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 25, 2004

To:

Regional Interagency Executive Committee (see attached distribution list)

From:

/s/Anne Badgley, Executive Director

Subject:

REGIONAL INTERAGENCY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES – June 8, 2004

Enclosed please find notes for the June 8, 2004 Regional Interagency Executive Committee (RIEC) meeting. Primary topics discussed at the meeting included:

Summary notes for these topics have been attached for your information.

Our next meeting is scheduled for July 20-21, 2004 in Florence, Oregon. Additional information regarding the field trip, Intergovernmental Advisory Committee meeting, and the short RIEC lunch meeting will be sent to you in the next week or so.

I look forward to seeing you at the next meeting. 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 Meeting Notes (7p)

cc: Presenters, REO Staff, & PAC DFOs

1961/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 Research Station, Forest Service
Cindi West, Pacific Northwest Research 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 Research Station, Forest Service
Garland Mason, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service (Alt)

ISSUE SUMMARIES

Topic: 10-YEAR MONITORING REPORT UPDATE

REO Contact: Dave Busch (USGS-BRD Rep.)

Issue Statement: Monitoring Program Lead, Jon Martin, made a presentation providing a program overview, a review of the status of the 10-year report, and some preliminary findings. The 10-year monitoring report on the effectiveness of the NWFP is the first comprehensive analysis of monitoring data and research results since 1994. 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.

Summary of Discussion:

  • There was considerable interest in how management agencies and executives would interface with the publication and review process being coordinated by PNW. At the appropriate time, executives would like to be briefed by scientists and module leads on the findings of each module
  • Several representatives expressed an interest in assuring that the scientific review process was broadly-based and that there was a clear understanding about when and how information would be released
  • Several comments dealt with the monitoring of aquatic systems and biota, including how restoration projects are being monitored; NOAA-Fisheries’ update of ESUs (Evolutionary Significant Unit) may be a source of new scientific information for aquatic monitoring
  • Some issues associated with monitoring and classification of vegetation could impact module report findings and timing of report production. The executives have been aware of a variety of issues associated with mapping and may have to prioritize resolution of such issues
  • Interest was expressed in forming a RIEC subcommittee to interface with the monitoring program.

Next Steps (who/what/when):

  • An August 26, 2004 briefing has been scheduled for RIEC members regarding the preliminary monitoring report findings. The REO Executive Director will continue to work with the Interagency Monitoring Program and MPM to schedule additional briefings for the RIEC and IAC. Major findings will probably not be available until late fall of 2004.
  • Forest Service, Region 6 is leading a process to develop a communication plan for the 10-year report that will deal with communication external to the scientific publication process and will also incorporate provisions for briefing agency headquarters offices.
  • REO will work with the Monitoring Program to develop a future RIEC agenda item dealing with the monitoring of aquatic/riparian systems.
  • Within two weeks, the Monitoring Program will report through the MPM on how issues associated with vegetation monitoring will affect 10-year report production and findings.

 

Topic: FUTURE RESEARCH/MONITORING REPORTS

Presenters/Sponsors: Anne Badgley, (REO), Cindy West (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.

Background: PNW Process Proposed for 2004 Monitoring Interpretive Report: Various science agencies have their own processes for quality control and quality assurance to ensure science 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 seven individual general technical reports (GTRs) for the monitoring modules (northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, old-growth habitat, watershed condition, socio-economic, and executive summary) and a synthesis GTR. There will be other documents that will be authored and published by the management agencies.

Discussion:
Description of PNW process for GTRs: Cindi West (Associate Station Director, PNW) presented the proposed quality assurance and quality control process and release policy for the manuscripts that would be published by PNW Station. The PNW proposed process would follow the general PNW publication policy with the exception of the addition of an external peer review that was added due to the significance of the report content and concerns with the Federal Data Quality Act.

Review process for other monitoring reports: Anne Kinsinger (USGS- BRD) discussed general similarities in the various research agencies policies for peer review and release of science findings. Anne suggested that the other management led publications receive a similar level of review prior to being released. Anne suggested that the research agencies could provide some advice to the management agencies regarding review of the three other monitoring reports. Anne also offered to facilitate a dialogue among the research executives on how federal research agencies could better coordinate and support each other with scientific reviews.

Decisions:

  • In discussing the release of the 04 Interpretative Reports, the RIEC members wanted to ensure that they were informed about the timeline for release of documents and that there were no surprises. There was concern that the draft manuscripts should not be shared with the Monitoring Program Managers (MPMs) prior to completion of the technical and external peer review process, but some indications that the MPMs could help to facilitate technical review. RIEC did not want the appearance of management inappropriately influencing the science process. However, RIEC would like to have periodic briefings on report findings and issues as the manuscripts are being developed and finalized.
  • The Research Executives were requested to revise the proposed peer review and release process for the 04 Interpretive Reports to be published by PNW, and present the process in the form of a document that the RIEC and non-agency authors could agree to.  The Regional Research Executives also suggested that the RIEC consider a comparable review of the three management reports. (Monitoring program lead, Jon Martin, will draft a proposed review process for these three documents.)
  • The Public Affairs officers/RIEC Communications Subcommittee are working on the communications plan for the release and sharing of the 2004 Interpretive Reports. A draft plan will be completed by July 27, 2004.
  • RIEC requested periodic briefings on the timeline for the release of the 2004 Interpretative Reports, report findings, and issues as the manuscripts are being developed and finalized.
  • The Research Executives will continue dialogue on the Data Quality Act and peer review procedures, and look for opportunities to share experts and develop joint sources for external peer reviews ideas and expertise. The Research agencies will share information with one another about their respective data management, scientific review and report release policies to ensure strong collaboration on products for the RIEC.
    •

Action Required:

  • PNW will be sending the RIEC a letter that clarifies PNW’s intended peer review process for the 2004 Interpretive reports to be published by PNW.
    •
  • The Monitoring Program lead, Jon Martin, will review the research agencies’ procedures for peer review and release and develop a recommendation for a review process for the other reports to be published by the management agencies.
  • The Public Affairs officers/RIEC Communications Subcommittee will complete a draft communications plan for the release and sharing of the 2004 Interpretive Reports by July 27, 2004.
  • Monitoring Program lead, Jon Martin will provide a list of GTR titles and Chapters, authors and affiliations to the RIEC.

 

Topic: Litigation Update

Presenter: Roger Nesbitt (Solicitors Office, Pacific Northwest Region, Department of the Interior, Portland, Oregon)

REO Contact: Jay Watson (FWS Rep.)

Issue Statement: Roger provided an overview of current litigation involving several Northwest Forest Plan programs and projects.

Summary of Discussion:
  1. Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, et al. vs. USDI and USDA (U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington [Civil No. CV4 844P]) concerns the decision to remove Survey and Manage from NWFP. Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, National Forest Management Act, Forest Land Management Act, and Endangered Species Act, have been challenged.
  2. Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations et al. vs. NMFS, FWS, USDI and USDA (submitted May 27, 2004, to U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington). The plaintiffs are challenging the agencies for "...failing to assess the ability to protect aquatic species’ viability without the requirement that each project must be consistent with the ACS [aquatic conservation strategy] objectives... impacts of the ACS amendment... scientific disagreement... reasonable range of alternatives... cumulative... effects..."
  3. Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center et al. vs. BLM (U.S. District Court, District Court of Oregon [Civil No. 03-3124-CO]). The plaintiffs are challenging BLM’s Cotton Snake (Medford District) and Cow Catcher (Roseburg District) timber sales concerning Survey and Manage requirements.
  4. Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center, et al. vs. BLM (U.S. District Court, District of Oregon [Civil No. 03-3006-CO]). The plaintiffs are challenging BLM concerning the Pickett Snake Timber Sale (Medford District) and changes to NWFP’s Aquatic Conservation Strategy.

Hot Topic

Topic: ANALYTICAL PROCESS DEVELOPMENT

REO Contact: Steve Morris (NOAA-Fisheries Rep.)

Issue Statement: Development of an analytical process (AP) for ESA consultations on actions affecting listed fish species within the NWFP area.

Summary of Discussion: Michael Tehan (NOAA-Fisheries) provided background and discussion of the issue, including completion of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) amendment (clarifying ACS consistency and scale issues), and NOAA-Fisheries and FWS Biological Opinions removing requirements for consistency with ACS objectives at the project level. He then discussed AP workgroup activities including development and pilot testing of the AP.

Next Steps (who/what/when): The next draft of the AP will be completed in early July, and Michael emphasized the need for an implementation strategy. The IMIRG will be discussing this at its next meeting on June 15, 2004.

 

NWFP Implementation Improvements Subcommittee Reports

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.

Summary of Discussion: At the March 10, 2004 RIEC/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 would be reviewed in the context of the upcoming Record of Decision to clarify aquatic conservation strategy language. The RIEC also agreed to provide an opportunity for IAC review prior to a final RIEC decision. At the June 8, 2004 RIEC meeting, Dave Gibbons reported that the Forest Service Region 5 is continuing review of the Federal Guide for Watershed Analysis and several court cases in preparation for completing a guidance letter.

Topic: PROGRAMMATIC CONSULTATIONS

Team Lead: Mike Crouse

REO Contact: Steve Morris (NOAA-Fisheries Rep)

Issue Statement: Review of existing programmatic consultations within the Northwest region and evaluation of potential for expanding this approach to ESA section 7 consultations between NMFS and FWS and the Forest Service and BLM.

Summary of Discussion: Russ Strach (NOAA-Fisheries) provided a discussion of workgroup activities to date, including the review of existing programmatic consultations (LRMP-level, program-level, and batched project-level consultation). This review reveals that Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has 109 and NOAA-Fisheries has 64 programmatic consultations currently active. The majority of FWS programmatics are batched project-level consultations, whereas NOAA-Fisheries has completed more program-level consultations. Russ also discussed the methodology whereby selections for inclusion in the database were made, how the utility of expanding consultations was assessed, and the pros and cons of expanding programmatic consultations (both by subject, and by geographical area/administrative unit).

Next Steps (who/what/when): This subject will be discussed again at the July 9, Eastside Executives meeting.

Topic: PROGRAMMATIC CONSULTATION SUBCOMMITTEE, NWFP IMPLEMENTATION IMPROVEMENTS

Team Lead: Jack Blackwell (FS)

Presenter: Paul Roush

Issue Statement/Background: The RIEC has been evaluating implementation improvements to the Northwest Forest Plan. At the March 10, 2004 RIEC and IAC meetings, the RIEC discussed potential clarification regarding Endangered Species Act (ESA) Programmatic Consultations.

Next Steps (who/what/when): At the June 8, 2004 RIEC meeting, Paul Roush, BLM California, reported the interagency executives met May 11th and narrowed the list of possible implementation improvements and agreed to form a chartered subgroup of agency managers to meet several times a year and at least once a year with the agency executives. This group will define roles and issues with the intent of improving interagency implementation. The charter is currently under final review by the California executives.

Topic: FUTURE MEETINGS TOPICS AND PROCESSES

REO Contact: Anne Badgley, REO Executive Director

Issue Statement: RIEC members were provided an opportunity to discuss the 2005 meeting schedule, logistics, and topics. In particular, RIEC members were asked to identify their preferred schedule and if there were any fatal flaws in the overall schedule.

Summary of Discussion/Decisions: The RIEC made several decisions during this discussion, including:

  • The RIEC is willing to meet on July 21 for a short time after the IAC meeting in Florence, Oregon.
  • The RIEC will evaluate the success of the July 20-21, 2004 field trip and determine if additional field trips will be scheduled. Generally, there was support for one field trip per year where the field trip would directly enhance the discussion and understanding of the committee.
  • Several topics were identified for future meetings.
  • RIEC members determined that January would be too soon to hold an offsite meeting as proposed and suggested that March may be a better time. The REO will continue polling members to determine when the optimum date might be.
  • The RIEC would adopt the following proposed meeting schedule for 2005. Further refinement in dates, times, and locations is expected. The major shift involves a conference call prior to each of the IAC meetings.

Next Steps:

  • Up-to-date meeting information is typically posted on the REO Web page for your convenience (see www.reo.gov for additional details).
  • A new process for evaluating meetings was tested (in meeting questionnaire). Thank you to all who participated. We received valuable information on how to make the meetings function better and will be looking at how we might incorporate these suggestions.

Revised RIEC/IAC 2005 Calendar

Group

Estimated Time

Date - 2005

Location/Meeting Type

RIEC

8 a.m. - 4 p.m.

January 25 (Tuesday)

Portland

RIEC

9 a.m. – 11 a.m.

February 15* (Tuesday)

Conference Call

RIEC

IAC

8 a.m. – 4 p.m.

8 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.

March 16 (Wednesday)
March 17 (Thursday)

California Field Trip and meeting

RIEC

8 a.m. – 4 p.m.

May 10 (Tuesday)

Portland

RIEC

9 a.m. – 11 a.m.

July 28 (Thursday)

Conference Call

IAC

8 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.

August 17 (Wednesday)

TBA/Meeting

RIEC

8 a.m. - 4 p.m.

October 18 (Tuesday)

Portland

RIEC

9 a.m. – 11 a.m.

November 2 (Wednesday)

Conference Call

IAC

8 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.

November 16 (Wednesday)

TBA/Meeting

*Corrected after the fact.

Attendance:

Kathy Anderson (FS, CA)

Joan Hagar (USGS-FRESC)

Debbie Pietrzak (BLM/REO)

Anne Badgley (REO)

Laurie Lee Jenkins (NPS/REO)

Dave Powers (EPA)

Elaine Brong (BLM)

Anne Kinsinger (USGS-BRD)

Dave Renwald (BIA)

Miles Brown (BLM)

Heidi Krouse (REO student)

Paul Roush (BLM)

Dave Busch (USGS/REO)

Teresa Kubo (EPA/REO)

Carol Schuler (USGS-FRESC)

Kath Collier (REO)

Claire Lavendel (FS)

Russ Strach (NOAA-Fisheries)

Mike Crouse (NMFS)

Curt Loop (USACE)

Chris Strebig (BLM)

John Engbring (FWS)

George Lottritz (FS) (phone)

Mike Tehan (NOAA-Fisheries)

Dave Gibbons (FS, CA)

Shawne Mohoric (FS)

Jay Watson (FWS/REO)

Linda Goodman (FS)

Steve Morris (NOAA/REO)

Dave Wesley (FWS)

Diane Guidry (NRCS)

Roger Nesbitt (Solicitor’s Office)

Cindi West (PNW)

Becky Gravenmier (PNW/REO)

Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta (EPA) (phone)

Rory Westberg (NPS)

 

Handouts:

- Contact Lists: IAC, RIEC (with Alternates), and Regional Ecosystem Office
- Revised RIEC Agenda
- "Assessment of Programmatic Consultations in Oregon, Washington and Idaho" (Powerpoint slides)
- Extra copy of the prework
- FS memorandum - "Effectiveness Monitoring for the Aquatic and Riparian Component of the Northwest Forest Plan: Conceptual Framework and Options"
- "Interagency Regional Monitoring of the Northwest Forest Plan" (Powerpoint slides)
- FS/NOAA/BLM/FWS memorandum – "Update/Amendment to the January 24, 2003 ICS Memo #1 titled: Improving the Effectiveness of Endangered Species Act Implementation"
- Northwest Forest Plan Meeting Evaluation Questionnaire