Environmental Management

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 17–25 | Cite as

A hierarchical approach to fisheries planning and modeling in the Columbia River Basin

  • Danny C. Lee
  • William E. Grant


The Columbia River Basin is the scene of a massive effort to restore populations of Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) and steelhead (O. mykiss). Efficient restoration is confounded by a high level of complexity, competing sociopolitical goals and values, and uncertainty about key system properties. Simulation models and other tools of systems analysis are important to development of a comprehensive, regionally acceptable strategy. Hierarchy theory provides a useful paradigm for organized complexity within the Columbia Basin and the basis for a trilevel hierarchical structure for organizing and integrating models. Life-stage models compose the most basic simulation units at the lowest level in the proposed hierarchical modeling structure. Each life-stage model simulates a distinct period in the life cycle of anadromous salmonids. Population models at the intermediate level simulate the complete life cycles of salmon and steelhead populations. At the highest level in the hierarchy, interpopulation models simulate extensive, long-term processes that affect multiple species and stocks. A hierarchical system of models is preferable to a single model or to a group of models lacking formal structure. A principal advantage is that models have the correct spatial and temporal resolution for analyzing questions at different scales. A hierarchical structure also facilitates the flow of information among models, and aids in understanding the impacts of uncertainty. Constructing a hierarchy of models should involve both bottom-up and top-down perspectives that maintain logical consistency among models, while allowing unique model structures appropriate for each level in the hierarchy.

Key Words

Columbia River Basin Pacific salmon Steelhead Hierarchy theory Simulation modeling Systems analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Allen, T. F. H., and T. B. Starr. 1982. Hierarchy: Perspectives for ecological complexity. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. and seven coauthors. 1993. Columbia River salmon passage model (CRiSP.1). University of Washington, Center for Quantitative Science, Seattle, 531 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Beamesderfer, R. C., B. E. Rieman, L. J. Bledsoe, and S. Vigg. 1990. Management implication of a model of predation by a resident fish on juvenile salmonids migrating through a Columbia River reservoir.North American Journal of Fisheries Management 10:290–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berggren, T. J., and M. J. Filardo. 1993. An analysis of variables influencing the migration of juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River Basin.North American Journal of Fisheries Management 13:48–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chaney, E. 1978. A question of balance: Water/energy—salmon and steelhead production in the upper Columbia River Basin. Northwest Resource Information Center, Portland, Oregon, 29 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority, 1991. Integrated system plan. Publication 91-16. Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon, 526 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Koslow, J. A. 1992. Fecundity and the stock-recruitment relationship.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 49:210–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lee, D. C. 1991. A stochastic, compartmental model of the migration of juvenile anadromous salmonids in the Columbia River Basin.Ecological Modelling 54:227–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lee, D. C., and J. B. Hyman. 1992. The stochastic life-cycle model (SLCM): Simulating the population dynamics of anadromous salmonids. Research Paper INT-459. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah, 30 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Lee, D. C., and A. V. Kneese. 1989. Fish and hydropower vie for Columbia River waters.Resrouces 94:1–4.Google Scholar
  11. Lee, D. C., and C. M. Paulsen. 1991. Improving system planning in the Columbia River Basin: Scope, information needs, and methods of analysis. Discussion Paper QE91-07. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 23 pp.Google Scholar
  12. Lee, K. N. 1989. The Columbia River Basin: Experimenting with sustainability.Environment 31(6):6–11, 30–33.Google Scholar
  13. Lee, K. N. 1993. Compass and gyroscope: Integrating science and politics for the environment. Island Press, Washington, DC, 243 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Levin, S. A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology.Ecology 73(6):1943–1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leopold, A. 1949. Sand county almanac. Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar
  16. Muckleston, K. W. 1990. Salmon vs. hydropower: Striking a balance in the Pacific Northwest.Environment 32(1):10–15, 32–36.Google Scholar
  17. Nehlsen, W., J. E. Williams, and J. A. Lichatowich. 1991. Pacific salmon at the crossroads: Stocks at risk from California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington.Fisheries 16(2):4–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Northwest Power Planning Council. 1986. Compilation of information on salmon and steelhead losses in the Columbia River Basin. Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon, 252 pp.Google Scholar
  19. Northwest Power Planning Council. 1989. Salmon and steelhead system planning documentation. Prepared by the Monitoring and Evaluation Technical Work Group. Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
  20. Norton, B. G. 1990. Context and hierarchy in Aldo Leopold's theory of environmental management.Ecological Economics 2:119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Norton, B. G., and R. E. Ulanowicz. 1992. Scale and biodiversity policy: A hierarchical approach.Ambio 21 (3):244–249.Google Scholar
  22. O'Neill, R. V., D. L. DeAngelis, J. B. Waide, and T. F. H. Allen. 1986. A hierarchical concept of ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 254 pp.Google Scholar
  23. Peterman, R. M., and M. J. Bradford. 1987. Statistical power of trends in fish abundance.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 44:1879–1889.Google Scholar
  24. Raymond, H. L. 1979. Effects of dams and impoundments on migrations of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead from the Snake River, 1966 to 1975.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 108:505–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schaller, H., and T. Cooney. 1992. Snake River fall chinook life-cycle simulation model for recovery and rebuilding plan evaluation. Draft manuscript. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
  26. Schaller, H., C. Petrosky, E. Weber, and T. Cooney. 1992. Snake River spring/summer chinook life cycle simulation model for recovery and rebuilding plan evaluation. Draft manuscript. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
  27. Volkman, J. M. 1992. Making room in the ark: The Endangered Species Act and the Columbia River Basin.Environment 34(4):18–20, 37–43.Google Scholar
  28. Watt, A. S. 1947. Pattern and process in the plant community.Journal of Ecology 35:1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Webster, J. R. 1979. Hierarchical organization of ecosystems. Pages 119–131in E. Halfon (ed.), Theoretical systems ecology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  30. Zeigler, B. P. 1979. Multilevel multiformalism modeling: An ecosystem example. Pages 17–54in E. Halfon (ed.), Theoretical systems ecology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Danny C. Lee
    • 1
  • William E. Grant
    • 2
  1. 1.USDA Forest ServicesIntermountain Research StationBoiseUSA
  2. 2.Deparment of Wildlife and Fisheries SciencesTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations