Call Summary
Northwest Environmental Information Sharing Executive Summit
Wednesday, May 28th 2008
10:00 AM – 12:00 PM PT
Purpose:
Executives and senior staff members of federal, state, and tribal agencies met as a follow-up to the
“Sharing Information to Improve Decisions” Executive Summit on October 2nd, 2007. Participants
discussed the progress made on each of the four tasks developed at the fall Summit, outlined a new task
to address High Level Indicators and discussed potential next steps to continue working towards regional
information sharing strategies.
Participants:
The call was attended by approximately 45 individuals representing executives and staff from a broad
range of regional agencies. A list of attendees and contact information can be found at the end of this
document.
Summary of Action Items:









Participants interested in Task 2 and/or with suggestions on pilot ESUs should contact Barry
Thom.
Participants interested in Task 3 should contact John Stein and/or Josh Baldi.
Executives interested in leading and/or co-leading and others interested in participating in Task 4
should contact Barry Thom
Participants should review the Task 4 document circulated by Stewart Toshach (A Pacific
Northwest Information Framework Proposal) and send comments and edits to Kristen Durance at
Ross & Associates.
Ross & Associates will circulate the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) “High
Level Indicators” (HLI) list along with the Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Program (PNAMP)
HLI document to the group. (DONE)
Chris Drivdahl (WA Governor’s Salmon Recovery Office) and Suzanne Knapp (OR Governor’s
Natural Resources Office) will serve as co-leads of a new Task 5 and with other interested parties
develop a 1-2 statement of purpose and steps forward to share with Executive Summit
participants for their review.
Participants interested in the new Task 5 (High Level Indicators) should contact Kristen Durance
at Ross & Associates.
The Co-chairs and Co-leads of the Tasks will meet to consider content and timing and determine
face-to-face meeting need for the fall. Ross & Associates will draft an agenda as needed and
circulate to the Co-chairs and Co-leads for their review.
Participants should consider their willingness to sign on to an MOU or more general agreement
Background & Introductions
Barry Thom (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Northwest Regional Office), Tom
Karier (Northwest Power and Conservation Council), and John Stein (National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration, Northwest Fisheries Science Center) thanked the participants and provided
a brief review of progress on the four Tasks developed at the initial Executive Summit on October 2 nd,
2007.
Updates on Tasks Identified at October 2007 Summit
Task 1: Executive Vision Statement – Tom Karier
The Executive Summit vision statement was drafted by staff from the Pacific Northwest Aquatic
Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP), Pacific Northwest Regional Geospatial Information Council (PNW-
RGIC) and the Northwest Environmental Data Network (NED) and circulated to Summit participants
earlier this year. Comments received from Executives were incorporated into the current draft. The
Vision states:
“In the Pacific Northwest we are making priority regional decisions with environmental
information acquired using a documented, systematic and efficient approach to collecting,
sharing and accessing that information.”
The vision statement recognizes the reason for holding executive level meetings as a voluntary initiative
to discuss the tasks required to develop a regional data sharing structure. This document may serve as
the foundation for any future agreements or MOUs.
Task 2: Salmon Population Status and Trends – Barry Thom
Barry Thom briefed participants on the progress of NOAA staff members on developing a pilot project to
identify and understand existing protocols for measuring salmon population abundance and productivity
data. They have outlined the following steps to complete this task:
1. Define the need/requirement for information on ESA-listed anadromous fish abundance and
productivity in the Region.
2. Complete a pilot inventory of existing salmon population abundance and productivity data for 2
ESUs.
3. Based on above, outline a common approach that supports, at a minimum, a set of core regional
needs for population abundance and productivity data and distribute it for review to the Executive
Summit participants.
4. Conduct a region-wide inventory
5. Develop recommendations on region-wide abundance and productivity approach
6. Implement region-wide approach
NOAA is currently working to identify the information necessary to make ESA listing decisions with the
idea that those data can be used to develop a region wide status and trend dataset. Scott Ramsey
(NOAA) is working on the development of a data dictionary that outlines all aspects of the needed data
including high level indicators (HLI), associated metadata, and specific raw data. The data dictionary
should be ready for broader review by the end of June. Initial progress on this task has slowed due to the
complications in developing a comprehensive data dictionary.
Next Steps:
 The Northwest Fisheries Science Center is developing a database and associated tools to store
and analyze derived data and metrics (e.g., TRT productivity and trend/abundance data).
 Complete a pilot inventory project utilizing two ESUs.
o Options include focusing on an ESU with good data already available (e.g., Puget Sound)
and an ESU with limited data.
o NOAA will solicit input on potential ESUs to include in the pilot from Executive Summit
participants.
 Identify agency staff resources that may be available to review the completed data dictionary and
help with the pilot inventory project.
 Information collected from the pilot project will be distributed to Executive Summit participants for
review and discussion on how the approach can be expanded region wide.
Action: Participants interested in participating in Task 2 or with suggestions for the pilot ESUs should
contact Barry Thom.
Task 3: Watershed and Ecosystem Health Assessment - John Stein and Josh Baldi (WA ECY)
An update was provided on regional activities related to watershed and ecosystem health. This task
encompasses a wide range of watershed health metrics beyond salmon population status and trends.
The Task 3 progress document outlines several steps, to be managed by a workgroup of State, Federal,
Tribal and local government staff, which are needed to identify mutually agreeable indicators of
watershed or ecosystem health. These steps include:
1. Using Puget Sound as a pilot area, coordinate with the PSP and build on work of the WA
Monitoring Forum and others to identify key or priority issues that are affecting the health of the
Sound and associated watersheds (e.g., water quality/storm water, biodiversity, nutrients,
hydrology, and primary productivity). These may be expressed as key indicators or benchmarks.
2. Based on issues, identify potential indicators. A matrix that summarizes the various data
requirements for the indicators will be developed to characterize type of data, timing, scale,
quality requirements, etc.
3. Examine existing data sets and characterize the gap between what is available and what is
needed to report on the indicator.
4. Outline possible approaches for addressing the gaps, based on collaborations and partnerships
among agencies regionally (e.g., regional MOU).
5. Consider the applicability of the results of this pilot to other basins and ecosystems.
6. Integrate this data set into a regional data framework (Separate Summit Task #4).
The PSP is in the process of adopting provisional indicators which will be used as a starting point for a
region-wide assessment process. The goal of Task 3 is to build off the efforts of the PSP to gain regional
buy-in on one set of indicators and begin a gap analysis to determine specific data that may be missing
for watershed health conditions. PSP is under a statutory requirement to have an initial plan in place by
December 1st, 2008 and this deadline serves as a mechanism to keep the process moving forward.
NOAA has taken the lead in development of the provisional indicators across a broad set of ecosystem
objectives. An independent science panel will also review all recommendations developed in this
process. The process that PSP is using to develop indicators should create a set of metrics that could be
applicable to other regions and/or rolled-up for use over a larger geographic area.
Participants discussed the need to produce some analysis of the different systems and protocols used for
indicators across the region. These steps have already been undertaken by staff at PNAMP and other
agencies and the Executive Summit may be used as a clearing house to examine consistencies and
differences on a regional level. PSP examined over 600 initial indicators to reach the 20-30 indicators
that will be a part of their final package. Information on how each indicator was developed (e.g., existing
metric from another system, a combination of indicators, or a new metric) will be included in any
information distributed to Executive Summit Participants.
Next Steps:
 Identify other agencies/executives with an interest in developing regional watershed health
indicators to assist with Task 3.
 Once provisional indicators are developed by PSP, begin broader discussions with Summit
participants to identify areas of agreement and areas where new indicators may be required.
 Discuss and identify resource needs and engage key staff across regional entities to help make
data available as defined in the Executive Summit Vision statement.
 Commit staff to complete the tasks outlined above.
Action: Participants interested in participating in Task 3 should contact John Stein and Josh Baldi.
Task 4: Data Management and Technology Approaches - Stewart Toshach (NOAA NWFSC)
An update was provided on the activities that PNAMP, PNW-RGIC and NED have completed under Task
4. The NED steering committee developed the draft document “A Pacific Northwest Information
Framework Proposal” based off documents produced at the 2005 Regional Data Discovery and Sharing
workshop. The model outlined in the framework, referred to as the “Wedding Cake Model”, is designed to
be applicable to a wide variety of data management situations (e.g., implementation and effectiveness
monitoring data).
Next Steps:




Identify one or multiple CIO level executives interested in taking the lead on Task 4. This task will
benefit from the experience of a CIO with background in natural resources or projects with
multiple data inputs.
Solicit general reactions and input from Executive Summit participants on the draft framework
document.
Discuss options for organizing existing systems to optimize data sharing and access.
o Example: The PSP EPA grant to test the Northwest Data Exchange for water quality
data.
Identify data areas with high levels of consistency between organizations to use as a starting
point for developing systems for sharing and storing those data. This process could act as a test
case for technical options.
Action: Participants interested in working on and/or Executives interested in leading Task 4 should
contact Barry Thom.
Action: Participants should review the Task 4 document circulated by Stewart and send comments and
edits to Ross & Associates.
Identification of Additional Tasks
Participants discussed related activities that have been initiated since the October Summit that may be
relevant to or benefit the work going on within the four Summit tasks. Discussion focused on ways to
leverage the knowledge gained in current activities and ways to effectively coordinate those activities with
the work of the Executive Summit.
High Level Indicators (HLI)
Tom Karier gave an overview of work underway at the NPCC to identify HLI to report data to Congress
and state governors. The Council is interested in adopting indicators already developed by other regional
agencies where possible. Tom showed participants a draft list of potential biological and implementation
indicators, two of the four categories currently under review. Additional indicators will also be developed
for watershed health and management (i.e., financial and project oriented indicators) categories.
Due to the overlap across agencies, the NPCC attempted to identify current indicators or groups of
indicators already developed by the PCSRF, CBFWA and other regional efforts that fit their needs. The
goal is to develop a draft list and circulate it to Executive Summit participants for discussion on how to
make it more compatible with other efforts.
Action: Ross & Associates will circulate the NPCC Draft HLI list to participants.
Participants discussed the process of developing HLI and focused on the following:
 PNAMP developed a draft proposal for regional HLI which provides many of the technical details
that will be required once a set of indicators is agreed upon.
o PNAMP staff members have the expertise to examine indicators across organizations
and develop data definitions/dictionaries that will allow for compatibility.
o The PNAMP proposal does not cover the executive buy-in required for a regional data
sharing effort – that is where the Executive Summit will provide input.
 HLI need to inform program specific decisions at the same time as contributing to the “bigger
picture”. If they can serve both purposes then it will be easier to get buy-in from the various
agencies.
o Examples: TMDL implementation, are efforts making a difference in accordance with the
Forest Practices Act?, etc.
 The Washington Monitoring Forum has decided to focus on HLI that coordinate data and “tell the
story” of recovery efforts (i.e., Are we saving salmon?, is our water drinkable/swimmable?, etc.)




Each organization has unique mandates that may or may not be met by every indicator but there
seems to be significant overlap. The goal is to develop a list that can be use by multiple agencies
to achieve their individual goals while still allowing regional comparisons.
There are several organizations developing HLI and one challenge is how to acknowledge and
leverage those efforts and provide better coordination and communication. Examples include:
o The CBFWA comprehensive plan for fish and wildlife and RM&E recommendations which
have been vetted through the Fish & Wildlife agencies.
o PCSRF Report to Congress indicators and limiting factors analysis.
The Executive Summit can be used to extract the core data from various efforts, identify the
commonalities and use them as a step forward for a regional data sharing model.
The NPCC will develop HLI over the summer and have a draft ready for review by the fall. Their
goal is to complete this process by the end of December 2008.
Decision: A new Task (Task 5) will be developed to examine the HLI already developed by various
agencies using collaborative fora such as PNAMP. This task will be co-led by Chris Drivdahl (WA) and
Suzanne Knapp (OR). Other interested participants in Task 5 include:
o Brian Lipscomb (CBFWA)
o PNAMP technical staff
Action: Ross & Associates will send the PNAMP draft HLI proposal to all participants.
Action: Executives and others interested in participating in the development of Task 5 should contact
Ross & Associates.
Action: The co-leads will work with other interested parties and the Co-chairs to articulate the new Task
in a statement of purpose (similar to Tasks 2 & 3). The statement of purpose will be circulated to
Executives for review.
Next Steps and Potential Fall Summit
Participants discussed the need for a fall face-to-face meeting to provide additional time to review
progress on the current tasks and outline technical options for sharing data across the region.
Potential discussion topics include:
 Development of an Executive Regional Information Sharing MOU based on the vision.
 Report on progress and review of products developed for Tasks 2 and 3 (e.g., Salmon Population
Status and Trends Data Dictionary and PSP’s provisional indicator list).
o Task 4 may manifest as a data management framework and technical options for Tasks 2
and 3 rather than develop as a unique Task. Options could be reviewed.
 Report on progress towards Task 5 (e.g., NPCC’s development of HLI).
 Tools developed that could help move the process forward (e.g., the NED Model).
 Updates on other data sharing efforts such as the Data Management group under the PSP,
CBFWA, PNAMP.
The participants also discussed the need for an MOU or other, less formal agreement for executives to
sign to help define the effort and resources required to move forward. A regional MOU may be too big to
successfully allocate resources and participants expressed interest in exploring smaller, regional MOUs at
the basin or sub-basin level. This could be discussed at a fall meeting.
Action: Task Co-leads and Executive Summit Co-chairs will meet to discuss potential benefits and needs
for a fall face-to-face meeting. Ross & Associates will draft an agenda as appropriate for a fall meeting
and circulate it to participants.
Action: Participants should consider their willingness to sign on to an MOU or more general agreement.
Participants:
Al Doelker
Mike Mottice
Greg Delwiche
Al_Doelker@or.blm.gov
mike_mottice@blm.gov
gkdelwiche@bpa.gov
BLM
BLM
BPA
Tom Iverson
Ken MacDonald
Phil Roger
Cathy Kellon
David Tetta
Rob Wilson
tom.iverson@cbfwa.org
ken.macdonald@cbfwa.org
rogp@critfc.org
cathy@ecotrust.org
tetta.david@epa.gov
wilson.rob@epa.gov
CBFWA
CBFWA
CRITFC
EcoTrust
EPA
EPA
Bart Butterfield
Peter Hassemer
Keith Wolf
Janet Hess-Herbert
Barry Thom
Bruce Crawford
bbutterfield@idfg.idaho.gov
phassemer@idfg.idaho.gov
kwolf@kwaecoscience.com
jhessherbert@mt.gov
Barry.Thom@noaa.gov
bruce.crawford@noaa.gov
IDFG
IDFG
KWA
MT
NOAA
NOAA
Stewart Toshach
Tom Karier
Kathy McElreath
Brendan Sylvander
Jeff Cowen
John Stein
stewart.toshach@noaa.gov
tkarier@nwcouncil.org
kmcelreath@nwcouncil.org
Brendan Sylvander@noaa.gov
jeff.cowen@noaa.gov
john.stein@noaa.gov
NOAA
NPCC
NPCC
NWFSC
NWFSC
NWFSC
Tom O'Neil
Bruce Jones
Ed Bowles
Danny Burgett
Cedric Cooney
James Kagan
habitat@nwhi.org
bjones@nwifc.org
Ed.Bowles@state.or.us
Danny.Burgett@or.usda.gov
cedric.cooney@oregonstate.edu
jimmy.kagan@oregonstate.edu
NWHI
NWIFC
ODFW
OR NRCS
ODFW
OR INR
Suzanne Knapp
Greg Sieglitz
Aaron Borisenko
Bruce Schmidt
Paul Ocker
Michael Newsom
suzanne.knapp@state.or.us
greg.sieglitz@state.or.us
Borisenko.aaron@deq.state.or.us
Bruce_Schmidt@psmfc.org
paul.a.ocker@usace.army.mil
mnewsom@pn.usbr.gov
OR GNRO
OWEB
OR DEQ
PSMFC
US ACE
US BR
Timothy Personius
Kathryn Puckett
Linda Ulmer
Dan Diggs
Jen Bayer
Alan Mikuni
tpersonius@pn.usbr.gov
kpuckett@pn.usbr.gov
lulmer@fs.fed.us
daniel_diggs@fws.gov
jbayer@usgs.gov
amikuni@usgs.gov
US BR
US BR
US FS
US FWS
USGS
USGS
Sean Quigley
Jacque Schei
Scott Van Hoff
squigley@usgs.gov
jschei@usgs.gov
svanhoff@usgs.gov
USGS
USGS
USGS
David Woodson
dwoodson@usgs.gov
USGS
Brodie Cox
Erik Neatherlin
Chris Drivdahl
Josh Baldi
Ken Dzinbal
Steve Leider
coxpbc@dfw.wa.gov
neathean@dfw.wa.gov
chris.drivdahl@esa.wa.gov
Josh.baldi@esa.wa.gov
kdzi461@ecy.wa.gov
steve.leider@esa.wa.gov
WDFW
WDFW
WA ECY
WA ECY
WA ECY
WA ECY
Kaleen Cottingham
Carol Smith
Nancy Tosta
Kristen Durance
Kaleen.Cottingham@rco.wa.gov
bioforsalmon@comcast.net
Nancy.tosta@ross-assoc.com
Kristen.Durance@ross-assoc.com
WA RCO
WA CC
Ross & Associates
Ross & Associates