RIEC Decision Index 2004-Current

2004-Current | 2003-2002 | 2001 | Meeting Agendas and Notes

August-September, 2008 (To Be Scheduled)

March, 2008

• Topic:  No decisions

August, 2007

• Topic: Fire-prone Systems subcommittee - This subcommittee was directed to focus on the habitat risk model. The budget and riparian reserve tasks (also assigned to this subcommittee) were dropped given higher priority work.

February, 2007

• Topic: Summary of Decisions (restatement of decisions from the December meeting).
• Topic: RIEC and REO Review and Coordination Requirements
  • No changes to LSR review responsibilities, interpretation of standards and guidelines, and review and coordination associated with plan revisions.
  • Use new review process for reviewing changes to Standards and Guidelines, land allocations, and other plan amendments.
  • Delegate additional Survey and Manage Responsibilities to the RIEC Survey and Manage Subcommittee.
• Topic: Senior Manager's Group (SMG) Organizational Concepts
  • Meeting logistics, operation, membership, and role.
• Topic: Provincial Advisory Committees (PACs)
  • The RIEC decided to re-charter some PACs and not to re-charter others based on poll.
• Topic:  Regional Ecosystem Office (REO)
  • Additional logistical suggestions made regarding the REO transition to a virtual organization.
• Topic: Northwest Natural Resources Forum
  • Meeting logistics, criteria, attendance, topics, etc.

December 1, 2006 (REO #2244)

• Topic:  RIEC Meeting Logistics
  • One annual all-RIEC Meeting, with agenda being driven by RIEC members and process led by RIEC Chair agency. No other regularly schedule RIEC meetings.
  • Communicate decisions re: the expanded role of the Senior Manager's Group (SMG).
  • Additional RIEC meetings can be requested by the SMG, RIEC agencies, and other subgroups with delegated responsibility.  Requests should be sent to the RIEC Chair.
  • Rework interagency MOU to reflect these decisions.
• Topic: Future of the IAC
  • Do not renew IAC Charter in 2007
  • Develop options for future nonfederal involvement on Northwest Forest Plan issues.
  • Discuss options with IAC members in advance of and at next IAC meeting
• Topic:  Future of the PAC/PAC
  • No final decisions made.

August 16, 2006

• Topic:  Litigation Update:
  • RIEC members agreed to foster more communication among agency attorneys and litigation coordinators to improve litigation support. Anne Badgley will compile a list of agency litigation contacts and inform them of the RIEC’s interest in improving communications, after which Sue Zike will make an initial contact to assess opportunities for coordination. (If additional management support is needed, Anne can engage the Senior Managers’ Group on this topic.)
• Topic:  Adaptive Management and Monitoring Subcommittee Report
  • Suggestions for revisions to monitoring protocols will be coordinated through the Senior Managers Group.
• Topic: Examining the RIEC/IAC Future Structure
  • The RIEC will utilize an outside party to facilitate a discussion that will focus on the future structure of the RIEC, IAC, PIECs, PACs, and REO. Linda Goodman (FS, R6) and Mike Crouse (NOAA-Fisheries) will assist Anne Badgely in interviewing and selecting a facilitator for this process. Possible sources for facilitation include the Oregon Consensus Institute and the National Policy Consensus Center.

March 17, 2006

• Topic: General Decisions:

  • The RIEC agreed to a set of priority questions that will guide NWFP regional monitoring and research investments over the next decade.

  • The RIEC decided on NWFP monitoring options to pursue for priority questions including annual cost ceilings.

• Topic: Current monitoring protocols will need to be revisited in light of decisions regarding direction for monitoring of priority questions for the NWFP area. Decisions regarding monitoring options are outlined below.

  • What is the status and trend of watershed condition? (M-5)

    Option C – Watershed stream reach sampling with data integrated within a GIS decision support model. Additional direction: (1) Determine cost to transition PacFish/InFish Biological Opinion (PIBO) monitoring protocol to GIS framework. Want proof of concept on integrating PIBO and the Aquatic Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program (AREMP) data within GIS decision model framework; (2) Suggest revisions for protocols and design for program; and (3) Senior Managers Group (SMG) to revisit decisions after additional information is available.

    What is the status and trend of NSO habitat ? (MR-2)

    Option A – Complete range wide habitat in-growth & loss every 10 years on Federal lands. Update habitat loss and change detection every 5 years. Additional direction: Explore how to estimate change in habitat due to losses from fire annually. The FS Remote Sensing Application Center (RSAC) is investigating this.

    Did we accomplish planned activities and comply with standards and guides? (M-1)

    Option A – Develop recommendations & options for protocols to standardize BLM/ FS annual reporting and mapping of ground disturbing activities including standards, elements to be tracked and costs. Additional direction: Consider including compliance for each mapped activity in database.

    What is the status and trend of late-successional old-growth? (M-3)

    Option B – Revise protocol to implement Interagency Mapping & Assessment Process (IMAP) program for Oregon, Washington, and California.

    What is the status and trend of NSO populations? (M-11)

    Option D – Continue current demography studies while evaluating a population survey approach (Option C). Complete transition plan (include options for strata and costs), pilot to test protocol, and peer review in Year 1. Additional direction: Goal is to complete transition in Year 2 to population survey approach, provided that the evaluation shows that the approach is cost effective and satisfies requirements for NSO population monitoring. Review transition plan at end of Year 1; consider peer review and pilot test results. In Year 2, make final decision regarding population survey approach and continuation of demographic studies.

    What is the status and trend of MAMU habitat & populations? (M-4)

    Option 1A – Continue current monitoring of populations and habitats for one year to complete data needed for power analysis, then re-evaluate to consider status of murrelet and other survey options.

    What is the status and trend of socioeconomic well being? (MR-3)

    Option A – Periodic regional analysis of existing data (e.g., 10-year census) Additional direction: Suggest process and options with cost estimates.

    What is the status and trend of government-to-government consultation? (M-8)
    Option: Waiting for Interagency Tribal Monitoring Task Group (TMTG) to develop options and recommendations for RIEC consideration. The TMTG to report out by mid-April. This question will encompass other tribal related questions (e.g., M-9: Do American Indians have access to and use of forest species, resources, and places important for cultural, subsidence or economic reasons, particularly those identified in treaties? MR-8: Are sites of religious and cultural heritage being adequately protected? M-10: What is the status of trust resources identified in treaties with American Indians?).

January 24, 2006

• Topic: Adaptive Management and Monitoring Subcommittee Activity Report

(1) RIEC and staff were asked to provide input to John Laurence by February 14, 2006 on the draft Adaptive Management Framework concept paper.

(2) The RIEC was asked to review the priority questions package, in preparation for the March RIEC meeting (yet to be scheduled), to:

• Recommend which priority questions would become the "short" list of regional priority questions to guide future adaptive management & monitoring activities.
• Determine which monitoring topics (Table 1) to invest in and the general option to pursue from their agency perspective. Staff would then complete additional work to identify potential monitoring protocols, costs and options and bring that back to RIEC for final decisions. Agencies should be prepared to discuss the level of funding support they can provide for future effectiveness monitoring efforts (FY07 and beyond).
• Suggest where additional research (Table 3) is needed to fully answer priority research questions.

(3) Schedule a meeting in March 2006 for RIEC to make decisions regarding regional priority questions and options for answering these questions.

(4) Schedule two meetings to provide an opportunity for Senior Managers Group (SMG) and key agency staff (not represented by SMG) to meet with the task group members to answer questions and clarify the monitoring staff work. RIEC would like the SMG to meet and discuss potential options, rationale and pros/cons of those options, and availability of funding by agency. RIEC members would like feedback from their SMG members and staff prior to making a decision on regional priority questions and options to answer those questions.

(5) Research executives will continue discussions about priority research questions and will look for opportunities to collaborate. They will suggest areas where the research agencies may be able to join efforts and collaborate in order to provide answers to key research questions important to Federal land managers.

(6) The task group will complete the work on the management experiment templates prior to the next RIEC meeting. They will provide a summary of all existing management experiments, issues and costs.

• Closing Agreements:
  • Positive responses regarding the field trip were received. The RIEC agreed to have another field trip in FY 06. It was suggested that the trip not be scheduled in August due to fire potential. May or June were suggested as more appropriate dates. It was further suggested that we look at potentially going to Washington State, perhaps the Okanogan/Wenatchee area which is fire-prone or select another subject. There may also be an opportunity to get the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, the Colville Tribe, and Washington IAC representatives involved.
  • Next IAC meeting is scheduled on November 30, 2005.

October 18, 2005

• Topic: Adaptive Management and Monitoring Subcommittee Activity Report.  The RIEC asked the task group to:

  1) Refine Regional Corporate Questions--This staff work will include refining priority questions wording, eliminating redundancies, determining potential options to answer the questions, and providing costs and uncertainties for the options. Staff will provide an update to the RIEC in December.

  2) Prepare to discuss with the IAC--Several facets of this work will be discussed at the upcoming November IAC meeting.

  3) Summarize Work on Existing Management Experiments--The RIEC asked for a summary of the work accomplished to date on extensive management experiments such as the BLM Density Management Studies, Five Rivers, Fort Lewis, Olympic Habitat Study, and the work in the Sierras. Staff should summarize existing work including findings, outcomes, effort expended and costs. The RIEC felt that they might be able to learn from the work that has already been completed. Staff will provide a summary of ongoing management experiments and a draft template for future management experiments in February or March.

  4) Develop a Proposal for Reporting Progress on Regional Objectives--A task group (Jon Martin, FSR6; Miles Brown, BLM; and Dave Busch, USGS) was identified to work with Tom Quigley’s proposal regarding annual progress reporting and regional objectives. Tom’s proposal suggests managers are to report their perception on progress in meeting regional objectives for every acre on a yearly basis at the watershed level. This information would be consolidated regionally and could be portrayed in a series of map products. The task group should prepare a proposal for RIEC review by December.

July 28, 2005

• Topic: The RIEC agreed that the issue regarding Marbled Murrelet zones needed to be investigated further.

June 1, 2005

• Topic:  The RIEC agreed to create a RIEC-lead Adaptive Management/Monitoring subcommittee to develop a broad adaptive management framework.
• Topic: The products from the RIEC Communications subcommittee were accepted with minor changes. Refinements to the Management Implications document were requested. Changes will be incorporated throughout the documents ensuring that the information and presentation are consistent.
• Topic: The RIEC agreed to help develop the long-term corporate vision, and questions and priorities needed as part of the interagency regional monitoring project.

April 21, 2005

• Topic: Restoration of forest ecosystems in high fire regimes subcommittee - Jack Blackwell (FS, R5) agreed to take the lead in developing a draft map of high fire regime NWFP landscapes and proposing draft goals and objectives and priorities for treatments by the June 1 RIEC meeting.
• Topic:  Communications subcommittee:  Elaine Brong volunteered to lead the effort on behalf of the RIEC to develop draft key messages for RIEC review by the June 1 RIEC meeting.
• Topic: Adaptive management subcommittee: Tom Quigley, with help from Jim Sedell, will take the lead in revisiting the Adaptive Management Area Issue. They will propose options for the RIEC that could include using existing AMAs as centers for testing and learning as well as considering options for including a broader landscape approach for institutionalizing the adaptive management concept. The draft proposal will be done by the June 1 RIEC meeting.
• Topic:  Meeting Logistics - the RIEC agreed to expand the June 1, 2005 to a full day.

April 1, 2005

• No decisions

January 25, 2005

• Topic: Focus on Critical Habitat (FWS) - The FWS [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service] will publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register on revisions to critical habitat for the NSO by December 15, 2005. NOAA Fisheries held public hearings in January 2005 held in various locations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and California to receive comments and feedback on the proposal. Comments on the proposal must be received by NOAA Fisheries no later than 5 p.m. Pacific Standard Time on February 14, 2005.
• Topic: 10-Year Monitoring Report Update - Future RIEC meetings will provide updates for the executives regarding the status and trend reports and the synthesis document.  The IAC have been invited to attend the NWFP April conference to hear the science findings. They are invited to attend a meeting the following day (April 21) with the RIEC to solicit their feedback and input.
• Topic: Rechartering of the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee IAC) - Unanimous approval to recharter.

November 2, 2004

• Topic: 10-Year Monitoring Report Update - Determine what topics from the synthesis warrant detailed discussion at the RIEC meetings in January and March 2005.
• Topic: Northern Spotted Owl Consultation Workgroup Report - The SMG [Senior Managers Group] has requested information on vegetation management projects being proposed by field units and will discuss the potential implications of these projects with field units. The intent is to establish a broad strategic framework to assist field managers to focus on potential management implications geographically. The technical team is working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to establish consistency regarding how Level 1 teams interpret the new information from the two scientific reports.

July 21, 2004

• Topic: Update on BLM Resource Management Plan Revisions - There was general agreement to continue these discussions and incorporate periodic updates in the agendas.
• Topic: Use of New Information in a Biological Opinion - It was agreed to have Dr. Steve Courtney, SEI, present preliminary conclusions, including their review of Northern Spotted Owl population status and trends, habitat use and trends, barred owls, genetics, West Nile virus, information gaps and uncertainties, and conservation strategies in August. The Regional Ecosystem Office will contact Dr. Courtney and make the necessary arrangements for the meeting.
• Topic: Review of the IAC Field Trip - Additional discussions regarding how best to fund future activities of this type are needed. REO staff will proceed with planning for and implementing the field trip in 2005.

June 8, 2004

• Topic: 10-Year Monitoring Report Update, next steps: 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 - In discussing the release of the 04 Interpretative Reports, the RIEC members wanted to ensure that they were informed... 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 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.

March 10, 2004

• Topic: Expanding the RIEC membership to include the Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. The new Station Director, Jim Sedell and his alternate Garland Mason (Assistant Director) were unanimously approved.
• Topic: Potential Improvement Activities - Adaptive Management Areas: The RIEC discussed the field survey information and acknowledged that AMAs were not fulfilling expectations under the NWFP for a variety of reasons, as outlined in the presentation.  After reviewing available options, the RIEC decided to address key AMA issues through future planning efforts, including scheduled plan revisions for both BLM and FS, and site-specific plan amendments that could be undertaken for individual AMAs.  This option provides for efficient use of limited resources during ongoing plan revisions.  The RIEC also agreed that BLM and FS would move forward by focusing their resources on three AMAs (the 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.  RIEC members also expressed interest in considering other proposals which would be viable without additional BLM and FS resource commitments.  
• Topic: Potential Improvement Activities - Watershed Analysis: FS Region 5 agreed to prepare a draft memo for RIEC review and potential approval as a regional policy clarification.  The draft would provide clarification and guidance on development and use of WA recommendations, particularly in regard to roles and responsibilities of line officers.  The RIEC agreed that the draft would be subject to broad review by REO and other key agency staff, and that it would be reviewed in the context of the upcoming Record of Decision to clarify aquatic conservation strategy language.  Depending on progress, this topic could be the subject of a RIEC conference call in mid-May.  (Note:  In the IAC meeting that afternoon, the RIEC agreed to provide an opportunity for IAC review prior to a final RIEC decision.)

January 22, 2004

• Topic: Topics for the IAC agenda. 
• Topic: Agreement regarding the posting of a Federal Register notice about Survey and Manage FSEIS and the preferred alternative.