timely and effective manner. This will include information gathered at the system level, such as harvest 

 rates, recovery of tagged fish in the fisheries, and the survival and abundance of juvenile and adult fish 

 through the hydroelectric system; as well as subbasin data such as numbers of spawners, subbasin 

 carrying capacities, juvenile survival rates, and hatchery and natural production levels. It will also 

 depend heavily on research results that clarify the relationships between variables and the results of 

 different management actions. 



The Coordinated Information System (CIS), called for in Section 206{d)(C) of the program, will be 

 used to bring together the data and information needed for SMEP. The CIS is a system that will 

 facilitate exchange and dissemination of data within the Columbia Basin. Given the multi-jurisdictional 

 nature of the basin, the need for such a system has been recognized for some time, and was one of the 

 primary recommendations to emerge from the regional planning under the Enhancement Act. 



MEG has prepared a workplan for the design of a Coordinated Information System that is 

 expected to implemented in the fall of 1988. The workplan calls for the design and scoping of a CIS 

 and the completion of demonstration projects in the John Day, Umatilla, Yakima, and Salmon River 

 subbasins. As note above, the workplan also calls for the development of techniques for classification 

 of habitat and watersheds which is relevant to the basin-wide experimental design of SMEP and the 

 organization of the CIS. Finally, the workplan provides for the updating of the Stock Assessment Study 

 as a periodic output from the CIS. 



The CIS will consist primarily of standards and protocols that will enhance the communication 

 between the various data bases that reside on systems maintained probably by the agencies 

 responsible for collecting the data. Creation of the CIS originates with the system wide data collection 

 conducted as part of System Planning. It will incorporate the natural and hatchery data bases 

 maintained by the Council (Section 206 (e)(1) and (2)). The standards and protocols will address the 

 following features of data collection: 



• Quality and documentation of data . The effectiveness of the evaluation process in assisting 

 decision making depends upon the quality of the data collection and on the analyses performed. 

 Confidence in the SMEP requires accountability through documentation of data sources and 

 procedures. 



• Consistency in data collection . Consistencies in data collection, sampling and survey methods, 

 units of measure, and consistency in the definitions of sampling units (time-area, fisheries, production 

 types etc.) are needed to allow comparability between subbasins and projects throughout the 

 Columbia Basin. Consistency is also necessary over time, since a primary function of SMEP is to 

 evaluate change in production over time. 



• Timeliness and quality of data reporting . Communication of data, analytical results and methods 

 in a timely and clearly understandable way is necessary to perform the monitoring and evaluation steps 

 on time and to convey results in a way that promotes trust. Communication of the SMEP process is an 

 important step toward integrated system planning and research. 



Genetics Monitoring 



Despite the almost universal recognition of genetics as a factor contributing to the success of 

 production programs, meaningful incorporation of genetic concerns into production planning has 

 proven difficult. This stems from a lack of clear genetic objectives, the degree of uncertainty regarding 

 how to incorporate genetics into production planning, and because of the gulf that separates the 

 academic study of genetics from the practicalities of fisheries management. The genetics portion of 

 SMEP deals with these last two problems to provide the tools to assist in the formation of genetic 

 objectives. 



-12- 



