In response to ralepayefconcer ns'. theCouncil also proposes development and refinement of 

 mecttanisms for reporting on and evaluating the effectiveness of program measures Evaluation 

 and reporting-mechamsms already are included m some program measures (such as the Water 

 Budget) The Courtdt proptDses'toexpantfthris importarvt concept by-caU*fig-fef-pi=ofnpt-evakjat«Dfi- 

 0f-GngoHig-acttvt44esT-such-as-FeseafCfi-and-ot^ef-sttJdtes--to-deteffn«i€-ttiefr-contftt)tjtf0fi-?o- 

 pfogfam-e8ect*veness-and-py esiaPhshmg a regular schedule for reporting progress m each of the 

 key areas of action and by establishing a work group to assist in the development of a 

 system monitoring and evaluation plan for program progress and long-term research needs 

 {see section 205). Annual work plans are requested from federal implementing agencies, to'- 

 habrtat-and-passage-festofattGn-protects-and-aftAetaf-pfoduet«n-pfOjeets- Further development of 

 the adaptive management concept may lead to an integrated, comprehensive evaluation of funded 

 activities. [Source Council staff.] 



Wildlife and Resident Fish 



The action plan addresses the need to protect, mitigate and enhance wildlife, to the extent 

 that they are affected by hydroelectric operation and development, by establishing a basis for 

 proceeding with mitigation planning, starting mitigation where it is clearly indicated, and continuing 

 to call for conditions on new hydroelectric development to avoid adverse effects on wildlife. 



In the resident fish area the action plan proposes action where conflicts with anadromous 

 fish goals would be nonexistent or inconsequential where significant biological gams can be 

 achieved, and where there is a dear link to the effects of hydropower development and operation. 

 The action plan calls for particular emphasis on resident fish measures m Montana and the upper- 



-110- 



