CRITFC Salmon Population

Crosswalk Mapper Focus Group

Meeting Notes

November 2, 2012 - 9:00– 11:00 am

Attendees: Denise Kelsey (CRITFC), David Graves (CRITFC), Kathryn Thomas (USGS/PNAMP), Jacque Schei (USGS/PNAMP), Joe Nowinski (CRITFC), Steve VanderPloeg (WDFW) Leslie Sikora (WDFW/StreamNet), Tom Iverson (CBWFF), Mike Banach (StreamNet), Phil Roger (CRITFC)

Mapper website:

ACTIONS: Provide comments on tool and front page by Monday, November 19th

Meeting notes:

No cost extension being requested, project currently slated to end the end of November, asking BPA for an extension at least through February

  • States are currently represented with sub-basin planning population boundaries from early 2000’s, CRITFC has not yet received more current population boundaries from Idaho, Washington, and Oregon; Anne Marshall is working on converting linear SaSi data for entry into the Mapper
  • Colville tribe has recently sent data for incorporation
  • Have TRT data that needs to be attributed to NOAA NMFS names
  • Still need any data ShoBan wish to contribute

Who is the audience for this tool/information?

  • Anyone who manages fish populations in the Columbia River Basin
  • Can be used for looking at overlay of populations as defined by different entities and looking at an individual HUC6 to determine all population unites defined for that HUC 6
  • Note on terms: range is the entire geographic area a species can inhabit and distribution the actual area that is inhabited. The population boundaries are generally boundaries of ranges. Some organizations include entire ranges and others only the accessible range (e.g. range ends at a dam)

New front page for web tool

  • CRITFC will have a new web site soon, the current front page for tool will be converted to new style

Regions shown on navigation page are not based on any existing delineation

  • AMS categories could be used as an alternative for the 4 regions shown, AMS categories could be same as NOAA categories

Entry into a population

  • All sections show up, this is somewhat confusing – several suggestions were made to make it easier for viewer – shade area of query or shade area not of query, use cross hatching (easier for those that have trouble distinguishing shades)
  • Suggest legend turn on automatically rather than viewer having to find and turn on, this makes it clearer as to what is being seen and what to do next, layer list not evident
  • When click on single HUC, see all 1st level attributes
  • Pop-ups on attribute field names are still not working consistently
  • Second level attributes – field names need resizing
  • Basemap can be changed
  • ESA and subbasin boundaries are similar but not exact, coloring of gray for one on black for other gives impression of dotted line, need to consider color change
  • Can have many maps open at one time
  • Some HUC’s can be empty because no populations, need to be attributed as such so viewer doesn’t think it is an error

Other tools to possible interact with via web services

  • NWIFC/WDFS – good prototype of a tribal application
  • Integrate into CA exchange network
  • Connect with new StreamNet query system via HUC 6 structure
  • Integrate with Monitoring Resources/Explorer
  • Explorer will feature project locations, will be build in next few months, Sitka will develop using 1 year contract
  • Question related to web services? If a HUC has more than one population name, how does a web service handle the request?

Applications

  • Can ask the question of how a calculated VSP value may differ depending on the population boundaries used for calculation
  • Potential way to summarize discrepancies – use planned monitoring resources explorer feature to look at where projects are actually sampling, then compare project locations with population boundaries in Salmon Crosswalk
  • A broad summary of populations that shows discrepancies would be useful to initiate a conversation about population names with contributing organizations

Discuss the type of query tool that R. Scranton requested at last meeting, this seems to be a ‘report’ type of feature; Russell will be contacted for clarification

Some population boundaries, such as TRT, split a HUC. Those boundaries have been maintained where possible.