2006 Pacific Northwest Environmental Data Workshop

1
2006 Pacific Northwest Environmental Data Workshop

• Summary of Day 1, 2 and Next Steps Notes

Nancy Tosta, Ross Associates
2
Progress from last year (Stewart Toshach)

• On-going coordination with PNAMP and RGIC
• Meeting of NED signatories
• White papers identify issues
• Workgroups
• Technology for Data Discovery
• Subbasin Planning Workplan
• Water Quality
• Temporal and Spatial
• Riparian and Upland
• Salmonid Monitoring and Research

3
Why are we here? (Phil Roger)

• Make our jobs easier
• Recognize cross-jurisdictional issues
• Improve program implementation
• Prepare for (anticipate) the future

4
What needs to be done? (Joe Scordino)

• Establish regional data system
• Identify data management needs
• Cross-walk existing systems
• Monitor
• Involve all relevant parties
• Establish clear outcomes and objectives
• Demonstrate effectiveness

5
(No Transcript)
6
How do we get there? (Louis Sweeny)

• Networks are grown not installed
• EPA Exchange Network had a driver (Federal
  Reporting requirements) and funding
• EN flow specific data, specific format,
  specific service
• Professional and organizational altruism not
  enough - Need to consider a center and
  localized incentives
• Centralized, de-centralized, distributed,
  warehoused all
• Performance measurement is increasing driver
• Start with bi-lateral shared interests

7
Panel of 9 - Envisioning the System

• Mitch West
• Tom Karier
• Dan Haug
• Peter Friesen
• Bruce Schmidt

• Greg Delwiche
• Rich Kang
• Cy Smith
• John Stein

8
Panel of 9 - Envisioning the System

• Consider this a constant learning environment
  (everything changes)
• Leadership is critical and has to own it
• Centralization helps organization and access
• Integration can only go so far
• Infrastructure pipes to flow data has gaps
• Issue of secondary use of data for different
  purposes?
• Trust is key and lacking

9
Panel of 9 - Envisioning the System

• Centralized databases do work
• Are they like standards where we have so many
  to choose from?
• Role of standards?
• Need to help others do things for us
• Consider other structures objects, lattice,
  index unstructured data

10
Panel of 9 - Envisioning the System

• Information utility
• Perverse authority infrastructure can more
  easily sell not participating
• Demonstrate incremental progress
• Mine the data
• System of systems?

11
Technology Breakout (Ernst Torsten)

• No interest in detailed technology discussion now
• -feeling that interchange technologies could be
  resolved ---open standards
• General Needs/Issues -Highlights
• Should there be a shared list of questions we are
  trying to answer?
• Living list, maybe apply some technology like
  web/wiki
• Do we know this alreadydo we agree?
• Test theory of data gaps
• People keenly interested in what other technology
  folks are doing
• Applications, tools
• Need for the data dictionary
• Map of anti-patterswhere have NED like efforts
  failed before?
• Need for open data structures standardized but
  room for unique data

12
Technology Breakout - Paper exercise for project
to integrate and make available project data from
27 different sources

• Identified major components (10 of them)
• Which of these makes it NED
• Trading Partner Agreement -stewardship
• Data Standard/Definition
• Metadata
• Web Services
• NED Portal Display
• Flow Configuration/API

13
Technology Breakout - Paper exercise for project
to integrate and make available project data from
27 different sources

• Issues deliberated
• Who does the UI - is it NED?
• Project data overlap// who manages
• Sensitive data (have to provide security
  infrastructure)
• People wont participate unless there is trust in
  how data will be handled
• Started to do a straw poll on proposing the
  project
• Turns there are two groups doing this project
  now
• ---you are doing what! Im doing that
• This is probably how most NED project will start

14
Content Breakout (Stewart Toshach)

• Note Red Text are the priority items
• How to link data to metadata
• How to do version control use release notes
• More details needed on how measurements are made
  (Collection methods)
• 3 types of metadata needed what the data is how
  it is collected and how it is QA/QCd.

15
Content Breakout Discussion

• Need to know the statistical sampling frame
  before deciding how to use or reuse the data
• Lost most peer review dont publish tech
  reports for most fishery data
• Integrated Land Management Bureau uses the ISO
  Standard Metadat repository MetaStar
• Need to publish data dictionary
• Need to know how to roll up disparate data sets,
  e.g., collected at different geographic scales or
  with different statistical frames

16
Content Breakout Discussion

• How to track chain of custody, who did what
  with the data, where and when.
• Many field programs have time and resource
  constraintsthe data must be delivered ready or
  not for management decisions
• Is data quality just a trust me issue?

17
Content Breakout Discussion

• Need feedback processes and tools on QA/QC
• How do you move data upstream? E.g., make needed
  corrections back to the source?
• There is no mechanism or review process for
  metadata records

18
Content Breakout Discussion

• Need an analytical tool box to check data
• Need rating systems and language to describe
  confidence we have in the data (eg 1-10)
• Knowledge of data quality drives next research
  tasks

19
Content Breakout Discussion

• Relationship between quality and quantity of
  data a small amount of high quality data can do
  the same (statistically) as large amount of low
  quality data
• Check CSMEP data quality methodology (based on
  EPA EMap)
• Need naming conventions for data sets and simple
  descriptions of data content

20
Content Breakout Discussion

• Responsibility for QA/QC needs to be with each
  agency
• What is the right source for primary and derived
  data -when do you know you are seeing the right
  stuff?
• Credibility issue with small variance in
  different data results from the same data

21
Content Breakout Discussion

• Location data is critical at a minimum it
  allows spatial integration
• A data sharing template agreement is needed to
  allow easier sharing of data between
  organizations

22
Institutional Breakout Group (Jen Bayer)

• Participants Nancy Tosta, Angelo Facchin, Molly
  Moreland, Audrey Hatch, Laura Gephardt, Leif
  Horowitz, Jennifer Pollock, Jen Bayer, Nancy
  Tubbs, Cedric Cooney, Dick Stone, Bruce Schmidt,
  John Stein, Cy Smith, Burney Hill, Helen Rueda,
  Peter Pacquet, Greg Sieglitz

23
Institutional Breakout - Discussion

• What is it?
• It is bigger than Columbia Basin
• Smaller than ?? (Based on issue?)
• Do we need to identify common goals? (50
  questions?)
• Communities of interest
• Measuring effectiveness (e.g, PART)
• Clarify the NED signatories who do they speak
  for?
• The right people must be in the conversation
  (ologists)

24
Institutional Breakout - Discussion

• There is a lack of infrastructure
• There is lack of clarity on the incentives
• Data must be findable
• Information utility?
• Information market place?

25
Institutional Breakout Next Steps

• Clarify drivers (why should people be here?)
• Consider NMFS Listing Decision Framework
• Craft a clear vision of the goals and benefits
  for Executives
• Gain executive participation and commitment
• Understand exec personal performance standards
  and respond to them
• Clarify infrastructure e.g., policy committee,
  technical committee and the agenda and activities
  for NED
• Identify approaches to address effectiveness
  questions
• Clarify connectivity with PNAMP

26
Institutional Panel

• John Stein - NWFSC
• Jennifer Pollock USGS
• Dick Stone WADFW
• Peter Paquet NWPCC
• Bruce Crawford WA IAC

27
Institutional Recommendations

• (John and Tom? or the NED Exec Committee) Have
  discussions with agency heads (e.g., fish chiefs)
  clarify from them whats being asked for
• Demonstrate value-added from participation
• Identify who represents whom as NED signatories
• PNAMP, NED, ? are they putting the list of
  pieces together on whats needed? someone needs
  to identify what the questions. These groups
  should send out common message

28
Institutional Recommendations

• NED workplan what does it say? - is it
  familiar to those who are participating?
• NED steering committee should craft a strategic
  plan maybe include a business plan that
  identifies who funds NED
• Rather than new Center (Toms proposal) whole
  new infrastructure maybe one of NED signatories
  should lead/oversee this??
• As regional players do strategic plans can
  they identify contributions to NED?
• Is it possible to integrate regional portal
  efforts e.g. NBII NW node and BPA NED portal?

29
Institutional Recommendations

• NED MOU is not a negotiated agreement that
  clearly identifies what gains and pains are (WA
  as example signed on behalf of 6 agencies) so
  need to clarify what you get and what you pay by
  signing
• Have to build connectivity between local, state,
  and federal data needs mid-level managers (not
  data, but agency spokespeople with authority to
  speak) should define how to do this
• Look at NED workplan

30
Institutional Recommendations

• Examine existing documents that address benefits
• MOA?? (commit resources?) is it time for this?
• Need governance structure with people with
  authority to speak for the agency (at all levels)
  needs to incorporate NED, RGIC, and PNAMP
  governance structure

31
Institutional Recommendations

• Small steps first wins? - Steering Committee
  identify 3 important questions that capability
  exists to answer put together the systems to
  answer these. (e.g., place to access all TRT
  data, something of need to CRITFC) maybe use
  PART review process to define this (esp the data
  question) can NED help compile these PART
  needs?
• Use the above to describe value-added and use
  it as marketing mechanism
• Start with derived data
• Use extreme programming start small and
  iterate
• Earmark for PISCES? Who does this?

32
Institutional Recommendations

• Great benefit of going to DC and demonstrating
  coordinated effort and voice (states and feds)
• NED set up a policy committee to work on
  benefits and vision and help the story. This is
  senior execs may be iterative to get people
  involved.
• Consider development of matrix that shows
  agencies, goals, and current and needed data
  this will be done by policy committee?
• Move from MOU to MOA but still work to get full
  sign-on from all players even if they cannot
  commit resources

33
Technical Panel

• Jimmy Kagan Natural Resources Institute, Oregon
• Tom Pansky BPA
• Curtis Cude ODEQ
• Mike Beatty BOR
• Tom Iverson - CBFWA

34
Technical Recommendations

• Comprehensive inventory of what data are
  available (NED has done some of this already)
  include all the little projects out there
• Inventory what you need (will be easier to do if
  the 3 top questions are defined)
• Try to identify a quick win see technology
  breakout discussion
• NED way? involves larger cross-section of
  participants e.g., cover 85 of data in region?

35
Technical Recommendations

• Already lots of pilots (maybe these are phase 1
  vs pilots) need to make them operational need
  to demonstrate proof of concept
• Use NED as forum to develop technical solutions
  examine options for synergy among existing
  systems
• Consider how to strategically move forward based
  on approaches taken and lessons learned
• Create one-place report population, limiting
  factors, project status recognize living nature
  of the data (being done within the Basin) not
  storing the data access to real-time. Fish W
  managers are providing access to their data.

36
Technical Recommendations

• CBFWA may contribute to creation of NED portal
  by getting FWM data on it (data may be made
  accessible from StreamNet)
• Take simple first bite population status and
  trends more difficult questions await
• First requirement put data on the web (how make
  this happen?) (incentives to play very
  different than tools to play)
• Many-one.org portal portal technology

37
Technical Recommendations

• Examine federal directives for available tools
• NED portal offers option to create a dynamic
  inventory
• Central system (Tom Kariers vision) to help
  provide access to integrated data
• Adhere to international standards and protocols

38
Technical Recommendations

• Use technology and web to find better ways to
  collaborate e.g., create a wiki. Before
  building anything try to find out whats there
  but how to do this? Schema and field names not
  published make available on a portal?
• Need to create vision for big picture of
  technological network show how water quality
  data exchange, heritage data, StreamNet, PCSRF
  fit together.
• Get agreement on the data stewards
• Training? Is this a need?

39
Other Recommendations Wrap up

• Proceed with pilots using PCSRF and CBFWA
• Develop clear statement of benefits of
  participation and description of what NED is
• NED Co-Chairs, Tom and John make contact with
  other signatories and those who should sign and
  provide reasons for participation