Regional Ecosystem Office 333 SW 1st P

Regional Ecosystem Office 333 SW 1st P.O. Box 3623 Portland, Oregon 97208-3623 Website: www.reo.gov E-Mail: REOmail@or.blm.gov Phone: 503-808-2165 FAX: 503-808-2163
	Memorandum
Date:	June 3, 2004
To:	Regional Interagency Executive Committee (see attached distribution list)
From:	/s/Anne Badgley, Executive Director
Subject:	REGIONAL INTERAGENCY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA & PREWORK - 8:00 – 12:00 noon – June 8, 2004

Enclosed please find a proposed agenda and pre-work for the June 8, 2004 Regional Interagency Executive Committee (RIEC) meeting. The meeting will begin at 8:00 a.m. in Conference Room J (formerly known as the REO Conference Room), Second Floor, Robert Duncan Plaza. Primary topics to be discussed at the meeting include:

10-Year Monitoring Reports,
Future Research/Monitoring Reports,
Northwest Forest Plan Implementation Review Team Reports, including an extensive report from the Programmatic Consultation team, and
A variety of hot tipics, and a discussion related to future meetings topics and processes.

A few conference call lines have been set aside and can be reached by dialing the toll free number 1-888-xxx-xxxx, passcode xxxxx. The meeting will adjourn at 12 noon.

If you have any questions regarding this material, please contact your REO Representative, Kath Collier (503-808-2179), or me (503-808-2165).

Enclosures:

1 – June Agenda and Pre-Work Materials (11p)

cc: Presenters, REO Staff

1944/kc

Distribution List for RIEC

Dave Allen, US Fish & Wildlife Service
Terry Rabot, US Fish & Wildlife Service (Alt)
Elaine M. Brong, Bureau of Land Management
Mike Mottice, Bureau of Land Management (Alt)
Jon Jarvis, National Park Service
Rory Westberg, National Park Service (Alt)
Linda Goodman, Forest Service
Jim Golden, Forest Service (Alt)
Bob Graham, Natural Resources Conservation Service
Dianne Guidry, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Alt)
Col. Richard W. Hobernicht, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Curt Loop, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Alt)
Anne Kinsinger, USGS Western Region
Dave Busch, USGS/REO (Alt)
Robert Lohn, NOAA Fisheries
Mike Crouse, NOAA Fisheries (Alt)
Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, Western Ecology Division, EPA
Dan McKenzie, Western Ecology Division, EPA (Alt)

Dave Powers, Environmental Protection Agency
Dan Opalski, Environmental Protection Agency (Alt)
Stan M. Speaks, Bureau of Indian Affairs
Alex Whistler, Bureau of Indian Affairs (Alt)
Tom Quigley, Pacific Northwest Station, Forest Service
Cindi West, Pacific Northwest Station, Forest Service (Alt)

California Federal Executives

Kent Connaughton, Forest Service
Kathy Anderson, Forest Service (Alt)
Steve Thompson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
John Engbring, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Alt)
Phil Detrich, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Alt)
Michael Pool, Bureau of Land Management
Paul Roush, Bureau of Land Management (Alt)
Jim Sedell, Pacific Southwest Station, Forest Service
Garland Mason, Pacific Southwest Station, Forest Service (Alt)

Regional Interagency Executive Committee (RIEC) Meeting
June 8, 2004 Agenda
Conference Room J (formerly known as the REO Conference Room),
Second Floor, Robert Duncan Plaza, Portland, Oregon

Time	Topics	Purpose	Presenter
8:00	Welcome § Introductions § Agenda Review	Housekeeping	Anne Badgley Facilitator
8:10	10-Year Monitoring Report § Background § Status Report & Schedule Updates § Preliminary Points of Interest § Future Discussion Topics/Opportunities	Update/ Discussion	Jon Martin
9:45	Future Research/Monitoring Reports § Aligning agency policy processes under the Data Quality Act (peer review, etc.) § Public Release of Documents	Update/ Discussion	Anne Badgley (intro) Cindy Miner/ Anne Kinsinger
10:00	Break
10:10	NWFP Implementation Improvements (moderated by Anne Badgley): § Watershed Analysis Recommendations (10) § Programmatic Consultation Subcommittee (50) § California Update (5)	Updates/ Report	Dave Gibbons (FS-R5) Mike Crouse Paul Roush
11:15	Litigation Update § S&M Lawsuit and other Updates	Updates	Roger Nesbitt
11:30	Hot Topics § Analytical Framework Update	Update	Mike Crouse
11:40	Future Meetings Topics and Processes § IAC Field Trip/possible RIEC lunch meeting § October Preview, November proposal § 2005 Proposed Calendar	Update Feedback	Anne Badgley
11:50	Closing § Review of agreements, tasks, & assignments	Housekeeping	Facilitator
12:00	*Adjourn*

Status Report:

PNAMP Implementation

Topic: 10-YEAR MONITORING REPORT UPDATE
Presenter/Sponsor: Jon Martin, Interagency Monitoring Program
REO Contact: Anne Badgley, Executive Director
Issue Statement: Recent interest in the draft Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) population report elevated the need to update the RIEC on the status of the 10-year monitoring report. This recently released NSO report is one part of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) status and trend report on NSO populations and habitat. In addition, the NSO report is part of a collection of other status and trend reports (Marbled Murrelet, Late-Successional Old-Growth, Watersheds, Tribal, Socio-economic, Implementation). A Synthesis Report and Executive Summary Report considering all findings in the status and trend reports and new research will likely be done in early spring of 2005. Presentation Objectives: 1. Provide a program overview (especially for "new" RIEC members). 2. Review status of 10-year report. 3. Review some preliminary findings.
Background: The NWFP 1994 Record of Decision required a monitoring plan but did not describe how to monitor. Implementation monitoring began under a draft monitoring plan in 1996. In 1999, with the help of many experts, a strategy and design for the overall effectiveness monitoring program was published (GTR-437, 1999). At about the same time, NSO, Marbled Murrelets, and Late-Successional Old-Growth monitoring plans were approved by the RIEC. The Watershed module (AREMP or Aquatic/ Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program) was approved in 2001, and the Tribal module was approved in 2002. The Socio-economic module is being tested, and the Biodiversity monitoring plan has not been developed. The goal of the monitoring program is to evaluate the success of the NWFP in achieving the objectives on Federal lands of conserving late-successional habitat and related species, improving watershed condition, and providing resource production and assistance to rural economies and communities.
Analysis and Options: The 10-year monitoring report on the effectiveness of the NWFP is the first comprehensive analysis of monitoring data and research results since 1994. This periodic evaluation was recommended in the monitoring strategy and design. The RIEC approved the 10-year monitoring report schedule in September 2001.
Organizational/Funding Implications: Key 10-year Monitoring Report Dates
	First draft *status & trend reports* for internal review § Peer review complete - reports released		August 2004 December 2004
	First draft *synthesis report* for internal review § Peer review complete – reports released		December 2004 February 2005
10-year Monitoring Report Publications and Authors: · PNW Publications o Status and Trend of the Northern Spotted on Federal Lands under the NWFP (Lint, Forsman, Davis, Reid, Mowdy) o Status and Trend of the Marbled Murrelets on Federal Lands under the NWFP (Huff, Baldwin, Falxa, Miller, Nelson, Ralph, Raphael, Strong, Thompson) o Status and Trends of Late-Successional - Old-Growth Forest under the NWFP (Moeur, Spies, Hemstrom) o Status and Trends of Watershed Condition under the NWFP (Gallo, Lanigan, Eldred, Gordon, Moyer, Reeves, Larsen) o Status and Trends in Socio-Economic Conditions under the NWFP (Charnley, Donoghue, Buttolph, Dillingham, Kay, McLain, Moseley, Phillips, Stuart, Sutton, Tobe) o Synthesis Report (Bormann, Barbour, Busch, Diaz, Haynes, Lee, Marcot, Martin, Molina, Raphael, Reeves, Spies) o Executive Summary Report · BLM-FS Publications: o Tribal (Crespin, Tamez, McConnell) o Compliance & Implementation (Baker, Ferguson, Hsin, Palmer, Tolle, Winkler) o Information Management (Palmer, Bingham, Morganti)
Follow Up Items Needing Further Discussion: As we move closer to completion of the report, the RIEC will need to be engaged in the following manner: 1. RIEC to provide feedback at August 26 meeting on Synthesis Report. 2. RIEC updates can be provided at October 5 RIEC and/or November 3 RIEC/IAC meetings. 3. Development of a communications plan for release of reports (Monitoring Program Managers/ Public Affairs Officers have lead on developing). 4. RIEC should discuss follow-up steps after completion of the 10-year report and how to fold in other related reports (such as FWS status reviews, NSO independent science review of the NSO monitoring program, "Gang of Four" report, Conservation Biology Special Edition on NWFP, etc.) (Cindy Miner [PNW] to provide proposal).
Action Required:		[ X ] "Information only" at this time. Decisions as outlined above will be needed later this summer.

Topic: FUTURE RESEARCH/MONITORING REPORTS
Presenters/Sponsors: Anne Badgley, (REO), Cindy Miner (PNW), and Anne Kinsinger (USGS)
REO Contact: Becky Gravenmier (PNW Rep.)
Issue Statement: The release of the Draft report "Status and Trends in Demography of Northern Spotted Owls" in May prompted much discussion among regional executives regarding issues of peer review, distribution and release of draft documents, and communication plans for future science and management reports associated with the NWFP. This briefing is intended to provide the RIEC with an update on the proposed release, peer review, and publication process for science led portions of the 2004 Monitoring Interpretive Report. This is an update on items that have been worked on since the last RIEC conference call regarding the release of reports.
Background: PNW Process Proposed for 2004 Monitoring Interpretive Report: Various science agencies have their own processes for quality control and quality assurance to ensure manuscripts have received adequate peer review and policy review before being published. These processes have become even more important over the past year due to external challenges of land management decisions based on requirements within the Federal Data Quality Act. As part of the NWFP 2004 Monitoring Interpretive Report, PNW Research Station will be publishing six individual general technical reports (GTRs) for the monitoring modules (northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, old-growth habitat, watershed condition, socio-economic, and tribal) and a synthesis GTR. There will be other documents that will be authored and published by the management agencies.
Analysis and Options: The PNW intends to implement the following quality assurance and quality control process for those portions of the NWFP 2004 Monitoring Interpretive Report that will be published as a PNW GTR. The process follows the general PNW publication policy with the exception of the external peer review. This policy was recently reviewed and reconciled with the Federal Data Quality Act. 1. PNW will ensure that draft manuscripts are reviewed by all participating authors. Manuscripts will be revised to address internal review comments. The Monitoring Program Managers (MPM) will be briefed on key findings. 2. PNW will ensure that manuscripts are sent to three or more technical experts for technical review. 3. PNW will perform a policy review of the revised manuscripts and reconciliation letters. 4. PNW will either contract or coordinate in-house an external peer review for each GTR. It has been requested that draft manuscripts be shared with the MPM. Manuscripts will be revised to address external peer review comments. 5. The final draft manuscripts will then be submitted to PNW for the final editing and publication process. The final GTR will be made available to the public on the PNW website at the same time the documents are sent to the printer.
Work in Progress: The following issues are currently being addressed by the MPM (lead) and other staffs: § What should be the internal review and awareness process before the manuscripts are published and peer reviewed (e.g., Mid-level managers, RIEC)? § How do we pay for contracted external peer reviews of the various GTRs? § What will be the peer review process for the management led publications? § When will we share these publications externally and how (communication plan)?
Action Required:	[ X ] Information Only at this time Decision

Topic: NWFP IMPLEMENTATION IMPROVEMENTS: Reports from RIEC Subcommittees
Presenter/Sponsor: Anne Badgley (REO)
Issue Statement: The RIEC has been evaluating potential implementation improvements to the North-west Forest Plan. Updates will be provided on several topics that are being addressed by various groups.
Background: In 2000, the RIEC identified three implementation areas to focus improvement efforts including: meeting timber harvest objectives, reducing costs, and streamlining procedures. In late 2003, several subcommittees were formed to work on a variety of implementation improvement strategies. These subcommittees have been reporting periodically, with some topics being discussed at length during RIEC and IAC meetings. During the March 10, 2004 RIEC/IAC meetings, subcommittee reports presented/discussed included: watershed analysis, riparian reserves, and programmatic consultations. Following is a complete list of the subcommittee topics.
Topic	Lead	Update for this meeting
Risk Management	Tom Quigley	No Update
Adaptive Management Areas	Anne Badgley	Written Update
AREMP 6^th & 7^th Field HUCs	Tom Quigley/Dave Powers	Written Update
Firewood gathering guidance	Anne Badgley	Written Update
Riparian Reserves	Mike Crouse	Written Update
Jack Ward Thomas	Kent Connaughton/Tom Quigley	Written Update
Watershed Analysis Recommendations	Jack Blackwell/Kent Connaughton	Oral Presentation (briefing document included in this package)
Programmatic Consultation	Mike Crouse	Oral Presentation (briefing document included in this package)
Native American Exception for Burning	Jack Blackwell/John Engbring	Incorporated in the Consultation presentation by R-5 (California) staff
Community Involvement	NA	For future discussion (No Updates)

Subcommittee Reports

Topic: ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT AREAS
Team Lead: Anne Badgley (REO)
Status: Team task completed. Decision made at the March 10, 2004 RIEC meeting. The RIEC acknowledged that the AMAs were not fulfilling expectations under the Plan. The RIEC decided to address key AMA issues through future planning efforts, such as scheduled plan revisions for BLM and FS, and site-specific plan amendments that could be undertaken for individual AMAs. The RIEC also agreed that BLM and FS would move forward by focusing their resources on three AMAs (previously identified as Central Cascades, Little River, and Hayfork). This approach provides opportunities to adapt and apply lessons learned to other AMAs, and it is consistent with actions under the recent AFRC Settlement Agreement.
Action Required:	[ X ] Information

Topic: AQUATIC RIPARIAN EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING PLAN (AREMP) PROTOCOL (6^th & 7^th Field HUCs)

Team Lead: Tom Quigley (PNW) and Dave Powers (EPA)

Status: The AREMP effectiveness monitoring protocol is in the process of being published as a general technical report (GTR) by the PNW Research Station. The RIEC issue was that the science document was being proposed as the publishing source for the monitoring strategy, including the policy decisions that underlie the strategy. A revised manuscript is now in review that more clearly separates policy calls from the monitoring options as outlined by science. PNW has drafted a letter to the RIEC that describes the edits to the AREMP GTR and suggests that RIEC prepare a memo for the record summarizing the AREMP monitoring protocol decision.

Action Required:

[ X ] Information

Topic: FIREWOOD GATHERING GUIDANCE

Team Lead: Anne Badgley (REO)

Status: Team task completed. USFS Region 5 had concerns about limitations on firewood gathering in late-successional reserves. This issue has been resolved by Region 5 staff.

Action Required:

[ X ] Information

Topic: RIPARIAN RESERVES

Team Lead: Mike Crouse (NOAA-Fisheries)

Issue Statement: The RIEC reviewed options to address two Riparian Reserve issues (activities within Riparian Reserves, and adjustments to RR widths) and agreed to provide an opportunity for Tribes and other IAC members to comment on these issues before making a final RIEC decision.

Background: At the March 10, 2004 RIEC and IAC meetings, the RIEC reviewed options to address two Riparian Reserve issues: activities within Riparian Reserves, and adjustments to Riparian Reserve widths. Tribal representatives requested an opportunity to provide written comments to the RIEC regarding these topics, and the RIEC agreed. David Herrera, Fisheries Director, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, volunteered to coordinate this effort. Other IAC members were also invited to send in their comments to the REO. Responses were requested by April 16, 2004. No IAC input has been received to date.

Action Required:

[ X ] Information

Topic: JACK WARD THOMAS REVIEW FOLLOW-UP

Team Lead: Tom Quigley (PNW) and Kent Connaughton (FS, R5)

Status: Ongoing. The Forest Service, Region 5 NWFP review of activities in California highlighted several topics and options for improvement of the NWFP. This review has generated discussions among the RIEC, IAC, agency staffs and others including the scientists involved with the original plan ("Gang of Four"). As the RIEC works through their current set of tasks to address various components of the NWFP, they will continue to meet and discuss options to improve the implementation of the NWFP. Results of the California review are being considered and discussed.

Action Required:

[ X ] Information

Topic: WATERSHED ANALYSIS

Team Lead: Jack Blackwell (FS)

Presenter: Dave Gibbons (FS)

Issue Statement: The RIEC agreed that FS Region 5 would prepare a draft memo for RIEC review and potential approval as regional policy clarifying development and use of Watershed Analysis recommendations.

Background: At the March 10, 2004 RIEC and IAC meetings, the RIEC discussed potential clarification regarding development and use of Watershed Analysis recommendations. The RIEC agreed that FS Region 5 would prepare a draft memo for RIEC review and potential approval as a regional policy clarification. The draft would be subject to broad review by REO and other key agency staff, and it would be reviewed in the context of the upcoming Record of Decision to clarify aquatic conservation strategy language. The RIEC agreed to provide an opportunity for IAC review prior to a final RIEC decision.

Action Required:

[ X ] Information

Topic: ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMMATIC ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SECTION 7 CONSULTATIONS ON FEDERAL LANDS IN OREGON, WASHINGTON, AND IDAHO

Team Lead/Presenter: Mike Crouse (NOAA-Fisheries)

Issue Statement: The RIEC, Interior Columbia Basin Deputy Team, and Interagency Regional Executives expressed an interest in developing a better understanding of what opportunities exist to expand existing or create new programmatic consultations on Federal lands. While the RIEC initiated the request, the Interagency Regional Executives (USFS Regions 1, 4, and 6; BLM Oregon/Washington and Idaho; NOAA-Fisheries; and Fish and Wildlife Service) signed a December 18, 2003 letter formalizing this assignment and expanding its scope to include eastside Federal lands.

Background: The Interagency Coordinators Subgroup established by the Interagency Regional Executives has been leading a team to better understand the nature and extent of already-issued programmatic Section 7 consultations to determine what, if any, opportunities exist to expand or create new programmatic consultations that would increase permitting and Section 7 consultation efficiencies. The team compiled a comprehensive table of existing programmatic consultations and prepared GIS maps depicting National Forests and BLM units with and without programmatic consultations. The team also considered expansion opportunities as well as a list of pros and cons for regional interagency leadership to consider.

Analysis and Options: The RIEC will be presented with a complete assessment of the programmatic consultations issued by NOAA-Fisheries and Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition the RIEC will be asked to consider the development of a new or expanded programmatic consultation focusing on instream fish habitat restoration actions. Benefits and trade-offs will be described. Opportunities and trade-offs in developing or expanding programmatic consultations for land management programs other than instream fish habitat restoration will also be discussed. Feedback/guidance from the RIEC, on how much, if any, additional effort should be invested in further analysis and development will be used to develop options for presentations at the July 21, 2004, RIEC meeting.

Organizational/Funding Implications: Additional or modified programmatic consultations could increase action and consulting agency workloads.

Action Required:

[ ] Information [ X ] Decision

Topic: NATIVE AMERICAN EXCEPTION FOR BURNING
Team Lead: Jack Blackwell (FS, Region 5) and John Engbring (FWS, California)
Status: USFS Region 5 was interested in facilitating the burning of areas within the Forest Plan area to provide fire-successional plants traditionally used by Native American tribes. This issue will be incorporated in the report regarding programmatic consultations.
Action Required:	[ X ] Information

Topic: FUTURE MEETINGS TOPICS/PROCESSES

Presenter/Sponsor: Anne Badgley, Executive Director

REO Contact: This presentation will provide an overview of upcoming meetings, potential topics, logistics, and propose a meeting calendar for 2005.

Issue Statement: Topics, Analysis, Options, and Actions:

JULY IAC MEETING: [Decision needed] We have planned a field trip for the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (IAC) on July 20 with a follow-up meeting on July 21 at the Florence Convention Center. Travel information including room blocks, per diem rates, etc. will be sent to you shortly. The IAC meeting will be wrapping up around 12 noon. RIEC members will be asked to decide if they would like to take some time after the IAC meeting to have a short RIEC lunch meeting.

OCTOBER PREVIEW: [informational] A brief overview of potential topics for the October RIEC meeting will be presented. Additional suggestions and feedback on priorities are always welcome.

JANUARY 2005 PROPOSAL: [Decision needed] This proposal involves holding a two-day off-site meeting in January. The purpose of this meeting is to provide executives an opportunity to reflect on recent information (monitoring reports, status review, listing decisions, etc.) and discuss a future vision for the Forest Plan area.

2005 PROPOSED CALENDAR: [Decision needed] Each year the REO develops a proposed meeting calendar for executives to consider. This year there are two alternatives to choose from. Committee members will be asked for ‘fatal flaws’ in the dates and if it would be possible to select one of these alternatives. In both alternatives, we attempted to create more of a "one-month-on/one-month-off pattern" which should facilitate timely discussions while minimizing the number of conference calls or other meetings.

Alternative 1 – Stacked Meetings

This calendar is similar to previous years with the time for RIEC meetings fluctuating from two hours to a full day. IAC meetings are stacked on the same day as an early RIEC meeting.

Meeting Type	Estimated Time	Date - 2005
RIEC	8 a.m. - 4 p.m.	January 25 (Tuesday)
RIEC Optional Conference Call	1.5 hours	February
RIEC/IAC – field trip	8 a.m. – 4:30 p.m.	March 16 (Wednesday) March 17 (Thursday)
RIEC	8 a.m. – 4 p.m.	May 17 (Tuesday)
RIEC Optional Conference Call	1.5 hours	Late June
RIEC/IAC – field trip	12 noon - 4 p.m. 8 a.m. – 4 p.m.	August 16 (Tuesday) August 17 (Wednesday)
RIEC	8 a.m. - 4 p.m.	October 18 (Tuesday)
RIEC/IAC	8 a.m. – 4:30 p.m.	November 16 (Wednesday)

Alternative 2 – Sequential Meetings

RIEC and IAC meetings are scheduled on sequential days. The goal is to provide sufficient time for RIEC discussions prior to the IAC meetings, to increase participation throughout the entire meeting, and reduce travel conflicts.

Meeting Type	Estimated Time	Date - 2005
RIEC (Regular meeting; optional subcommittee work session)	8 a.m. - 12 noon; 1 - 3 p.m.	January 25 (Tuesday)
RIEC (Breakfast meeting/Regular meeting; optional subcommittee work session)	8 a.m. - 2 p.m.; 2 – 3 p.m.	March 15 (Tuesday)
IAC – Field trip	8:30 a.m. - 3 p.m.	March 16 (Wednesday) March 17 (Thursday)
RIEC (Regular meeting; optional subcommittee work session)	8 a.m. - 12 noon; 1 - 3 p.m.	May 17 (Tuesday)
RIEC Optional Conference Call		Late June
RIEC (Breakfast meeting/Regular meeting; optional subcommittee work session)	8 a.m. - 2 p.m.; 2 – 3 p.m.	August 16 (Tuesday)
IAC - field trip	8 a.m. - 4 p.m.	August 17 (Wednesday)
RIEC (Regular meeting; optional subcommittee work session)	8 a.m. - 12 noon; 1 - 3 p.m.	October 18 (Tuesday)
RIEC (Breakfast meeting/Regular meeting; optional subcommittee work session)	8 a.m. - 2 p.m.; 2 – 3 p.m.	November 15 (Tuesday)
IAC	8:30 a.m. - 3 p.m.	November 16 (Wednesday)

STATUS REPORT

Topic: Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership

REO Contact: Teresa Kubo, EPA

Background: In 2000, the RIEC asked Aquatic and Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program (AREMP) staff to explore the possibility of developing a monitoring partnership with Washington, Oregon, and California agencies. This resulted in an ad hoc group of State and Federal natural resource and watershed specialists meeting since November 2001 to discuss how to coordinate/integrate their different watershed condition monitoring efforts. This group, now known as the "Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership" (PNAMP) was first introduced to the RIEC in August 2003. Since that time, PNAMP has expanded its membership to include a wide range of organizations – State, Federal, and Tribal, with a common interest in coordinating watershed condition, fish population, and effectiveness monitoring efforts.

Current Status: PNAMP is to be credited with a number of accomplishments to date:

Relationship Building

· Strengthened relationships between State and Federal agencies involved with monitoring watershed conditions in the Pacific Northwest.

· Identified major areas to improve integration of monitoring programs.

· Expanded coordination efforts to include other agencies and Tribes interested in monitoring aquatic systems.

Work Products (available from Jennifer Bayer at 509-538-2299 ext. 273, or jennifer_bayer@usgs.gov):

· Charter and business practices documents (drafts expected early June 2004). The intent of the Charter is to formalize the agreement among Federal, State, and Tribal entities to participate in the coordination of scientific monitoring programs through PNAMP. The business practices document will provide a more detailed explanation of the operation and administration of PNAMP.

· Strategy document (draft expected July 2004). To facilitate the higher level of coordination this will require, PNAMP drafted a coordination plan for monitoring in the Pacific Northwest, "Recommendations for Coordinating State, Federal, and Tribal Watershed and Salmon Monitoring Programs in the Pacific Northwest" (PNAMP 2004). PNAMP intends to complete work on its coordination plan, by fashioning a forward-looking, strategic monitoring framework titled, "Strategy for Monitoring Watershed Health and Salmon Recovery in the Pacific Northwest." This strategy builds upon the recommendations set forth in the 2004 plan and forms the basis of a coordinated regional approach to fish and watershed health monitoring. The purpose of this strategy is to provide a cost-effective regional approach to monitoring to be considered for adoption and implementation by the appropriate Federal, State, and Tribal governments involved in the region.

· Technical product completed (at the request of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council): "Technical Guidance for Subbasin Planners" (May 2004). PNAMP developed guidance to help subbasin planners design the monitoring elements of the subbasin plans being developed under the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program. The guidance document provides general and some specific considerations to the Council and subbasin planners on how their monitoring can fit within the broad range of monitoring activities in the Pacific Northwest.

· FY2004 Budget support secured. Coordination function (Coordinator and administrative assistant) supported financially through FY2004. Funding has been received from the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, the Washington’s Office of the Interagency Committee, Bonneville Power Administration, NOAA-Fisheries, and Bureau of Reclamation to fulfill needs through FY2004. Coordinator hired (Jennifer Bayer, US Geological Survey) May 2004.

· FY2005 Budget and Work Plan (drafts expected by July 1, 2004) - PNAMP Coordinator Jen Bayer, and other members, have been briefing the regional executive groups regarding PNAMP funding request for permanent positions for a coordinator and administrative assistant. Examples of the groups briefed to date are the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, the Washington Salmon Recovery Funding Board, and the Federal Caucus. PNAMP is also seeking direct fiscal support and confirmation of in-kind support for FY2005.

· Workgroup planning documents (drafts expected June 2004).

Next Steps: In June 2004, PNAMP will begin to seek confirmation of support from State, Federal, and Tribal agencies via signature to the PNAMP Charter. PNAMP Steering Committee members will facilitate interaction between their respective agencies and PNAMP regarding review, modifications, and signature process.

Topic: AQUATIC RIPARIAN EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING PLAN (AREMP) PROTOCOL (6^th & 7^th Field HUCs)
Team Lead: Tom Quigley (PNW) and Dave Powers (EPA)
Status: The AREMP effectiveness monitoring protocol is in the process of being published as a general technical report (GTR) by the PNW Research Station. The RIEC issue was that the science document was being proposed as the publishing source for the monitoring strategy, including the policy decisions that underlie the strategy. A revised manuscript is now in review that more clearly separates policy calls from the monitoring options as outlined by science. PNW has drafted a letter to the RIEC that describes the edits to the AREMP GTR and suggests that RIEC prepare a memo for the record summarizing the AREMP monitoring protocol decision.
Action Required:	[ X ] Information

Topic: FIREWOOD GATHERING GUIDANCE
Team Lead: Anne Badgley (REO)
Status: Team task completed. USFS Region 5 had concerns about limitations on firewood gathering in late-successional reserves. This issue has been resolved by Region 5 staff.
Action Required:	[ X ] Information

Topic: RIPARIAN RESERVES
Team Lead: Mike Crouse (NOAA-Fisheries)
Issue Statement: The RIEC reviewed options to address two Riparian Reserve issues (activities within Riparian Reserves, and adjustments to RR widths) and agreed to provide an opportunity for Tribes and other IAC members to comment on these issues before making a final RIEC decision.
Background: At the March 10, 2004 RIEC and IAC meetings, the RIEC reviewed options to address two Riparian Reserve issues: activities within Riparian Reserves, and adjustments to Riparian Reserve widths. Tribal representatives requested an opportunity to provide written comments to the RIEC regarding these topics, and the RIEC agreed. David Herrera, Fisheries Director, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, volunteered to coordinate this effort. Other IAC members were also invited to send in their comments to the REO. Responses were requested by April 16, 2004. No IAC input has been received to date.
Action Required:	[ X ] Information

Topic: JACK WARD THOMAS REVIEW FOLLOW-UP
Team Lead: Tom Quigley (PNW) and Kent Connaughton (FS, R5)
Status: Ongoing. The Forest Service, Region 5 NWFP review of activities in California highlighted several topics and options for improvement of the NWFP. This review has generated discussions among the RIEC, IAC, agency staffs and others including the scientists involved with the original plan ("Gang of Four"). As the RIEC works through their current set of tasks to address various components of the NWFP, they will continue to meet and discuss options to improve the implementation of the NWFP. Results of the California review are being considered and discussed.
Action Required:	[ X ] Information

Topic: WATERSHED ANALYSIS
Team Lead: Jack Blackwell (FS)
Presenter: Dave Gibbons (FS)
Issue Statement: The RIEC agreed that FS Region 5 would prepare a draft memo for RIEC review and potential approval as regional policy clarifying development and use of Watershed Analysis recommendations.
Background: At the March 10, 2004 RIEC and IAC meetings, the RIEC discussed potential clarification regarding development and use of Watershed Analysis recommendations. The RIEC agreed that FS Region 5 would prepare a draft memo for RIEC review and potential approval as a regional policy clarification. The draft would be subject to broad review by REO and other key agency staff, and it would be reviewed in the context of the upcoming Record of Decision to clarify aquatic conservation strategy language. The RIEC agreed to provide an opportunity for IAC review prior to a final RIEC decision.
Action Required:	[ X ] Information

Topic: ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMMATIC ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SECTION 7 CONSULTATIONS ON FEDERAL LANDS IN OREGON, WASHINGTON, AND IDAHO
Team Lead/Presenter: Mike Crouse (NOAA-Fisheries)
Issue Statement: The RIEC, Interior Columbia Basin Deputy Team, and Interagency Regional Executives expressed an interest in developing a better understanding of what opportunities exist to expand existing or create new programmatic consultations on Federal lands. While the RIEC initiated the request, the Interagency Regional Executives (USFS Regions 1, 4, and 6; BLM Oregon/Washington and Idaho; NOAA-Fisheries; and Fish and Wildlife Service) signed a December 18, 2003 letter formalizing this assignment and expanding its scope to include eastside Federal lands.
Background: The Interagency Coordinators Subgroup established by the Interagency Regional Executives has been leading a team to better understand the nature and extent of already-issued programmatic Section 7 consultations to determine what, if any, opportunities exist to expand or create new programmatic consultations that would increase permitting and Section 7 consultation efficiencies. The team compiled a comprehensive table of existing programmatic consultations and prepared GIS maps depicting National Forests and BLM units with and without programmatic consultations. The team also considered expansion opportunities as well as a list of pros and cons for regional interagency leadership to consider.
Analysis and Options: The RIEC will be presented with a complete assessment of the programmatic consultations issued by NOAA-Fisheries and Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition the RIEC will be asked to consider the development of a new or expanded programmatic consultation focusing on instream fish habitat restoration actions. Benefits and trade-offs will be described. Opportunities and trade-offs in developing or expanding programmatic consultations for land management programs other than instream fish habitat restoration will also be discussed. Feedback/guidance from the RIEC, on how much, if any, additional effort should be invested in further analysis and development will be used to develop options for presentations at the July 21, 2004, RIEC meeting.
Organizational/Funding Implications: Additional or modified programmatic consultations could increase action and consulting agency workloads.
Action Required:	[ ] Information [ X ] Decision