1 / 19

Meeting Agenda: Selecting Investment Scenarios for Salmon Recovery

This meeting will discuss the best investments for salmon recovery in the next three years and the strategy for distributing funds. It will also address the challenge of non-listed salmon species and determine the funding level to pursue. The goal is to use an efficient process to guide future decisions.

marthamiller
Download Presentation

Meeting Agenda: Selecting Investment Scenarios for Salmon Recovery

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Agenda Overview of meeting topics • 9:30 AM Introduction and Agenda Review • 9:45 AM Select Regional Allocation Option and Process Steps for 2006 SRFB Funding Cycle • 11:00 AM Review Goals & Objectives & 3-year Plans • 12:00 PM Working LunchReview the Road to July – Process & Decisions • 12:30 PM Discuss Investment Scenarios • 2:15 PM Identify sub-group members to develop proposal re: funding level to pursue • 2:30 PM Wrap-Up and Adjourn

  2. SRFB Round 7 Steps & Distribution Options • The goal for this year is to use as efficient • a process as possible. • This is a transition year. • Ultimately the 3-year investment scenario • selected will guide future decisions. • Today: • Clarify steps—see handout • Select distribution option—see handout

  3. Historically and today humans and salmon share the same bio- geographic regions

  4. What are the best investments for salmon recovery in the next three years? What strategy do we want to use to distribute funds? What level of funding do we to pursue? How do we want to address non-listed salmon species? DecisionsJuly Meeting

  5. Investment Scenariosdefinition The investment scenario ultimately selected should clearly identify the priorities in which this region wants to invest funds, political capital, voluntary efforts, and human resources in the next three years. It answers the question: what are the best investments for salmon recovery in the next three years?

  6. Technical Analyses for Prioritizing Recovery Strategies Across the Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ESU Puget Sound Technical Recovery Team

  7. Two Key Criteria for Making Choices • Protect options for the future role of existing • natural populations “Where are the populations whose future role is most threatened?” • Protect existing salmon habitat and the • opportunities for habitat restoration “Where is the best existing salmon habitat and the best opportunities for habitat restoration?”

  8. Data Used to Evaluate Near-term Threat of Extinction • Current abundance of natural-origin Chinook salmon (NOR) 2. Average number of adults produced by each Chinook salmon spawning in the wild (Recruits/spawner) 3. Proportion and origin of hatchery fish on the spawning grounds

  9. Data Used to Evaluate Ecological Integrity of Watersheds Four Positive Attributes • Area occupied by natural wetlands • Land use and land cover • Presence of eagles • Undisturbed habitat Four Negative Attributes • Hydrological alteration • Road density • Sub-watershed slope steepness • Hatchery production

  10. 15 SF Nooksack Cedar 10 High Risk Threat of Near-term Extinction Strategies 5 • Immediate attention to • protect future role of populations -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 = Indigenous Ecological Integrity = Replaced

  11. 15 Ecological Integrity Intact but Modified Strategies 10 • Significant portions occur in national forest or national parks Threat of Near-term Extinction Cascade Upper Sauk • Opportunities for habitat • restoration building on • protection in lower • watersheds, nearshore 5 Lower Sauk Skykomish Mid-Hood Canal Suiattle Lower Skagit Upper Skagit -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 = Indigenous Ecological Integrity = Replaced

  12. 15 Ecological Integrity Highly Compromised 10 Threat of Near-term Extinction Strategies • Large-scale, long-term protection, land use changes, and restoration 5 Puyallup Sammamish NF Stillaguamish Nisqually Green -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 = Indigenous Ecological Integrity = Replaced

  13. 15 Some Ecological Integrity Intact but Highly Modified • Strategies • Need low risk • populations • Protect existing • integrity and • ecological • function • Large-scale • restoration 10 Skokomish Threat of Near-term Extinction Elwha SF Stillaguamish White 5 Dungeness NF Nooksack Snoqualmie -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 = Indigenous Ecological Integrity = Replaced

  14. 15 SF Nooksack Cedar 10 Skokomish Threat of Near-term Extinction Elwha Cascade Upper Sauk SF Stillaguamish Puyallup White Mid-Hood Canal 5 Sammamish Dungeness Suiattle Lower Sauk Skykomish NF Stillaguamish NF Nooksack Nisqually Lower Skagit Green Snoqualmie Upper Skagit 0 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 = Indigenous Ecological Integrity =Composite/Replaced

  15. Parameters All populations equally or selected population focus. Restoration focus or Protection Focus Criteria Key Threats Community Support Preserves options Highest Risk populations Populations targeted for low risk Investment Choices

More Related