watershed associations
or local initiative groups can coordinate. Integration of these
programs will require establishment of an overall structure to
manage dispersed monitoring elements, and report information in
a useful fashion. As a whole, the program will contribute to
the development an adaptive management strategy based on evaluation
and application of monitoring data combined with scientific testing
of new approaches.
An effective monitoring program for
coastal salmon will require a long-term commitment of money and
personnel. For the Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative to succeed,
adequate funds will need to be allocated to support both established
and new monitoring work and funding must be sustained long enough
to allow evaluation in the context of changing climatic, oceanic,
ecological, and social conditions. All of the monitoring elements
that comprise this effort have high priority, the primary differences
between elements are the intensity of sampling effort and the
timing for initiation and duration of sampling. Also, because
of the integrated nature of the monitoring effort, all of the
major tasks and activities are essential as they work together
to create scientifically credible assessments. The effort required
will be large, and a serious commitment of funds and personnel
must be made over an extended time period.
Effective coordination among participating
OCSRI groups can help control the cost of a comprehensive monitoring
program, particularly by sharing expertise on effective techniques,
avoiding duplication of effort, and by providing timely and open
reporting of results. An OCSRI Monitoring Group has been established
to develop this level of efficiency and coordination. Links to
ongoing projects can also provide training and facilitation of
voluntary efforts in support of the overall monitoring program,
expanding its scope and creating a greater sense of involvement
and ownership.
Traditionally, many monitoring programs
have been slow to initiate and difficult to sustain. Ineffective
monitoring programs result when the biologic, temporal, and spatial
scales are too narrowly defined, and when institutional or ownership
barriers prevent integrated analysis and application of information.
Other problems result when the information is incomplete, inconsistent,
or poorly reported. The capacity to initiate and sustain successful
monitoring of populations and habitat quality, does not exist
within any single agency, corporation, interest group, or individual.
The interdisciplinary approach described in this chapter is designed
to overcome some of these problems. Success of the OCSRI monitoring
effort will require focused leadership and a commitment from participants
in many scientific and management disciplines representing multiple
interests.
Monitoring is more than the systematic
and periodic collection of data; it is the basis for effective
adaptive management. Properly supported and implemented, the
OCSRI monitoring program will provide an unbiased data set for
determining baseline conditions, cause and effect relationships,
and trends in conditions over time. Data will also be used to
assess current water quality standards and management practices,
determine the effectiveness of restoration activities, and suggest
new actions. The monitoring program is an essential component
of an overall strategy to improve our management of resources
and to restore coastal salmon populations.
The emphasis of the proposed monitoring
program is on coho salmon populations, but the approach has application
to all of Oregon's salmon species, including steelhead and cutthroat
trout. The bottom line of any monitoring program must be a reliable
assessment of population numbers, and adequate determination of
trends in abundance based on time series information. Equally
important, however, is a broad assessment of habitat factors,
from the abundance of large woody debris within a stream reach
to the cycles of ocean productivity that influence salmon populations.
Overall, each major element that
comprises the monitoring program is designed to be flexible and
able to accommodate both changes in emphasis and additional input.
These elements, described as Tasks, represent broad subject areas.
In addition to the specific OCSRI activities described under
each task, opportunities for direct cooperation or sharing of
information with related projects are identified. The open and
flexible approach is necessary as participants develop their monitoring
programs and continue to define their role in the process. Just
as we expect to implement management changes in response to new
information gathered by monitoring, the monitoring program must
also have the capacity to adapt and evolve.
Monitoring and watershed assessment information will be linked and applied to state agency and watershed council programs in several ways:
Monitoring results will be used and
applied through several key feedback loops. In general, the individual
agencies monitor BMPs and other agency specific actions to determine
their effectiveness. Each agency has a responsibility to report
the results of their monitoring efforts and make recommendations
to the monitoring group and to their respective policy boards
or commissions for appropriate action. Such reporting shall
be done annually.
The individual agency monitoring
efforts are described in Appendix II of this section and they
are also included with the agency management measures in Section
17B.
There will be an Annual Monitoring
Report and Conference organized by the interagency monitoring
group where agencies and other partners will be required to present
the results of their monitoring efforts. This conference will
be used to direct adjustments to monitoring efforts and protocol.
The conference will describe the habitat and population trends
related to the monitoring with broader temporal and spatial scales.
These monitoring results and trends will be placed within the
context of the biological and habitat objectives to describe annual
progress. The report and results of the conference will be provided
to the independent science team for their use in auditing the
program and to support their recommendations.
The annual Governor's report about
the State of the Salmon will also include discussion and recommendations
related to monitoring results. This report will describe what
commitments will be made to adjusting BMPs or program measures
based upon the monitoring results.
For more localized decision-making,
the key monitoring and assessment data will be provided to agency
managers, watershed councils or initiative groups, and other interested
participants on an on-going basis. Regional interagency groups
have been organized based upon state agency administrative boundaries.
Participants of the regional groups are lead agency decision-makers
of field operational programs. Relevant watershed assessment
efforts and data will be routinely reported to this group for
coordination and application purposes. The participants of this
group are expected to provide coordination with the watershed
councils and SWCDs to ensure they receive the same information
in a timely manner.
Watershed councils, SWCDs, and other
partners will report the results of their watershed assessment
efforts to the Monitoring Program coordinator as each module is
completed. These results will also be provided to the involved
state and federal agencies to support their day-to-day decision
making.
The distribution of populations and
the patterns of habitat characteristics must be described at appropriate
spatial scales. This approach to monitoring the status of salmon
populations has regional components that are relevant to salmon
biology and conservation. At a minimum, the monitoring program
will detect these factors at the level of the coho Evolutionarily
Significant Unit (ESU). This monitoring program is designed to
meet that objective, and to provide equivalent resolution at the
geographic scale of the region or river basin and the population
level of the Gene Conservation Group (GCG).
At intermediate scales, the program
provides a structure for meaningful interpretation of intensive
monitoring and experimental studies conducted at the sub-basin
and watershed level. Local experimental investigations and restoration
actions conducted at the site and reach level will be interpreted
as they contribute to changes within the context of watershed,
basin and regional classifications. In this way, site prescriptions
and watershed analysis can include monitoring components that
are imbedded at larger spatial scales, evaluating effectiveness
compared to the overall scope of habitat influences.
The coho GCG has been chosen as the fundamental level of organization. The GCGs were identified in the 1995 Biennial Report on the Status of Wild Fish in Oregon as geographic and metapopulation regions that form the basis for assessment, represent an important subdivision of the range of coho within Oregon, and form realistic management units. Originally described as four units, we have created an additional division of the North-Mid Coast GCG. This created the five regional/basin level groups (GCG Regions) as follows:
Monitoring activity in the South
Coast GCG must coordinate with California monitoring
in the remainder of the Southern
ESU. Regardless of the level of commitment made by agencies and
groups within California, OCSRI will fully support appropriate
levels of monitoring effort for the South Coast GCG within the
Southern ESU.
The assessment of coho populations,
habitat conditions, and actions directed at restoration will start
at this regional spatial scale. Within these GCG Regions, assessment
will also occur at the river basin scale, with appropriate resolution
developed for approximately sixteen basins. Across all scales,
the major monitoring activities described below are designed to
be complementary. While each inventory method or task has a primary
purpose, each provides additional information and a context for
integrated analysis. For example, where water quality and community
assessments occur in the same reach as summer juvenile sampling,
adult spawner counts, and habitat surveys, improved understanding
of the productivity of different types of habitat and the relationship
between adult spawners and subsequent juvenile seeding would result.
The first task of the monitoring
program will be to provide a coarse level analysis of these regions
and to identify appropriate subdivision of sub-basins, watersheds,
stream reaches and sites that comprise the sampling units. In
this way, the regional characterizations are supported by more
intensive monitoring activities in representative selections of
smaller sub-basins and watersheds. Incorporation of monitoring
activities at the stream reach or site scale will be aggregated
and interpreted within the regional context. The same monitoring
activities will be conducted in all regions. The exact number
of sample sites and general appropriation of effort will vary
in both region and by the particular task. Table 1 provides a
summary of the major activities at each of these scales, gives
a general idea of sampling intensity, and shows some of the relationships
between tasks. Although organized hierarchically, each monitoring
task has elements and applications that apply to the other levels.
The recommendations for staffing
and implementation of individual tasks and elements within tasks
are updated since publication of the August 1996 draft plan.
These recommendations were considered in the process of OCSRI
and agency budget development, but will continue to be modified
and adjusted as the final program structure is established.
Task 1: Stratified Probability
Sampling Design.
We propose to combine elements of a true probability sampling
design with stratification based on basin geomorphic and salmon
population characteristics. This approach will provide the framework
for all other monitoring activities. The sampling design will
require a preliminary, coarse level regional characterization
and analysis of coastal basins that includes information on vegetation,
land use, drainage networks, road networks, topography, geomorphology,
and salmon abundance and distribution.
The Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program (EMAP) has well developed protocols for selecting
sites designed to evaluate the state of surface waters based on
a probabilistic design. This approach, essentially a multi-scaled
grid overlying a regional map, results in an unbiased sample of
sites spread across the area of interest. This type of sampling
design has clear advantages in the to ability to make statistically
valid characterizations of physical and biologic conditions.
However, when only a limited number of samples can be collected
from within heterogeneous subregions, the ability to create a
representative sample may be restricted.
Stratified sampling designs attempt
to be more representative by collecting data from within groups
based on "important" factors. For stream habitat evaluation,
stratification of sites within regions can be effectively based
on type of channel confinement, channel slope or gradient, and
the watershed area using a combination geographic analysis and
stream channel surveys of (Moore et al. 1991, Montgomery et al.
1995). This approach must be combined with strata based on knowledge
of the general distribution of fish species within the region.
A successful stratified approach depends on good information
on the spatial characteristics of each strata and an understanding
of processes that influence the spatial distribution.
A combined stratified probability,
design will allow an efficient application of increased sampling
effort focused at strata within each of the five GCG Regions.
The developers of the EMAP probability approach have worked with
the OCSRI monitoring program both in sampling design and statistical
interpretation. The ability to generate a stratified approach
based on basin characterizations currently resides or is in the
process of development on Geographic Information Systems located
in the State Services Center of the Water Resources Department,
the Oregon Department of Forestry, the Oregon Department of Fish
and Wildlife, and at Oregon State University. Stream channel
classifications can be obtained from ODFW Research Section Aquatic
Inventory project and from assessments made by USFS and BLM.
Other EPA Corvallis Research Laboratory
and Region 10 staff have participated in discussions to combine
probability designs with methods to stratify regions. Additional
assistance is available from USFS PSW, Oregon State University
and Humboldt State University to apply approaches to quantifying
regional measures of fish abundance within a habitat context.
Much discussion has focused on issues of pre-stratification versus
post-stratification of the probability design. As a practical
matter, and as the need to proceed with sampling efforts develops,
future evaluation will focus on evaluation of the most appropriate
approach.
The modified Stratified Probability
approach will be directly applied to assessments specifically
designed to characterize status of coho populations at the regional
scale. These assessments include juvenile population sampling,
spawner surveys, and measures of upstream and downstream movement
specific to life history stage. The selection process will also
consider incorporation of sites with long term records and others
with ongoing sampling.
Recommendations:
Progress:
Coordination/Related Programs:
Cost:
Time frame:
Task 2: Stream Biotic Condition
and Ambient Water Quality.
Although direct measures of salmonid abundance and habitat quality
are important components of the monitoring program, these measures
must be supported by more comprehensive assessments of aquatic
biota and water quality. This type of assessment is needed to
obtain basic information about the status, productive capacity,
and limiting conditions in watersheds. The Oregon Department
of Environmental Quality has two programs that address this issue,
Ambient Water Quality Monitoring and the Index of Biotic Condition
and Stream Condition Assessments.
The Ambient Water Quality Monitoring
program should be maintained to provide basic water chemistry
and temperature information. The main purpose of ambient monitoring
is to look at trends in chemical parameters within and between
sites over a long time period. Water samples are currently collected
from 30 reference sites sampled quarterly and an additional 20
sites sampled eight times per year. The network of potential
sampling sites can be expanded in accordance with the Stratified/Probability
design with protocols standardized and made available to OCSRI
participants.
DEQ has also adopted new temperature
and dissolved oxygen standards that are designed to be more protective
of cold water species like salmon. This includes a standard for
intergravel dissolved oxygen in spawning areas to protect egg
and fry incubation.
The Index of Biotic Condition and
Stream Condition Assessments are developed from a sampling protocol
that measures channel characteristics, invertebrate communities,
water chemistry, riparian plant communities, and fish communities.
The selection of sites and sampling methods are based on modifications
of the federal (EPA and Regional Ecosystem Office) EMAP and REMAP
protocol. The condition of these communities can point to watershed
problems that would go undetected by other data. For example,
a loss of cold water invertebrate or fish taxa can identify temperature
problems within a watershed. Or an increase in sediment tolerant
taxa can point to sedimentation problems. These data can identify
problems early, before salmon stocks are significantly impacted.
These assessments are designed to
look at trends in stream conditions over the long-term. This
means that the sample sites are resampled at a 3 to 5 year interval
and changes in the overall condition of streams in a region evaluated.
These studies will also be used to evaluate differences in BMP's.
For example, if streams on state lands consistently have poorer
conditions than on federal lands, then state land use practices
could be reevaluated.
Finally, these studies will be used
to set more appropriate biological water quality standards. Regionally
based biological standards are in development for DEQ to implement
over the next five years. This sampling, particularly as linked
to salmon core areas (see below), will play an important role
is setting and applying biological standards.
Recommendations:
- Ambient Water Quality
100 sites sampled 8 times per year
20 Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen monitoring sites: 10 from
core areas
and 10 stratified probability selected.
20 diurnal survey sites using continuous monitoring equipment
for pH,
dissolved oxygen, temperature, and conductivity.
- Juvenile salmonid sampling would
be coordinated with ODFW, federal, and
private OCSRI participants to be done at the same sites
identified above.
Progress:
Coordination/Related Programs:
Cost:
Time frame:
Ambient Monitoring - Currently funded
at 50 sites per year (300 samples). Will need increased funding
to expand program to 80 samples per year.
Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen and Diurnal Continuous Monitoring are new programs.
Task 3: Juvenile Salmon Abundance Sampling. Annual summer surveys for juvenile coho are proposed to assess utilization of freshwater h