**Puget Sound Recovery Implementation Technical Team (RITT)**

**Agenda *and Notes from Meeting (in italics)***

*Minutes by Norma Jean Sands, committee chair, accepted at Oct 16^th^
meeting*

Sixth Meeting - August 21, 2008, King Co Bldg at 2^nd^ and Jackson

10am -- 3pm

*Attendance:*

*RITT members: Eric Beamer, Kit Rawson, Mary Ruckelshaus, Norma Jean
Sands*

*Domain Teams: Elizabeth Babcock, Susan Bishop, Matt Longenbaugh, Tim
Tynan, Rosemary Furfey (by phone in pm)*

*PSP: Joe Ryan*

10:00 am Minutes of last meeting and today's agenda

> *Minutes of the fifth meeting were approved as written.*

10:15 am Updates

a.  Watershed Liaison activities -- 3yr plan reviews.

> *Snohomish -- Kit -- What should the three year project/list/plan
> include? Does it need prioritizing? Perhaps only sequencings needs to
> be identified now? WDFW is working on a hatchery pilot plan to
> integrate steelhead and Chinook hatchery and harvest. The idea is to
> get hatchery reform integrated into recovery actions/plans. This
> raises the question, are things happening with hatchery plans that are
> not included in the 3-year plan in this and other watersheds?*
>
> *Island County - there was a meeting with Jason and Eric and watershed
> last week. They hadn't thought much about monitoring.*
>
> *San Juan -- Kit, Mary, and Rebecca met with watershed last week
> (science summit meeting). Monitoring was discussed. They want ather
> watershed to know that they are planning a workshop for January to
> discuss sequencing and prioritizing recovery projects -- all are
> welcome to attend.*

b.  Domain Team activities -- *Elizabeth Babcock*

> *The domain team has completed its review of the **Skokomish Chinook
> Recovery** chapter, but the report needs some finalization before
> sharing it with RITT. It should be out by end of next week.*
>
> *The Domain Team, RITT,PSP (Rebecca) and Recovery Council should have
> a meeting or conference call early September to go over all comments,
> so that we understand each others comments and concerns before talking
> with the Skokomish folks.*
>
> *Steelhead Recovery Plan -- The regional office (NMFS) doesn't
> currently have the resources to write the recovery plan and is
> considering contracting is out. The task of the Steelhead TRT is only
> to provide the technical documents relating to population
> identification and viability; the schedule is to have this competed by
> late spring 2009. Then the Recovery Plan can be written/finalized. It
> will be the task of the RITT to review the Steelhead Recovery Plan.*
>
> *Tim Tynam -- continuing work on the PS Hatchery EIS. Expect it to be
> completed in abut a year. They (NMFS) have 18 steelhead hatchery plans
> in hand. They are waiting for the Steelhead TRT to finish their work
> before addressing them. The SF Nooksack hatchery program is using
> Manchester facility for their work. They are also sampling juveniles
> and the previous 10% south fork fish in the south fork juvenile
> samples has increased to 40%, other fish are fall fish and north fork
> fish.*
>
> *Matt Longenbaugh --*is working on reviewing the draft watershed
> recovery plan for the Quinault -- this watershed doesn't have any
> listed fish, and they are interested in restoring watershed processes
> with many engineered log jams and levee setbacks. Another habitat
> issue in Puget Sound is the washed out road along the Dosewallips
> (washed out in 2002). There doesn't seem to be any good solution to
> replacing the road without negatively impacting the Chinook salmon.
> One solution is to only have a walking hiking trail to the camp
> grounds (which has been the only access since 2002 anyway). The Forest
> Service and Park Service would like the road back. The Recovery Plan
> did not address this upper watershed issue. RITT offered to be
> involved in some level of review of effects of this road repair on the
> Chinook population.
>
> *Susan Bishop -- the BiOp for the 2008 Pacific Salmon Treaty Chinook
> harvest agreement is going forward (it is needed for final bilateral
> acceptance of agreement along with some funding requirements). The PS
> co-mangers are currently working on their new Chinook harvest plan.
> They are also working on their steelhead harvest plan (by 2010).*
>
> *Joe asked if we are getting (will get) more Chinook back to Puget
> Sound and the spawning grounds due to the new Treaty agreement? Yes,
> we should be getting more fish back to Puget Sound. Not all fish will
> make it to the spawning grounds due to southern US fisheries. However,
> southern US Chinook fisheries are more constrained by ESA than by the
> US/Canada treaty and population specific goals to meet ESA criteria
> should be easier to be met, due to Treaty restrictions.*
>
> *A question on steelhead harvest was raised -- most steelhead harvest
> is inriver recreational and most is catch and release. Uncertainty
> about the population structure makes population regulations undoable
> at this point. NMFS and the TRT are keeping in contact over population
> delineation work.*
>
> *There was a question on how the Domain Team uses RITT for
> consultation technical advice. Not everything is reviewed by the RITT
> or RIST. The Domain Team is guided by the Recovery Plan and TRT
> documents. For many habitat consultations, outside (outside NOAA) is
> not desirable; the work becomes open to FOIA which can complicate and
> lengthen the process.*

c.  Skokomish Recover Chapter next steps -- Elizabeth

> *See above under Domain Team*

d.  PSP -- Joe Ryan

> *No updates -- but see discussion below.*

11:00 am -- Puget Sound implementation issues

1.  3-yr plan revisions; accomplishments, action lists, monitoring
    plans, report cards -- Discussion with PSP and regional office on
    direction of implementation. This should help define our work load
    in relation to Puget Sound and influence our discussion below on do
    we want to increase the membership of RITT?

> *PSP has contracted Carol MacIlroy and Millie Judge to develop a
> report card format for use by the watersheds to record how well they
> are doing on implementing their recovery plans. The Stillaguamish,
> Strait of Juan de Fuca, and Green watersheds are being used to help
> develop the formats by providing filled out templates. They mostly
> address habitat so far but should address all H's. They should have a
> strong connection with the three year work plans. How are changes in
> direction of recovery addressed, e.g. changes identified through
> adaptive management results? This gets us back to the question, how
> are recovery plans amended?*
>
> *Aside: Harvest is currently reviewing the harvest recovery actions
> and results over the past 5 years. However, a bug was found in the
> model used for analyses, so the comanagers request us to ignore the
> last draft and wait for the new 5-year review draft, to be ready
> shortly.*
>
> *Carol and Millie would like the RITT to review the report questions
> and the replies by the e watershed in the pilot study. But since
> attendance at the RITT meeting is expected to be low, we will wait for
> the October meeting for the review. Carol and Millie will get us the
> necessary updated documents prior to the October meeting.*

2.  Ken's cross watershed comparison of TRT reviews

> *Not completed yet, and besides, Ken is not here today.*

3.  Use of overparametized models - discuss this issue philosophically
    at thist RITT meeting.

    *No time, we will wait for a future meeting when most or all RITT
    members will be able to attend (October?).*

12:00 Other Chinook Buiness

> *COOKs request through Kit and Kirk*
>
> *a. Reconsider delineation of Mid Hood Canal and Sammamish
> populations. They feel that there is new information out there to
> indicate a difference in population status than reported in the TRT
> population document. The RITT feels that they can evaluate/review
> reports done on population structure using new data (since TRT
> analyses), but that they are not going to initiate a new analyses.*
>
> *b. Consider jeopardy in light of recovery plan Isn't this a question
> to the Domain Team and not RITT?. If population status changes, won't
> ESU standards for population recovery have to change. How does one
> prioritize actions across populations in evaluating impacts. All
> populations should improve, but not all will be at "low risk" at the
> end of recovery.*
>
> *An aside: What is the protocol on bringing questions and requests to
> the RITT and the RIST? The NOAA Regional Office decided on a less
> structured approach, so that these may be brought directly to RITT for
> Puget sound issues or RIST for regional ESA issues. RITT and RIST may
> then make the decision about whether to address the issue or not.*
>
> *RITT will address these two requests further at the next RITT
> meeting.*

12:30 noon lunch break

1:00 pm Ozette Sockeye

1.  Peer Review discussion -- Norma

> *Norma sent and handed out the compiled peer review. According to
> NWFSC peer review guidelines, which follow those of most scientific
> peer reviews), the list of reviewers and the compiled list will be
> made public but individual review comments will not be attributed to
> individual reviewers. The compiled set of comments includes all review
> comments reorganized according to topic. If anyone from RITT has
> comments on the compiled review, send comments to Norma and she will
> finalize the compiled peer review with appropriate introductory letter
> to be sent to Rosemary Furfey as part of the public comments to the
> Ozette Sockeye Peer Review.*

2.  Viability paper revisions and responses to reviews -- Kit

> *Mike Haggerty will double check the public comments for those
> referring to either the viability report or references to viability
> numbers in the recovery plan.*
>
> *Kit addressed many of the comments on the viability paper. He will
> make additional changes and has reprogrammed the SimSalmon method to
> remove the ceiling in estimated returns. There is a lot of concern
> about the lack of data and the assumptions used to do our analyses and
> produce our viability ranges. However, ignoring the data we do have in
> favor of using data just from other lake systems is not satisfactory
> either. Ozette sockeye are different from other sockeye, such as the
> almost singe age return as compared to the multiple age returns in the
> Quinault system. We did not have time to explore the life-cycle model
> to help determine viability. Data collection in Lake Ozette will need
> to improve in order to determine if the stock status is improving
> under recovery; as data improves and the time series increases,
> viability should be revisited and viability ranges will be revised at
> that time.*
>
> *Kit will send out the next version of the viability paper before the
> next meeting*

3.  Interpreting viability ranges -- Mary

> What have other TRTs done? Shallin?
>
> *Shallin did do a comparison of TRT approaches to viability. But other
> TRTs didn't report viability ranges per say. Mary will write up a
> paragraph on viability ranges and recovery for our viability paper and
> send it to Kit.*

4.  Public review comments - Rosemary

> *Rosemary joined us by phone and participated in above discussions
> about review comments and process.*

2:30 pm Other business

a.  Recovery Symposium progress -- workgroup (Bill, Ken, Norma)

> *The purpose of the symposiumand resulting book of papers is to
> showcase recovery efforts and analyses used in reviewing and
> implanting recovery. We will need to find funding to produce a book
> and are writing a proposal to the PST southern fund, although we did
> this last year and were turned down. We will undoubtedly need several
> sponsors to produce this book. We should try to get someone like John
> Stein or Robin Waples to be editor. Other ideas? The workgroup will
> report on progress at the next RITT meeting.*

b.  Enlarging the RITT? Send out another letter?

> *Are we just looking for one to replace Bob, or more to handle the
> work load. We may want to wait until the Steelhead TRT finishes their
> work and then add someone with steelhead expertise.*

c.  Hatchery and wild interactions, where is science on this, do we want
    a discussion on this next meeting?

> *RIST is addressing this at a region level. RIST members (ken and
> Mary) could update us on what they are doing after their August
> meeting.*

d.  *Items for next RITT meeting*

> *San Juan initiative*
>
> *Reevaluating population status of PS Chinook populations*
>
> *Addressing population prioritization and recovery probabilities*
>
> *Quantifying protection -- is this a bottleneck to recovery*
>
> 3 pm Adjourn
>
> Next Meetings -- *October 16 in Seattle*
>
> *November 20 in Edmonds in conjunction with Recovery Council Mtg*

**Outstanding Task/Issues/Agenda Items**

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **RITT**                          | **TRT**                           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Ken's cross watershed comparison  | Ozette Pop Id document            |
| of TRT reviews                    |                                   |
|                                   | Ozette Viability document         |
| Use of overparametized models -   |                                   |
| discuss this issue                | Summer Chum document              |
| philosophically at a RITT meeting |                                   |
| -- wait for a critical mass       | Chinook Viability document        |
|                                   |                                   |
| Hatcheries and integration -- do  |                                   |
| we want a discussion of this?     |                                   |
| What is RIST doing?               |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

**Watershed Liaisons**

+----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Straits Phil Roni                | > Lake Wash. Kirk Lakey           |
|                                  | >                                 |
| Hood Canal Ken Currens & Bill    | > Green Kirk Lakey                |
| Graeber                          | >                                 |
|                                  | > Kitsap Norma Sands              |
| Nooksack Ken Currens             | >                                 |
|                                  | > Puyallup/White Kirk Lakey       |
| San Juan Mary Ruckelshaus        | >                                 |
|                                  | > Nisqually Ken Currens           |
| Skagit Eric Beamer               | >                                 |
|                                  | > So Puget Sound Norma Sands      |
| Island Eric Beamer               | >                                 |
|                                  | > Nearshore Bill Graeber          |
| Stillaguamish Kit Rawson         | >                                 |
|                                  | > Ozette Norma Sands              |
| Snohomish Kit Rawson             |                                   |
+----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+