Introduction
The summary is organized as follows:
Toward Integrated Assessment and Management
The Multi-Species Framework Project was intended to help foster a regional perspective of the ecology and management of fish, wildlife, and ecosystems of the Columbia River Basin (McConnaha 1999). The Framework Project involved a multitude of stakeholders and managers from throughout the region and produced a range of visions and potential planning alternatives. Seven of the alternatives that emerged were reassessed using the Framework approach and forecasts of their ecological and economic impacts at the basin and province scale determined (NPPC 2000a; NPPC 2000b).
Following the preliminary analyses and subsequent review and screening of the input data, three of the seven alternatives were reanalyzed. This report presents the results of this reanalysis and documents the various databases and modeling and assessment procedures, including the Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment (EDT) method, used to forecast potential impacts.
The Multi-Species Framework analysis presented herein aims to:
· describe the process, Scientific Principles, and analysis tools that are incorporated into the Framework,
· show regional fish and wildlife managers how the Framework process can contribute to the development of proposed actions that are effective, based on sound science, and implemented in a biologically sound and cost-effective manner,
· illustrate databases, methods, and models that are useful in analyzing past, current, and future habitats and populations of fish and wildlife, and especially in considering an ecologically integrated approach to fish and wildlife assessment and management in the basin,
· determine the probable effectiveness of the three alternatives analyzed to improve fish and wildlife performance in the Columbia River Basin,
· provide regional decision makers with a clear assessment of the risks and critical uncertainties embedded in each of the alternatives, and
· describe the basis for a research, monitoring, and evaluation program needed to address the critical uncertainties identified.
The primary intent of the analysis is not the selection of a preferred alternative for implementation — that choice is a policy decision to be made by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council) after extensive consultation with natural resource management agencies, Indian tribes, industry, environmental groups, and the public. The analysis presented in this report will, however, help guide the selection process. The alternative ultimately selected for implementation may be among those analyzed as part of this Multi-Species Framework Project, or it might be one developed through another process, or the Council may choose to combine strategies identified in some or all of the alternatives to form a new alternative. Regardless of the particular alternative chosen, the Scientific Principles and analysis tools developed through the Framework process will contribute to the development of proposed actions that are effective, based on sound population ecology and ecosystem science, and implemented in a biologically defensible manner.
It is important to emphasize at the outset that the Framework analysis results were designed to provide input and guidance for decisions made at the basin and province levels. Conclusions regarding fish and wildlife performance at the subbasin or watershed level should not be specifically derived from the current analysis until the quality of the data is reviewed and refined for finer scale analyses. To accomplish the daunting task of describing some 259,000 miles of streams (over 7000 subwatershed units) in terms of 45 attributes for each month, and the array of terrestrial habitats throughout the Basin, we relied heavily on previous efforts and on the valued input from many organizations and scientist familiar with the Columbia Basin. Where the attributes required were not available or of unacceptable quality, modeling techniques were used to estimate them. Later, data quality and resolution can be sufficiently improved in the subbasin assessment phase to reliably support subbasin scale analysis and planning.
Toward Integrated Assessment and Management
One of the major themes of this report is the move toward an integrated assessment of fish and wildlife habitats, populations, and their ecological roles in their ecosystems. This does not remove focus on species; it complements it. We still promote individual modeling, analysis, and management of single species and selected populations of conservation interest.
We provide a modeling evaluation of single species or populations of fish (principally salmon) by using a relatively new modeling approach that evaluates their habitat conditions across life history stages, landscapes, and time. Some of this modeling is based on expert judgment, but it serves to provide a basis for better understanding and depicting cause and effect of conditions that influence fish populations. We do recognize that cause and effect models are not fully substitutable for empirically based statistical models, and vice versa, and both have important and complementary roles in resource management (Kareiva and Mobrand 1999).
We also provide modeling evaluations of a few selected wildlife species to demonstrate species-specific wildlife assessments at the basin and province scales. We also develop a conceptual foundation and assessment approach to a more fully integrated evaluation of fish and wildlife species – aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems – by evaluating how habitats, populations, and ecological roles interact among species throughout the Basin. This integrative approach offers a new vision for how cumulative effects assessments and resource management can more fully span and integrate fish and wildlife systems. It also offers a framework for using existing modeling tools (e.g., Figure II.1).
This Progress Report is presented in the following sections:
Section III. Methods
We present the scientific and conceptual framework underlying the assessment, and details of the process used for conducting the analysis of fish, wildlife, and integrated fish-wildlife ecological functions. After reviewing this section, the reader should have a firm understanding of the scientific foundation and the process used to produce the outcomes described in the results and discussion section of the report.
Section IV. Results and Discussion
We present the results of the analysis as they apply to the Framework and to each of the three alternatives examined. We compare environmental conditions as they exist today, as they may have existed without human influence in the past, and as they may exist in the future under each alternative. We present specific results on fish populations and species (principally salmon), selected wildlife species, and on integrated assessments of fish and wildlife populations and their ecological functions.
Section V. Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation
We describe the fundamental concepts underlying a research, monitoring, and evaluation program that could be developed to address critical uncertainties. The purpose of such a program is to determine whether biological objectives are being met over time.