Regional Habitat Indicator Project (RHIP), Survey 2
Informing selection of management questions related to MACROINVERTEBRATES

Question Title

INTRODUCTION
The Regional Habitat Indicators Project (RHIP) aims to enhance data sharing and regional reporting by identifying and recommending a small set of management questions, indicators, and objectives for surface water attributes that are of common interest across the Pacific Northwest. We are focusing on data that are currently available to communicate status and trends of aquatic habitats and allow comparisons within and among regions.

By taking 15 minutes to complete this survey, you can help us understand what management questions are important to organizations throughout the Pacific Northwest. Once we know what questions are of greatest common interest, we'll begin talking about indicators to inform the questions, targets, and data accessibility and sharing.

Management questions were initially compiled by work group participants drawing from their organizations' reports and websites. Similar questions were combined and then evaluated against 5 criteria using a survey; see the full results from Survey 1 here. Based on feedback from Survey 1 some questions were reworded and added to the list for consideration. Questions have been intentionally kept broad; specificity will come when selecting indicators and targets, and it will be up to individual organizations to determine the geographic scope that is appropriate for their reporting needs.

INSTRUCTIONS
Read through the list of questions and select the three that you think should be the focus of our efforts to enhance data sharing and regional reporting.

The list consists of all the original questions from Survey 1 and some reworded questions based on survey feedback. When making your selections, you should consider the original and reworded management questions (MQs). If you prefer the original wording, select the original question. If you prefer the reworded version, select the reworded question. If you're interested in how the original questions rank based on Survey 1 responses, scores (on a scale from 0 to 15) can be found in parentheses at the end of original questions.

Question Title

* 1. Select the three questions you think we should focus on for future discussions of indicators, targets, and data accessibility and sharing.

MQ 1 Original: Are environmental conditions improving? Are environmental condition targets met? (Score 10.2)

MQ 1 Reword: Are environmental conditions supporting macroinvertebrate productivity (diversity and biomass) that trends towards established targets?

MQ 2 Original: What are the causes of biological impairments (e.g. sediment, nutrients, temperature)? (Score 10.0)

MQ 3 Original: Are Best Management Practices (BMPs) having a positive impact on macroinvertebrate indicator scores? (Score 6.9)

MQ 3 Reword: What actions have been taken to return the environment to support a more historic or natural macroinvertebrate (MI) community structure (indicator)?

MQ 4 Original: How are land use stressors affecting the status and trends of macroinvertebrate indicators? (Score 8.6)

MQ 5 Original: What is the macroinvertebrate productivity (diversity and biomass) of the watershed? (Score 6.8)

MQ 6 Original: Is climate change affecting water quality needed for sustainable fish populations? (Score 8.6)

MQ 6 Reword: Is climate change affecting macroinvertebrate composition or abundance needed for sustainable fish populations?

Question Title

* 2. Who is your employer?

College or University

Consulting or Contracting company

Federal Government

Local Government (city, county, etc)

NGO

State Government

Tribe

Other

Question Title

* 3. What is your role in your organization?

Data Manager / Data Steward

Manager

Monitoring Coordinator

Researcher / Scientist

RME Policy and Reporting

Other

Question Title

* 4. Are you a member of the Macroinvertebrate Indicator Work Group?

Yes

Question Title

* 5. Additional comments?

Thank you for your time and participation!