7.3 Examples of revising monitoring design

Overview  Introduction   Steps in revisions    Examples of revisions    Results and next steps

Oregon Coastal Coho

Goal of Monitoring: To provide statistically rigorous information on the status and trend of natural-origin coho spawners in the Oregon Coast ESU.

Reasons for Review and Revision:  When the initial monitoring plan was implemented in 1998, individual coho populations within the ESU were monitored at an aggregated population scale because no specific population designations had been adopted.  In 2004, the Oregon Workgroup of the Oregon Northern California Coast Technical Recovery Team identified individual coho populations along the Oregon coast, thereby initiating a need for monitoring at the new population scale.  

Outcome:  Because Oregon had implemented a GRTS-based sample design in 1998, which provided spatially explicit information on the variance structure of Oregon coastal coho, Oregon was able to reallocate existing sampling effort to an updated GRTS-based sample design that provided for estimates of coho spawner abundance at the individual population scale without increasing monitoring costs or sacrificing precision of estimates of indicators.

Citation:  Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.  2007.  Oregon Coast Coho Conservation Plan.  Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Salem.

Snake River Basin Spring Chinook Salmon

Goal of Monitoring:  To provide status and trend data for viability assessment for the ESA-listed Evolutionarily Significant Unit for the Snake River Basin Spring Chinook Salmon.

Reasons for Review and Revision:  Current monitoring does not assess spatial structure and lacks abundance estimates in some populations.

Outcome:  The recommended intermediate design between the low and high sampling rates would provide spatial structure based on abundance estimates from redd surveys across the basin.  The intermediate strategy would require reallocation of resources, but would be cheaper than the current status quo sampling.   More expensive designs may provide evidence of viability over a shorter period than the intermediate design. 

Citation:  Marmorek, D., M. Porter, D. Pickard and K. Wieckowski.  2007.  Collaborative Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Project - Snake River Basin Pilot Report.  Volume 1. 

Next: Results and next steps