7419

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7419
• Author: Valdez, R. A., et al.
• Title: Summary Documentation and Preliminary SI Curves, SI Curve Development Project.
• USFW Year: 1987.
• USFW - Doc Type: Logan, Utah.
• Copyright Material: NO

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

TASK B: mRKSHOP #1

TASK OBJECTIVES

A ~rkshop was held fOllCMing assimilation of the datal:ase to detennine
what data to use in curve developnent and hew to partition these data. The
purpose of this w::>rkshop #1 was to asserrble six species experts to make
decisions on use of the data assimilated in Task A for curve generation.

Workshop #1 was held in salt lake ci tv, January 5-9, 1987. It: was
attended l7f 17 people; including 5 species experts, 9 pn'ticipants, and 3
BIO/WEST organizers. of the 6 experts identifieCl by FWS, 2 were unable to
attend, bIt only 1 designated a substitute. The experts and participants at
Wo:lrkshop #1 requested that FWS keep the same panel of 5 experts for Wo:lrkshop #2
to maintain consistency in decisia1S.

The specific objectives of Workshop #1 w=lre to:

1. Determine which data should be used for SI curve developnent.

2. Deterndne hew those data should be stratified, pooled, and analyzed.

Ob.iective 1: Data For SI CUrve Developnent

Methods. Workshop #1 was conducted try a c:haiJ:man, a fac11ita:tar, and a
dat'::lL- i!! _~./analyst. These three individuals ware from BIO/~, Inc.,
and had the primary responsibilitv tor organizing and conducting the workshop.

The role of the chairman was to conduct the meeting, describe the datal:ase
to the participants, solicit inplt on data use, and record final decisions.
The primary function of the facilitator was to moderate the W)rkshop, insure
equal inplt from all ~rts and pa.rticipants, and pranote consensus decisions
on the use of data. The data.l:ese manager/analyst was responsible for insuring
that the database was canplete, describing available data analyses and curve
developnent teclmiques, and performing the requested analyses. These three
individuals did not have decision-making authori tv. All consensus decisions
ware made try the panel of five experts. Proceedings of the workshop ware
recorded on a reel-to-reel tape recorder, and on flip charts.

During the first day of the W)rkshop, the data ware introduced and
described to the attendees. Missing data were identified and arranganents were
~ to secure what was avai lable.

For each of the three target species, a set of eight criteria was individ-
ually evaluated to detennine the type of data to include or exclude from
analyses. These criteria included: life stage, river, strata, year, gear, time
of year, time of day, and sample design. Each criterion became a decision
point at which the five experts decided to partition or pool data.

The W)rkshop chainnan conducted these deciSion-making p.xercises by using
flip charts. Each life stage of each species was treated separately, and the

10