Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Effectiveness Monitoring topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Adaptive Management Committee asks IRST for scientific guidance on prioritizing monitoring; motion passes 9–0
Summary
The Adaptive Management Committee voted unanimously to send a revised request to the IRST asking for scientific guidance on how to prioritize biological goals and objectives in the effectiveness monitoring strategy and authorized co-chairs to convene a joint work group to refine methods and timelines.
The Adaptive Management Committee voted unanimously, 9–0 with one member absent, to send a revised request to the Independent Scientific Review Team (IRST) asking for scientific guidance on how to rank biological goals and objectives for the HCP’s effectiveness monitoring strategy. The committee also authorized the committee co-chairs to convene a small joint work group with IRST members to refine criteria and next steps.
Committee leaders said the monitoring strategy is a decision item because the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) requires tracking whether conservation measures meet biological goals and objectives over the permit term. “The APC has the final say, in terms of the strategy, but they’re gonna be relying you are gonna be relying heavily on IRST for significant input,” the chair said during the meeting.
Members debated whether to ask IRST to produce definitive rankings or to provide objective scientific information—risk, uncertainty, cost and feasibility—so policy makers could make final prioritization choices. Several members urged transparency about how IRST would reach any rankings. One member suggested piloting the approach on the largest category of objectives (group 2) to work through methods before expanding to other groups.
Stacy Detweiler emphasized a near-term reporting expectation built into the draft HCP chapter: “IRST reporting its findings on, the metrics and trend targets within 1 year issuance of the ITP,” she said, noting some monitoring milestones are on an accelerated schedule tied to implementation.
After iterating language intended to leave IRST discretion about methods, the committee took a roll-call vote. The chair recorded the outcome: “So it passes 9 to 0 with 1 person absent.” The meeting transcript records affirmative votes from members called during the roll call, including Mike Cafaretta (sitting in for David Bugmead), Stacy Detweiler, Wendy Gerlock, Kaylee Holmes, Jason Robison, Josh Seeds and Amanda Sullivan Astor; the chair said the final tally was nine yes, zero no with one absent.
Next steps: co-chairs will meet to propose a small joint AMC–IRST sounding-board group to refine the request and, if helpful, pilot the approach on group 2 objectives before asking IRST for broader rankings. The committee adjourned after the vote.
