McManus et al 2020 vital sign evaluation

Product

A product is any output of an effort, including datasets, documents, graphics, or websites.

Create A New Product Page

Last Ten Documents

• Cereghino 2015 grant administrative streamlining
• WDNR 2001 shorezone data dictionary
• Thurston County 2015 county-wide planning policies
• TRPC 2013 sustainable thurston development plan
• TNC 2011 fisher slough monitoring baseline report
• TCAMRC 2018 thurston amphibian road survey summary
• TCAMRC 2017 thurston amphibian road survey protocols
• Sync 2018 infrastructure coordination fact sheet
• Sync 2018 DRAFT strategic plan for infrastructure coordination
• Stuart & Canty 2010 environmental markets for agriculture

Product Categories

Dataset‎ (1 C, 6 P)

Document‎ (5 C, 158 P, 520 F)

Graphic‎ (3 C, 78 F)

Website‎ (35 P)

Google scholar search

Linked To This Product

Wiki Rules

• Wiki text does not reflect the policy or opinion of any agency or organization
• Please adhere to our Social Contract and Style Guide
• Complain here, and be nice.

File Link: McManus et al 2020 vital sign evaluation.pdf

McManus, E., K. Durance and S. Khan. 2020. Revisions to Puget Sound Vital Signs and Indicators. A Collaboration of Ross Strategic and Puget Sound Partnership. Olympia, WA. 87pp.

Notes

• Using Vital Signs and indicators as the only measures of progress for Puget Sound recovery is challenging during development of the Puget Sound Action Agenda and related Puget Sound Implementation Strategies, because Vital Signs and indicators do not provide information on short- or intermediate-term progress towards achieving recovery Goals.
• It is not clear how the indicators and information about ecosystem conditions drive recovery priorities and actions.
• "the Partnership commissioned an effort led by Sandra O’Neill at the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) to propose a framework for an update (“evolution”) of the Vital Sign indicators … O’Neill et al. pointed out that many of the existing indicators are “lagging” indicators that should not be expected to respond quickly to management actions. These indicators are useful to understand long-term changes and for communication, but less suitable for periodically assessing progress towards recovery goals and objectives."(p.11)
• The Leadership Council specified three uses of Vital Signs and indicators:
  • Understand the condition of the ecosystem.
  • Articulate our shared statutory recovery goals and understand if we are achieving them.
  • Inspire focused action to drive progress towards meeting our shared goals. (p.15)
• "This effort was not designed to produce syntheses that use information from Vital Signs and indicators--along with information from other progress measures and findings from broader monitoring and assessment studies--to tell clear and engaging stories about how the Puget Sound ecosystem is doing, what additional work is needed, and what actions must be taken if recovery is to be achieved. This type of overarching work is needed and was the subject of ongoing conversations and much interest throughout the revisions process."(p. 34)