8149

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 8149
• Author: Phenicie, C. K. and J. R. Lyons.
• Title: Tactical Planning in Fish and Wildlife Management and Research.
• USFW Year: 1973.
• Copyright Material: NO

After the primary objective has been reduced into its constituent parts,
test for validity using the conditional sentence,

If and only if

, then

The first blank of this sentence is the antecedent. The second is the
conclusion. The two second echelon objectives above constitute the anteced-
ent and the primary objective is the conclusion. Thus the sentence reads,

If and only if we

Measure the annual increment of capital amortization and
document the yearly operation and maintenance costs

~d

Measure the annual increment of the fishery attributable to
marsh production,

then we will

Determine benefits and costs of northern pike spawning marsh
construction and operation for management of lakes where
northern pike is a suitable predator and natural recruitment
is inadequate.

The two parts of the antecedent are essential to reach the conclusion.
Is there any other premise yet missing which would or might preclude reach-
ing the conclusion? In this instance there is not. The antecedent is
complete, and therefore, the conclusion (the primary objective) is the
consequent of the condition. The reasoning is valid and complete.

The importance of this reasoning cannot be overemphasized. The purpose
is still step two of step-down planning, to derive a second echelon of items
that will accomplish the first. Two items were stated, but are there more
which may have been omitted? Are those that have been identified actually
essential to reach the objective? Could one or more be omitted as interest-
ing but non-essential? To develop a valid plan each of these questions must
be answered as each new echelon unfolds. Use of the conditional sentence is
absolutely essential to derive this second echelon of items. Having done
this, assume now that the primary objective and the second echelon objectives
of the plan in the centerfold have been derived correctly and completely.

Note on the plan that there are two second echelon objectives and each of
these has two third echelon objectives subordinate to it. These are followed
on the plan by fourth and fifth echelon objectives. Thus, each component of
each echelon of the example has been reduced into its constituent parts and
has been tested to see if and only if the antecedent constructs the corre-
sponding conclusion. This introduces the third step in step-down planning:
(3) Derive a third, fourth, etc., echelon of items. As each echelon of items
is composed, the conditional sentence test must be applied assiduously for
the plan to remain on track.

5