A common thread in both of the above is an effort to separate policy and technical issues. This 

 separation is viewed as useful because policy and technical issues frequently have become confused 

 in the recent past, and the result has been that technical staff have been unable to pursue technical 

 solutions to research issues. The intent of this structure is to allow the technical group to focus on 

 technical issues by providing an explicit policy group to handle policy problems and mediate disputes. 



3. Proposal for a System Monitoring and Evaluation Program. The 1987 Fish and Wildlife Program 

 called for establishment of a Monitoring and Evaluation Group to assist in the design and 

 implementation of a plan to monitor and evaluate progress toward the doubling goal and 

 consistency with policies set forth in the program (Section 206(d)). The group has responded by 

 examining alternatives and developing recommendations for the design of a system monitoring 

 and evaluation program. A report describing their conclusions is attached. The group has also 

 proceeded with development of several elements of the monitoring program described in the 

 1987 Fish and Wildlife Program, including a coordinated information system and a program to 

 identify genetic impacts in production planning. A coordinated information system is intended to 

 facilitate communication of research and monitoring data between the various agencies. It is also 

 intended to make this information more accessible to all interested parties in a usable form. 



The Monitoring and Evaluation Group identified several alternative approaches to measuring the 

 progress of the fish and wildlife program. These are discussed below. The group also reached two 

 conclusions: First, there was no single measure (smolt counts, adult counts or surplus production) 

 that would totally reflect program progress. Each of the approaches they identified measures the 

 progress of different aspects of the program. Second, the group felt that it was not possible to directly 

 separate program effects from non-program effects such as changes in harvest rates or natural survival 

 rates. This was because of the many conflicting factors that interact to determine the number of adult 

 or juvenile fish produced from the Columbia River. The group concluded that it was possible to 

 separate program effects from non-program effects only by using a computer model to simulate the 

 salmon and steelhead life cycle. 



ISSUES AND OPTIONS 



As a result of the 1987 Fish and Wildlife Program provisions, a variety of ad hoc discussions, and 

 the three initiatives described above, progress is being made in solving problems in research and 

 monitoring. However, as noted above, a number of problems remain. With the problems of the past 

 few years in mind, this is an opportune time to review the issues and decide whether more can be done 

 to solve the remaining problems. Accordingly, the Council seeks comment on the following major 

 research and monitoring questions and the options for resolving them. Commentors are especially 

 urged to consider and provide comment on: 



• The likely effectiveness of the options and opportunities for streamlining any proposed processes; 



• the efficiency of the options in terms of relative levels of personnel time and attendant overhead 

 costs; and 



• appropriate levels of expenditure that may be required to implement the options. 



The options are not necessarily mutually exclusive and may be considered in any appropriate 

 combinations and variations. Commentors are also encouraged to propose any additional alternatives. 



