Regional Ecosystem Office

333 SW 1st
P.O. Box 3623
Portland, Oregon 97208-3623
Phone: (503) 326-6265 FAX: (503) 326-6282

Memorandum

Date: June 8, 1995

To: Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Members (See distribution list)

From: Donald R. Knowles, Executive Director

Subject: June 1995 Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Meeting Notes

Enclosed are the notes from the June 1995 Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (IAC) meeting. Our next IAC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, July 6, at the Wyndham Garden Hotel at Sea-Tac. The address of the hotel is 18118 Pacific Highway South, Seattle, Washington 98188. Call (206) 244-6666 to make your hotel reservations and make sure the room rate quoted is $83.00. Shuttle service from the airport and hotel is available.

The agenda review conference call for the July meeting will be on Thursday, June 22, at 10:00 a.m. IAC members who wish to participate in the conference call, or have any questions or suggestions, can contact their agency representative, Gary S. Sims (503/326-6274), or Linda Kucera (503/326-6283).

Enclosure

cc:
REO
OFED

400/gs/lk/ly

Date: June 8, 1995
Subject: June 1995 Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Meeting Notes

Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Distribution List

California
Francie Sullivan, Shasta County Supervisor
Terry Gorton, Assistant Secretary, Forestry and Rural Economic Dev., California Resource Agency

Oregon
Rocky McVay, Curry County Commissioner
Paula Burgess, Federal Forest and Resource Policy Advisor, Office of the Governor

Washington
Harvey Wolden, Skagit County Commissioner
Amy F. Bell, Deputy Supervisor for Community Relations, WA Dept. of Natural Resources
Bob Nichols, Senior Executive Policy Assistant, Governor's Office (Alternate)

Tribes
Greg Blomstrom, Planning Forester, CA Indian Forest & Fire Management Council
Mel Moon, Commissioner, NW Indian Fisheries Commission
Jim Anderson, Executive Director, NW Indian Fisheries Commission (Alternate)
Gary Morishima, Technical Advisor, Intertribal Timber Council
Guy McMinds, Executive Office Advisor, Quinault Indian Nation (Alternate)
Don Motanic, Technical Specialist, Intertribal Timber Council

Federal Agencies
Michael Collopy, Director, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, National Biological Service
Anita Frankel, Director, Forest and Salmon Group, Environmental Protection Agency
Eugene Andreuccetti, Regional Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service
Bob Graham, State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Alternate)
John Lowe, Regional Forester, USDA Forest Service, R-6
G. Lynn Sprague, Regional Forester, USDA Forest Service, R-5 (Alternate)
Thomas Murphy, Director, Environmental Research Laboratory, Environmental Protection Agency
Charles Philpot, Station Director, Forest Service, PNW
Stan Speaks, Area Director, Portland Area Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs
Ron Eggers, Assistant Area Director, Portland Area Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs (Alternate)
Ron Jaeger, Area Director, Sacramento Area Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs
Michael Spear, Regional Director, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
William Stelle, Jr., Regional Director, National Marine Fisheries Service
Jacqueline Wyland, Division Chief, Env. & Tech. Serv., National Marine Fisheries Service (Alternate)
Elizabeth Gaar, Senior Policy Coordinator, National Marine Fisheries Service (Alternate)
Tom Tuchmann, Director, Office of Forestry and Economic Development (Ex Officio)
William Walters, Acting Regional Director, National Park Service
Elaine Zielinski, State Director, Bureau of Land Management, OR/WA
Ed Hastey, State Director, Bureau of Land Management, CA (Alternate)

Table of Contents

Item	REO Contact/ Presenter	Page
Executive Summary		4
Revision of Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed Scale: The Revised Federal Guide to Watershed Analysis	Mike Tehan	6
Implementation Monitoring Plan	Barry Mulder	8
Committee Operations	Gary S. Sims	9
Draft Agenda for the June Meeting	Gary S. Sims & Linda Kucera	11
Possible Future Agenda Items	Linda Kucera	12
List of Meeting Handouts	Laurie Ystad	12
List of Meeting Attendees	Laurie Ystad	13

Executive Summary for the June 1995
Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Meeting

Opening Comments by John Lowe

Welcome all members, and the public, to the June IAC meeting.
The first order of business is the certification of the May meeting minutes as correct. No changes were proposed or requested by any of the IAC members. The minutes for the May 1995 IAC meeting were certified by the chair as accurate.

Revision of Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed Scale: The Revised Federal Guide to Watershed Analysis (Guide)

The IAC approved the six points of agreement developed during the May 9 Watershed Policy Group meeting:
All IAC members can participate in revision of the Guide.
REO will clarify the use of the term "issues" in the Guide to reflect that the level of analysis required for a given watershed will be based on: a) relevant triggering event(s), and b) resource problems or concerns relative to a specific watershed.
FS and BLM will take the lead for minor activity criteria in riparian reserves.
Every watershed analysis should demonstrate a core understanding of the watershed, based on "core analysis topics" and "critical questions."
The expected use of the Guide with respect to nonfederal lands was established and identified in the ATO.
The REO/WACT will continue to work on Section I of the Guide, incorporating comments.
There was general agreement to adopt the eight core analysis topics to establish a framework for understanding all watersheds where analysis is done: Erosion Process, Water Quality, Hydrology, Stream Channel, Species and Habitats, Vegetation, Human Uses (identify tribal treaty rights), and Management Plans and Objectives.
The critical questions for each core topic will be evaluated by the REO to:
Reduce the overall number of questions to a minimum set.
Explain the context of the critical questions within the six analysis steps in the draft Guide.
Re-examine the specific wording of each question based on further clarification of their intended role and/or objectives
Clarify/explain the relationship of the critical questions to issues (triggering events and resource concerns).
The IAC members were invited to have technical staff members from their respective organizations participate in further Guide revisions.
The IAC accepted, in principle, the FS/BLM conceptual description for criteria to identify minor activities within riparian reserves that should not require watershed analysis. Before a final FS/BLM direction letter is issued to the field, IAC members will be given an opportunity to comment.

Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring

IAC members asked that a number of issues concerning the draft Implementation Monitoring Plan be revisited: 1) goals and objectives of the approach, 2) the basis for the census and sample, 3) the need for a database and its accessibility, 4) estimates of costs or level of effort, and 5) the relationship to existing monitoring.
The FS and BLM will review the final draft Implementation Monitoring Plan and provide analysis and recommendations to the RMC on the above 5 points.
The RMC will review the comments and develop a recommendation for presentation at the July 6 IAC meeting.
The RMC and the REO will hold workshops between the different work groups in June to discuss interrelationships between different activities and overall monitoring.

Committee Operations

The committee adopted procedures to:
Address requests from outside groups for time on regular meeting agendas.
Expedite "propose and dispose" for items identified as relatively minor in significance and related to on-the-ground implementation.
Participate in deliberations and decisions made by the RIEC outside the formal committee.
The committee directed the REO to review material being mailed and faxed to members, and to only send material containing significant information and/or requiring committee action. Other documentation will be listed and circulated once a month or members to identify items they would like copies of.

Hot Topics

Streamlining Consultation Procedures Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act memo dated May 31, 1995, signed by Forest Service Regions 1, 4, 5, and 6; Bureau of Land Management States Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and California; National Marine Fisheries Service North West Region. The agreement sets shorter consultation timeframes and emphasizes informal consultation. The agreement establishes a mechanism to move the consultation process closer to the field so all parties can use and understand it.
Award Winning GIS Map. Jeff Nighbert, BLM, took 1st place (over 400 entries) at the ESRI GIS Conference, an international event. Jeff created an ICBEM map that reflects what is really there at the landscape level and includes population centers and rivers. This is a new kind of map product. Congratulations Jeff!
BLM Timber Harvest PSQ for the next 10 years. The BLM has completed their resource management plans and will be reviewing them with the Districts. As a part of that achievement, a 10 year scenario for 2.2 million acres that BLM manages in western Oregon was graphed to show potential timber harvests using a computer model.
States' Framework Data. The State of Oregon has sent out requests for GIS data. So far, the FS and BLM have responded. There will be six basic/framework data layers and the timeframe for the project is 2 years.

Issue Summary from the June 1995 IAC Meeting

Meeting Date: June 1, 1995	REO Contact: Mike Tehan
Topic: Revision of Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed Scale: The Revised Federal Guide for Watershed Analysis (Guide).
Objective: Review and confirm policy agreements developed during the May 19 meeting of the IAC watershed analysis policy group. Agree on the next steps to move forward with revision of the draft Guide. Discuss and comment on staff proposals for core analysis topics, critical questions, and criteria for determining the need for watershed analysis when minor activities are proposed in riparian reserves.
Summary of Discussion/IAC Actions: The IAC discussed the following six points of agreement from the May 19 watershed policy group meeting: All IAC members can participate in Guide revision. REO will clarify the use of the term "issues" in the Guide to reflect that the level of analysis required for a given watershed will be based on: a) relevant triggering event(s), and b) resource problems or concerns relative to a specific watershed. FS and BLM will take the lead for minor activity criteria in riparian reserves. Every watershed analysis should develop a core understanding (information) of the watershed, based on "core analysis topics" and "critical questions." The expected use of the Guide with respect to nonfederal lands was established and identified in the ATO. The REO/WACT will continue to work on Section I of the Guide, incorporating comments. In response to item #3, the Forest Service described a proposal (developed jointly with the BLM) for determining when watershed analysis is needed for minor activities in riparian reserves. In response to item #4, the REO presented its proposal for "core analysis topics" and "critical questions" to demonstrate a core understanding of the watershed. The eight core topics are: Erosion Processes, Water Quality, Hydrology, Stream Channel, Species and Habitats, Vegetation, Human Uses (identify tribal treaty rights), and Management Plans and Objectives.
IAC Agreements: 1. Policy Agreements. The IAC concurred with the six points of agreement from the policy group meeting as summarized above. 2. Core Information. There was general agreement to adopt the eight core analysis topics to establish a framework for understanding all watersheds where analysis is done. The Human Uses topic should expressly identify tribal treaty rights. The proposed critical questions for each core analysis topic were not accepted as presented. Instead, the REO was asked to: a. Explain the context of the critical questions in the six analysis steps in the draft Guide. b. Re-examine the specific wording of each question based on further clarification of their intended role and/or objectives. c. Clarify/explain the relationship of the critical questions to issues (triggering events and resource concerns). 3. IAC Participation with WACT. IAC members that would like their staffs to participate directly in revision of the draft Guide should identify technical staff contacts and their expected level of involvement/review. This information should be provided to the REO. 4. Next Steps in Draft Guide Revision. REO will continue to move revision of the draft Guide forward. The WACT and participating IAC member technical staffs (WACT+) will further refine the critical questions as agreed, and integrate them into the next draft of the Guide. The intent is to have a technical WACT+ meeting before the July IAC meeting to review the next draft of Section I of the Guide, and to present a working draft of Section I to the IAC in July. 5. Minor Activities. The IAC accepted, in principle, the FS/BLM proposal. Before the FS/BLM issue a letter of guidance to field units, IAC members will be given the opportunity for comment. IAC members will receive a copy of the final draft letter within the next 8 days. Based on comments received, FS/BLM will then issue a final guidance letter within the next 2 weeks.
Follow-up Actions: 1. REO/WACT+ will further refine the critical questions and integrate them into the next draft of the Guide. REO will schedule a technical WACT+ meeting during the week of June 26 to review the next draft of Section I of the Guide. REO will present a working draft of Section I to the IAC in July. 2. IAC members will identify technical staff contacts and their expected level of involvement to the REO. 3. FS/BLM will provide all IAC members a copy of the final draft guidance letter on minor activities by June 9 and solicit their comments. Based on comments received, FS/BLM will issue the final guidance letter to the field by June 16.

Issue Summary from the June IAC Meeting
Meeting Date: June 1, 1995	REO Contact: Barry Mulder
Topic: Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring
Objective: Review the final draft Implementation Monitoring Plan and the proposed approach for effectiveness monitoring and propose a course of action.
Summary of Discussion/IAC Actions: The RMC presented a summary of the major issues regarding the development of the Implementation Monitoring Plan and a brief description of progress in the development of the Effectiveness Monitoring Plan. A summary of the review comments on the draft Implementation Monitoring Plan were given. The major issues of concern identified in the comments were whether to: 1) assess all S&Gs, 2) adopt the plan as mandatory, 3) obtain project documentation at both the planning and implementation stage, 4) include a census and sample, and 5) collect and store data electronically and make it accessible to the public. A proposed schedule was presented for a 2-year trial test of the approach. The IAC did not adopt the proposed policy assumptions or timeframe. IAC members stated that a number of issues needed to be revisited: 1) goals and objectives of the approach, 2) the basis for the census and sample, 3) the need for a database and its accessibility, 4) estimates of costs, and 5) the relationship to existing monitoring. It was agreed that BLM and FS should evaluate the issues and provide a response to the RMC. The RMC will develop revised recommendations for presentation to the IAC at the July 6 meeting. Discussion of the Effectiveness Monitoring Plan focused on the relationship with current monitoring and other activities, such as watershed analysis. It was agreed that RMC, REO, agencies, and work groups will begin discussing the issues of cost, integration of monitoring proposals (implementation, effectiveness, and validation), and the requirements as presented in the ROD. Emphasis will be placed on identifying efficiencies available as monitoring processes are implemented. Where possible, requirements to fulfill ROD requirements should be substituted with individual agency monitoring needs so there is a substitution of effort rather than an incorporation of a new layer of mandates. The potential cost, in funding and staff time, was a major issue of concern in implementing any of the proposed monitoring requirements.
IAC Agreements: The IAC agreed that BLM and FS should review the final draft Implementation Monitoring Plan and provide a summary and recommendations to RMC for consideration. They supported the need to begin discussions on integrating the different data-gathering activities, such as monitoring, watershed analysis, and survey and manage.
RIEC Decisions: NA
Follow-up Actions (who/what/when): The BLM and FS should review the final draft Implementation Monitoring Plan and provide a summary discussion and recommendations to RMC on the above 5 points at the (June 7 or June 28) RMC meeting. The RMC will review these comments with the agencies and provide a proposed approach for resolution at the July 6 IAC meeting. The RMC and the REO will hold workshops between the different work groups in June to discuss interrelationships between different activities.

Issue Summary from the May IAC Meeting
Meeting Date: June 1, 1995	REO Contact: Gary S. Sims
Topic: Committee Operations
Objective: Review, discuss, and decide on committee operational policy regarding: 1) requests from outside groups for time on regular meeting agendas, 2) expedited "propose and dispose" for items identified as relatively minor in significance and related to the on-the-ground implementation efforts, and 3) participation in deliberations and decisions made by RIEC outside the formal committee.
Summary of Discussion/IAC Actions: 1. The committee agreed that outside parties will be given opportunities to make presentations, but only after IAC has reviewed the proposed subject matter and agreed on a case-by-case basis that the presentation relates to the purpose of IAC. 2. The committee agreed to the compressed "propose and dispose" process when there is an identified need for an expedited review of a proposal. 3. The committee reconfirmed that there will be times that the RIEC will make some decisions outside the formal committee. These decisions will usually involve technical/operational issues, rather than matters concerning policy direction, and IAC will be informed of the decisions and be given an opportunity to discuss the issue(s) at a subsequent IAC meeting, if desired. Additionally, it was noted that too much routine information is being sent to the committee. The committee stated that it was interested in seeing major decision/action items and material related to future deliberations. The committee expressed appreciation for the attempts to kept informed, but also stated that the volume of material being sent tended to dilute the importance of significant information.
IAC Agreements: 1. Outside groups or individual members of the public may request time on an IAC agenda to present information. Such requests may be made in one of the following ways: a. Propose in public comment period. A group or individual may request time on a future agenda during the public comment period provided in a regular committee meeting. If the committee agrees, the individual will be put in touch with the REO for direction on how to develop a single page abstract of the proposed presentation for inclusion with the regular committee prework package. After reviewing the abstract, the committee will decide if it wishes to provide time for the proposed presentation at a future meeting. b. Individual written request. An individual or group may submit a written request to the committee describing the topic to be presented. After reviewing the information, the committee will decide if it wishes to provide time for the proposed presentation at a future meeting. 2. The committee approved a compressed "propose and dispose" procedure for review and recommendation on operational implementation direction for items of low controversy and/or relatively minor significance. a. The item will be presented at a regularly scheduled committee meeting and the reason for the expedited review will be identified. b. Arrangements will be made for an REO conference call approximately 2 weeks later, to discuss committee member comments and seek IAC concurrence. c. The REO staff will review the committee member comments, and: 1) if the changes recommended during the conference call are minor, they will be incorporated and direction will be sent to the field, with copies to the IAC members; or 2) if the changes recommended during the conference call are major, they will be evaluated and presented at the next IAC meeting for final committee approval and recommendation. d. The committee will retain the ability to decide that an item being presented for expedited review will be treated in the more deliberative manner; i.e., discussion at the following meeting rather than during a conference call. 3. There will be times when the RIEC will make decisions outside the arena of the formal committee meeting. Such decisions will usually be of a technical/operational nature, as opposed to issues involving policy direction and fall within one of two courses of action: a. The RIEC must decide about internal workings of the RIEC and/or REO. The IAC members will be advised of the decision(s), as appropriate, after it has been made. b. The REO may recommend actions concerning implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan, as required in the ROD, which do not require IAC involvement. In those instances, copies of the recommendation package and supporting information will be concurrently shared with the IAC members for their information. If IAC members have comments, they should address them to the REO Executive Director. The Executive Director will ensure that all such information from IAC members is promptly shared with the RIEC. c. An IAC member may bring up any RIEC decision at any subsequent meeting for discussion and committee review and deliberation.
RIEC Decisions: NA
Follow-up Actions (who/what/when): 1. The REO will work with Mr. Bill Bradbury of For the Sake of the Salmon to develop the information requested by IAC to consider his request for time on a future agenda. 2. The REO will assess the information that it has been routinely providing to the committee. The REO will only send material of significant actions or recommendations requiring future committee actions or deliberations. A list of all other documents will be provided for committee member's review at future IAC meetings. Each committee member may then identify which material of that he or she would like copies. Individual committee members may still request to routinely be copied on all documentation, as in the past.

Proposed Agenda for the July 6, 1995, IAC Meeting
Wyndham Garden Hotel
Seattle, Washington
9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

TIME	DURATION	AGENDA TOPIC	PRESENTER
9:00	20 min.	Welcome, certify June meeting notes, review the meeting objectives and agenda.	John Lowe and Linda Kucera
	60 min.	Watershed Analysis: Final Draft Watershed Analysis Guide Present main components of the final draft Agree on next steps	Mike Tehan
	15 min.	Public Comment: Emphasis on the Guide	Linda
	20 min.	Break
	45 min.	Information Management: Update on Watershed Boundaries	Chris Hamilton
	75 min.	Lunch
	30 min.	Activity Information Sharing Update on what has been collected to date Agree on next steps	Chris Hamilton
	60 min.	Monitoring: Implementation Monitoring Plan Effectiveness Monitoring Plan	Barry Mulder
	15 min.	Public Comment: Emphasis on Monitoring	Linda
	20 min.	Break
	30 min.	Hot Topics: FY 1996 Budget if Information Available	All
	30 min.	Future Agendas: August and October	Linda
4:30		Adjourn

STATUS REPORT	REO CONTACT
Salvage Bill	Don Knowles
Survey & Manage Update	Debbie Pietrzak and Jay Watson
Work Group Effectiveness	Debbie Pietrzak

August Agenda Topics:

Research and Monitoring Committee - Status briefing on research and monitoring surveys and the Effectiveness Monitoring Plan.
Information Management - Present integrated resource information system between REO, BLM, and FS.
Role of Government-to-Government Consultation - Present an analysis of ways to enhance government-to-government consultation and communications between federal, tribal, state, and local governments on issues related to the implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan.
Provincial Presentations - Presentation (30 minutes each) by a PAC/PIEC chair from each state concerning local issues and activities.

August Status Reports:

Federal Timber Sale Update
Work Group Effectiveness

September

No Meeting

June IAC Handouts:
Revised ATO's:
Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring
Committee Operations
Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed Scale: Revised Federal Guide to Watershed Analysis
Monitoring:
Monitoring Design for the Northwest Forest Plan
Summary of Final Changes
Final Draft Implementation Monitoring Plan
For the Sake of the Salmon
Western Oregon Age Class Distribution - BLM Chart
Oregon Department of Administrative Services Letter - Cooperative Project Baseline 97
Streamlining Consultation Procedures Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
Great Gray Owl Survey Protocol
House of Representatives - Appropriation Language
Organizational Chart - NW Forest Plan
IAC Identification List
RIEC Identification List
Acronym List and Acronym Definitions
May IAC Notes
June IAC Agenda

Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Meeting June 1, 1995 Attendance List
Name	Title	Agency

IAC Members and Alternates:

Bell, Amy Deputy Super. for Community Washington Depart. of Natural Resources

Blair, Roger Branch Chief, Watershed Environmental Protection Agency, Research Lab

Blomstrom, Greg Forest Planner CA Indian Forest & Fire Mgmt Council

Collopy, Mike Director, Coop. Research & National Biological Service

Frankel, Anita Director, Forest and Salmon Environmental Protection Agency

Graham, Bob State Conservationist Natural Resources Conservation Service

Hemingway, Roy Salmon Policy Advisor Office of the Governor, State of Oregon

Jackson, Gerry Assistant Regional Director U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Knowles, Don (DFO) Executive Director Regional Ecosystem Office

Lowe, John Regional Forester Forest Service, R-6

Moon, Mel Commissioner NW Indian Fisheries Commission

Motanic, Don Intertribal Timber Council

Nichols, Bob Senior Executive Policy Office of the Governor, State of Washington

Romancier, Bob Forest Service, PNW

Speaks, Stan Area Director Bureau of Indian Affairs

Stelle, William Jr. Regional Director National Marine Fisheries Service

Sullivan, Francie Shasta County Supervisor, Shasta County, State of California

Walters, Bill Deputy Regional Director National Park Service

Wolden, Harvey County Commissioner Skagit County, State of Washington

Wyland, Jacqueline Chief, Envir & Tech Sve Div National Marine Fisheries Service

Zielinski, Elaine State Director Bureau of Land Management, OR/WA

Regional Ecosystem Office:

Fritzler, Carol Lee Administrative Officer Forest Service

Hamilton, Chris GIS Bureau of Land Management

Kucera, Linda Facilitator U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Loop, Curt Representative Corp of Engineers

McKenzie, Dan Research & Monitoring Leader Environmental Protection Agency

McNair, Ranotta Representative Forest Service

Mulder, Barry Monitoring National Biological Service

Pietrzak, Debbie Representative Bureau of Land Management

Powers, Dave Representative Environmental Protection Agency

Quinn, Tim GIS Administrator Bureau of Land Management

Romancier, Bob Research & Monitoring Forest Service, PNW

Sims, Gary Representative Bureau of Indian Affairs

Sisto, Tony Representative National Park Service

Tehan, Mike Representative National Marine Fisheries Service

Watson, Jay Representative U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Ystad, Laurie Secretary Forest Service

Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Meeting
June 1, 1995 Attendance List

Name Title Agency

Other Intergovernmental Agencies:

Bradley, Bill Forestry Chief Bureau of Land Management

Caraher, Dave Riparian Manager, Coordinator Forest Service, R-6

Clauson, Steve R-5 Representative Forest Service, R-5

Cleland, Bruce Watershed Team Environmental Protection Agency

Graybeal, Nancy Deputy Regional Forester Forest Service, R-6

Hennessey, Lauri Chief of Public Affairs Bureau of Land Management

Hussey, Tom Planner Forest Service, R-6

Magee, Jerry Watershed Team Member Bureau of Land Management

Mason, Jerry Public Involvement Coordinator Forest Service, R-6

McDonald, Dennis Forestry Coordinator NW Indian Fisheries Commission

Nighbert, Jeff Geographer, GIS Bureau of Land Management

Ogden, Cay Watershed Team Member U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Shaffer, Anne Policy Analyst Quileute Tribe

Sprague, Lynn Regional Forester Forest Service, R-5

Stresig, Chris Writer/Editor Bureau of Land Management

Public:

Bradbury, Bill Executive Director For Sake of the Salmon

Bell, Amy	Deputy Super. for Community	Washington Depart. of Natural Resources
Blair, Roger	Branch Chief, Watershed	Environmental Protection Agency, Research Lab
Blomstrom, Greg	Forest Planner	CA Indian Forest & Fire Mgmt Council
Collopy, Mike	Director, Coop. Research &	National Biological Service
Frankel, Anita	Director, Forest and Salmon	Environmental Protection Agency
Graham, Bob	State Conservationist	Natural Resources Conservation Service
Hemingway, Roy	Salmon Policy Advisor	Office of the Governor, State of Oregon
Jackson, Gerry	Assistant Regional Director	U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Knowles, Don (DFO)	Executive Director	Regional Ecosystem Office
Lowe, John	Regional Forester	Forest Service, R-6
Moon, Mel	Commissioner	NW Indian Fisheries Commission
Motanic, Don		Intertribal Timber Council
Nichols, Bob	Senior Executive Policy	Office of the Governor, State of Washington
Romancier, Bob		Forest Service, PNW
Speaks, Stan	Area Director	Bureau of Indian Affairs
Stelle, William Jr.	Regional Director	National Marine Fisheries Service
Sullivan, Francie	Shasta County Supervisor,	Shasta County, State of California
Walters, Bill	Deputy Regional Director	National Park Service
Wolden, Harvey	County Commissioner	Skagit County, State of Washington
Wyland, Jacqueline	Chief, Envir & Tech Sve Div	National Marine Fisheries Service
Zielinski, Elaine	State Director	Bureau of Land Management, OR/WA

Fritzler, Carol Lee	Administrative Officer	Forest Service
Hamilton, Chris	GIS	Bureau of Land Management
Kucera, Linda	Facilitator	U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Loop, Curt	Representative	Corp of Engineers
McKenzie, Dan	Research & Monitoring Leader	Environmental Protection Agency
McNair, Ranotta	Representative	Forest Service
Mulder, Barry	Monitoring	National Biological Service
Pietrzak, Debbie	Representative	Bureau of Land Management
Powers, Dave	Representative	Environmental Protection Agency
Quinn, Tim	GIS Administrator	Bureau of Land Management
Romancier, Bob	Research & Monitoring	Forest Service, PNW
Sims, Gary	Representative	Bureau of Indian Affairs
Sisto, Tony	Representative	National Park Service
Tehan, Mike	Representative	National Marine Fisheries Service
Watson, Jay	Representative	U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Ystad, Laurie	Secretary	Forest Service

Bradley, Bill	Forestry Chief	Bureau of Land Management
Caraher, Dave	Riparian Manager, Coordinator	Forest Service, R-6
Clauson, Steve	R-5 Representative	Forest Service, R-5
Cleland, Bruce	Watershed Team	Environmental Protection Agency
Graybeal, Nancy	Deputy Regional Forester	Forest Service, R-6
Hennessey, Lauri	Chief of Public Affairs	Bureau of Land Management
Hussey, Tom	Planner	Forest Service, R-6
Magee, Jerry	Watershed Team Member	Bureau of Land Management
Mason, Jerry	Public Involvement Coordinator	Forest Service, R-6
McDonald, Dennis	Forestry Coordinator	NW Indian Fisheries Commission
Nighbert, Jeff	Geographer, GIS	Bureau of Land Management
Ogden, Cay	Watershed Team Member	U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Shaffer, Anne	Policy Analyst	Quileute Tribe
Sprague, Lynn	Regional Forester	Forest Service, R-5
Stresig, Chris	Writer/Editor	Bureau of Land Management