; Origins of the Validation Monitoring Panel
Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out
Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Origins of the Validation Monitoring Panel


  • pg 1
									Why Validation Monitoring?
• Salmon stock declines despite millions
  invested in restoration activities
   – Costs will increase throughout the
• No coherent scheme to ground
  monitoring efforts in good science
• All sides support better objective
• Profusion of official committees etc
   – Central role of academic research
      Levels of Monitoring
• Compliance: Has the contract for
  restoration work been
  completed as agreed?
• Efficacy: Has the work produced
  the intended change in
  particular conditions (e.g. lower
  stream temperature or greater
  stream complexity)?
• Validation: Has restoration
  achieved the overarching goals
  of reversing the decline in
Could we do better restoration
  • We knew what works best
  • We increased efficiency of
    administration through
    consistency across agencies and
  • Political support was maintained
  • We could strategically target
    investments to minimize costs
Can we get beyond the plausible?

• Dr. Daniel Botkin call for
  quantitative methods
• Center for the Study of the
  Environment proposed a
  scientific foundation for
• Recommendations include new
  emphasis on "counting fish"
  – not rely on surrogate indicator
    species or habitat goals
           Counting Fish?
• Recommendations generated a
  vigorous debate
• Some challenges aimed at
  scientific and technical merits
• Others focused on the practical
• ESA makes numbers of fish
  measure of compliance
  – therefore "counting fish" necessary
    and pivotal
   Dialogue welcomed

• Peers challenge colleagues
• Essential to the scientific
• Still confusing array of similar
  conversations taking place
• Need more credible hard look
   Monitoring not just an
    academic exercise

• Help us learn what works and
  what does not
• Will give us evidence of the
  benefits of restoration work
• Will give us information when
  there is no change or further
 Monitoring Requires Science
• Monitoring not the same as mere
  data collection
• Must be based on scientifically
  valid methodologies
• Must serve objectives of sound
  quantitative approach
• Rarely is based on scientific
Agencies measure assortment
        of conditions
• Monitoring associated with agency
• Proprietary information developed
  by private sector
• Scattershot approach in response to
  fragmented authorities
• No one entity bringing it all together
• No one providing a scientifically
  rigorous foundation
ONRC founded to explore new

• One foot in academia; the other
  in the world of pragmatic
• Focus on addressing technical
  scientific challenges
• Seek consensus among leading
   The Keystone Center to
    facilitate the dialogue
• Long experience in complex and
  highly technical natural
  resource issues
• National reputation for
  professional facilitation
• Widespread credibility for
  creating a neutral setting
• Experience with diverse
   Validation Monitoring Panel

• National Academy style
  distinguished committee
• Range of scientific disciplines
• Engaged in in-depth review of
  technical challenges of monitoring
  salmon restoration
• Staff support for serious
  scholarly consideration
• Preparation of report useful to
  agencies and stakeholders
 Moving beyond conventional
• Not always easy
• Experienced facilitators will
  challenge panel members
• Look for the elements of further
  evolution of ecological
• Identify areas of emerging consensus
• Create a structured environment of
  creative thinking
• Summary of relevant data collection
  activities in riparian, aquatic and
  marine systems
• Annotated list of salmon restoration
  monitoring approaches in use
• Bibliography of literature on
• Findings of the panel review of
  salmon restoration monitoring
• Evaluation of the limits of present

To top