NFHP Science and Data Committee Report Gary E. Whelan and Andrea C. Ostroff NFHP Science and Data...
-
Upload
estella-francis -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of NFHP Science and Data Committee Report Gary E. Whelan and Andrea C. Ostroff NFHP Science and Data...
NFHP Science and Data Committee Report
Gary E. Whelanand
Andrea C. OstroffNFHP Science and Data Committee Co-Chairs
November 2014
2015 Board PrioritiesScience and Data Committee
Responsibilities
• Action Plan Objective 1 – Priority Task D
• Action Plan Objective 4 – Priority Tasks I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P
Action Plan Objective 1 - Priority Task D
Continue development of standard effectiveness measures for conservation actions used to address nationwide fish habitat focus areas
• Status– Pilot effort conducted with Committee subgroup and
Foundations of Success– Data compilation demonstration effort in the Pacific
Northwest to increase awareness of existing monitoring programs
Action Plan Objective 1 - Priority Task D
Continue development of standard effectiveness measures for conservation actions used to address nationwide fish habitat focus areas• Challenges
– Not enough results from SWG effectiveness measures – Difficulty with conceptual approach– Shifting approaches of NFHP performance measures
caused confusion– S&D committee wants to provide actual data to aid
decision-making
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task I
Examine and review National Assessment products produced by Marine and Inland Assessment Teams along with activities underway by the FHP and LCCs• Status
– Review of assessment teams’ progress via Science & Data Committee meeting monthly calls
• Challenges – Priority on 2015 assessment creates time constraints to
engage with LCC activities• Needed resources
– $20K for Science and Data Committee Meeting in April/May
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task J
Develop coordinated delivery of 2015 assessment including new online capabilities to help partners and stakeholders understand and best use the new national assessment data and products
• Status– USGS working in coordination with Science & Data
Committee and assessment team leads to conduct usability study and develop approaches for new data delivery via NFHP Data System
– Develop writing team by January 2015
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task J
Develop coordinated delivery of 2015 assessment including new online capabilities to help partners and stakeholders understand and best use the new national assessment data and products
• Challenges and Questions– Large coordination effort between report generation and
data delivery components. – Does the Board desire to have a hard copy printed
report?– Need to define roles and responsibilities in other
committees.• Resources Needed
– Writing team time– Funds for printed copies, if desired
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task KContinue to catalog science data products and assessments
completed and underway within each of the established FHPs and national assessment team via the NFHP Data System
• Status – Data SOPs are complete– Actively working with FHPs that have datasets ready to
release – While conversations have been initiated with multiple
FHPs, Only 3 FHP datasets from the 72 datasets identified through the FHP inventory have been documented in the NFHP Data System
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task KContinue to catalog science data products and assessments
completed and underway within each of the established FHPs and national assessment team via the NFHP Data System• Challenges
– Committee focus on 2015 Report, limiting time for FHP data
– FHP time resources to invest in data documentation– Existing FHP data delivery mechanisms provided by
other entities and NFHP Data System viewed as duplicative.
– Effective communication and coordination with 19 FHPs• Resources Needed
– $12K for Committee Chair Travel (same request in another Task)
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task LInland Assessment Refinements – Incorporate fisheries,
aquatic nuisance and invasive species, dam inventory, land conservation status, and water quality status information as data become available.• Status:
– Freshwater fish data doubled for 2015 assessment including AK and HI resulting in new fish metrics and analysis approach
– Greatly revised and improved dam inventory data with increased number of dams included
– TNC land conservation database attributed– NPDES permits, nutrients and information from EPA lists– Coal and Uranium mines
Challenges– Resource constraints to collect and prepare data for
analyses• Resources Needed
– Continued USFWS support
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task M
Inland Assessment - Improve river fragmentation analyses and national calculation of fragmentation metrics and develop lakesheds and lake assessments• Status
– New fragmentation analysis is complete and incorporated into assessment
– Lake incorporation planning will be underway in early 2015
• Challenges– Insufficient resources to complete incorporation of lakes
into assessment• Resource Needed
– As stated previously
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task N
Inland Assessment - Evaluate approaches to improve hydrology and temperature incorporation and to refine the marine-inland linkages between the inland and marine assessments.• Status
– Water withdrawal data layer attributed to inland assessment
– Improved spatial framework for SE AK and new framework for Great Lakes (GLBFHP and GLFT)
– Marine-inland linkages in development for Great Lakes (GLBFHP and GLFT) and Pacific Coast (PMEP)
• Challenges– Marine assessment being updated in two regions
constrains development of broader inland-marine linkages to be developed nationally.
– Temperature data scattered– Hydrology data being developed
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task O
Marine Assessment - Complete full assessment of estuaries in the northern Gulf of Mexico; continue data collection, processing, and initial analysis for West Coast estuaries.• Status
– Full assessment for Gulf of Mexico in progress and will be complete
– Multiple West Coast assessments will be complete in early 2015 by PMEP and significant progress with Great Lakes assessment
• Challenges– Insufficient resources to complete full marine
assessment• No progress with Atlantic and AK Coasts• Some progress with HI by MSU and HI FHP
– Integrating products into report• Resources Needed
– NOAA support for total assessment
Action Plan Objective 4 - Priority Task P
Conduct Science and Data Outreach to FHPs, LCCs, Board, and other key audiences.• Status
– Communication with individual FHPs has occurred via FHP invitation
• Example – Met with all AK FHPs in October with a focus on coordinating science and data efforts
– Preliminary discussions initiated with LCC national coordinator
• Challenges– Time resources to meet with all 19 FHPs
• Resources needed– $12K for Committee Co-Chair travel support (shared)
Thank You!
Visit www.fishhabitat.org for more information
Gary E. Whelan
Michigan DNR
517-373-6948
Andrea C. Ostroff
USGS
703-648-4070