There is a condominium leased by Region 3 for 6 months across from the Service's office in Arlington, Virginia. It is available if you go to the WO.

Bud shared the following miscellaneous items with the Team: John Rogers wants all Congressional contacts coordinated through the WO/Legislative Services Office. NGOs are very important at this time for the Service in our relations with Congress. Congressional staffs are young, underpaid, and uninformed. We need to help them understand the Service and its mission. The Northeast-Midwest Group is very effective with Congress. Ohio's Congressman LaTourette and Senator Glenn are involved with them.

The National Conservation Training Center's EBM training course is good; all should consider going to it, even those who believe they understand the concepts of EBM. The NCTC has a Team Effectiveness training session that is available to the Service's teams. It can range from 1 day to 2 weeks. A survey is filled out by team members and then the training is tailored to the team's specific needs. The GLBE Team's Executive Committee (ExCom) is in the process of completing the survey portion of the course, which will be evaluated to determine specific training needs. The ExCom will eventually make recommendations to the full Team as to the value of the training session for the full Team.

There is a traveling Service Great Lakes Ecosystem display (set up in the meeting room) that was presented at the 1996 State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference. Any comments or recommendations for improvement of the display should be forwarded to Bob.

Region 3 has a World Wide Web home page that will include a narrative for each of its ecosystems. A draft write-up for the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem was distributed to meeting participants - any comments should be provided to Bob.

Station profiles are being finalized and Bob will distribute the most recent version to team members by cc:mail in 2-3 weeks.

The revised state Congressional briefing booklets are being prepared. They should be used for outreach when possible.

Mike Tansy - Team Leader

Since the May 1996 meeting, the Executive Committee (ExCom) has had 6 conference call relating to the focus area concept, development of the agenda for this meeting, etc. The final draft focus area concept and focus area profile were distributed to all Great Lakes field stations. Minutes of ExCom conference calls have been kept and, when appropriate, have been distributed to all Team members. Supervisors need to ensure that these minutes are provided to staff so they know what is going on.

Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River - Dieter Busch

1. FERC hydro relicensing on the St. Lawrence is an issue.

2. The Service should call what we are doing an ecosystem approach, not ecosystem management as the Service will never manage an ecosystem.

3. Our plates are already full.

4. Lake Erie Basin conference calls may be convened.

Lake Erie - Dieter Busch

The Lake Erie Basin Team has not been particularly organized to date, though there has been good coordination between Regions 3 and 5.

Lake St. Claire/Detroit River - Doug Spencer

There is a lot of activity going on by non-Service interests. The Service needs to pick and choose carefully where to get involved. Wyandotte and Grassy Island NWR work may develop into a Superfund project. In FY 1996, $115,000 was spent on sediment testing; in FY 1997, $37,000 will be spent. The International Joint Commission (IJC) Remedial Action Plan committee is involved here.

Lake Huron - Jerry McClain

There is a need to identify focus areas. A request was sent to field offices for input. Lake Huron is the last Great Lake to initiate the LAMP process and Jerry is involved in it. The LAMP is quantifying the ecosystem and fish community components.

Lake Michigan - Mark Holey

Potential focus areas were identified at the May 1996 full Team meeting. There has been some field office input provided but final focus areas need to be identified.

Lake Superior - Tom Busiahn

After the May 1996 meeting, field offices were contacted regarding identification of focus areas, which still need to be finalized. The Service is involved in a lot of projects but it is not necessarily a result of Team action.

Before the meeting, each field station was requested to prepare a single page overview of its EBM approach type activities to be shared with other Team members at this meeting. Each station presented its highlights of these activities - refer to the handouts for station summaries.

EPA is soliciting project proposals for funding. Three new categories are included for proposals (contact Rich Greenwood for further information). EPA is interested in forming partnerships on projects. EPA's National Estuary Program, which has not gotten going in the Great Lakes, and the Service's Coastal Wetlands Grant Program were discussed as possible areas that should receive attention.

Doug Spencer volunteered to be the Team Leader following Janet Smith's tenure, which begins May 1, 1997 and extends through April 30, 1998.

Jim Hudgins presented an overview of the Service's display at this year's Michigan Outdoor-ama event that was sponsored by the Michigan United Conservation Clubs. Development of the display, which included active participation and funding from Service field stations in Michigan, was coordinated under the energetic and effervescent leadership of Joan Guilfoyle. The display included standup displays, hands-on fish and wildlife items, a 6-foot-square Great Lakes Basin ecosystem puzzle, and items confiscated by Law Enforcement. Numerous Service brochures were passed out. About 100,000 people attended the event with a large number visiting the Service's display.

The Team discussed the future use of the display. Potential venues identified by the Team included Congress; other similar outdoor shows in other states; Earth Day events; IJC and its annual Congressional breakfast; converting it into a traveling exhibit trailer. In addition to the general need for more and better handouts, there is a need for a leaflet that addresses the Service as an agency and that includes the Service's mission and identification of its Federal trust resources for which it is responsible. A suggestion was made for the Service to investigate producing a brochure that could be provided in the seat back pockets of commercial airlines - this would allow us to reach a million people in 30 days. Another suggestion was for the display to be integrated into the Minnesota Valley NWR's display materials. Two concepts for the display were discussed: (1) a small ship-able display, and (2) a larger 3D display similar to the one used at Outdoor-ama.

The Team decided to ask Bud Oliveira and Joan Guilfoyle to investigate the possibility of using the display in April 1997 in or near Congress to coincide with the effort to reauthorize the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act. Janet Smith will contact Bud and Joan regarding this idea. If it is workable, the ExCom and others who were involved with the Outdoor-ama will be contacted to get the effort going ASAP. [Note: subsequent to the meeting, a conference call was convened to discuss the merits of pursuing this idea - currently, Mike Tansy is working with Legislative Services and congressional staff to obtain congressional sponsorship of the display. Once a date/location for use of the display is identified, subsequent conference calls will be convened to outline develop a plan of action.]

The Plan's migratory bird goal and objectives were revised, based largely on input provided by Region 3's Migratory Bird Program staff, which was distributed to meeting participants in advance of this meeting. The revised goal and objectives are attached.

The Team discussed how to address recommended and/or mandatory revisions to the GLBE Team's Plan. The Team decided that recommended minor modifications will be discussed at the next full Team meeting (recommended changes should be identified in the preliminary agenda in advance of the meeting), as needed; more significant changes, such as those that may be associated with the Service's implementation of provisions of the Government Performance and Results Act, will be brought before the Team only as needed.

After some discussion of the map of this ecosystem, the Team decided to revise the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem map for inclusion with the Team's Plan as an addendum. The true "hydrological" watershed (ecosystem) boundaries should be depicted with solid lines; the Service's administrative boundaries, i.e., Rainy River (Minnesota) and Kankakee River (Illinois and Indiana) boundaries should be depicted with a foot-noted dotted line to explain the differences.

Before addressing a number of agenda items related to improving the Team's effectiveness, the Team brainstormed benefits of the EBM approach to acknowledge that, although improvements can be made, there are a number of positive aspects of the approach:

• Improved intra- and inter-regional, inter-program cooperation, e.g., St Marys River dye study re: sea lamprey control; round goby/Chicago diversion issue; Detroit River and Grosse Ile area restoration efforts; Helmer Nelson wetland demonstration site in Minnesota

• Improved partnering with other non-Service players

• Improved cross-program support for projects, e.g., Michigan Outdoor-ama display, using the ecosystem based management approach theme and involving multiple Service stations

• Improved coordination on Lakewide Area Management Plan processes

• Building support for the National Wetlands Inventory's Great Lakes wetlands status and trends efforts

• Funding proposals developed cooperatively by multiple stations

Dick Dyer explained that in October 1996, Region 5 convened a regionwide meeting of regional office and field office supervisors to review and discuss EBM implementation, problems, needed changes, etc. Among Region 5's decisions relative to its implementation of the EBM approach are the following:

• The EBM concept is OK.

• The organizational structure isn't working; it is too complicated and coordination problems are widespread.

• A decision was made to limit each field office to participating on one or two ecosystem teams. Some field offices had been working with 5 or more ecosystems, which spread them too thin to be effective.

• Each ecosystem team will address and report on only one or two major, common issues each year. This minimizes duplication with programmatic reporting requirements.

• The ecosystem teams will not be involved in budget matters - budgeting will be done by programs.

• Region 5's RD said that the Region can't return to program management as that decision will need to be made by the new Director.

• A Service-wide evaluation of the EBM approach, which was scheduled when the Service's EBM approach was initiated, will be conducted this fall.

• The RO has become more complex and inefficient. This is the opposite direction that it should be going. The surname process has become lengthy and time consuming.

Rich Greenwood explained that the IJC, through U.S. EPA and Environment Canada, is the organizer of this conference; the first conference was held in 1994, with the second conference, which was bigger and better, held in 1996 (contact Rich for copies of the 1996 conference presentations). The Service had five displays at SOLEC 96. The overall purpose of SOLEC was to bring together information on the State of the Lakes consistent with a commitment of the 1987 Amending Protocol of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1972 to regularly evaluate progress. The planning of these conferences require a significant time commitment. SOLEC has a webpage: http://www.cciw.ca/solec/. The focus of the 1998 conference will be ecosystem indicators. This is an opportunity for the Service to define its role in the Great Lakes. The IJC is interested in becoming more involved in Great Lakes issues beyond the biannual conference. Rich indicated that SOLEC will probably become the overall coordinating force between the 5 LAMPs being prepared.

The ExCom devoted much effort during the past year to developing a suggested Focus Area approach and a Focus Area Profile, which were presented in advance of the meeting to all Team members (see attached). In essence, the ExCom recommends to the Team that each Great Lake Basin Team select one to three focus areas that involve participation of more than one Service office. Bob explained that adopting Focus Areas is only one of many tools for implementing the Service's EBM approach in the Great Lakes; over time, the Team may determine if the use of Focus Areas is worthwhile, if the Focus Area approach should be modified, or if it should be discontinued for an alternate approach. He explained that this approach is consistent with the view of Region 3's RD that focus areas are where the Service can concentrate its efforts and get the job done in a relatively discrete period of time, e.g., 3 or 4 years; the Service would then move on to another focus area. It was pointed out that the Coastal America Program has a similar focus area concept except that focus areas are selected by several Federal agencies. Tom Busiahn completed a Focus Area Profile and shared it with the Team as an example of how the approach may be implemented.

The Team ultimately decided to implement the Focus Area concept and evaluate it after one year. Each Basin Team will meet to identify one to three Focus Areas, including the completion of a Focus Area Profile for each Focus Area, by May 5, 1997; Bob will distribute a complete set of completed profiles to all Basin Teams; Basin Teams will initiate Focus Area efforts immediately, as appropriate.

Tom Larson (Region 3, AP) distributed to Team members a handout describing his proposal for a regional approach to relating regional priorities and plans. A two-step approach is proposed that would inventory the Region's resource needs and that would provide a tool to ecosystem teams to demonstrate how their efforts contribute to specific regional priorities. The two proposed steps include:

1. A short term process that would collect and summarize existing resource information, Federal trust resource interests, existing plans, etc. This would provide a common base of knowledge for all Service people in Region 3. This first step would be completed in a few weeks and the results of which would be provided to field offices for their review and comment.

2. The second step would be long term and would involve collection of needed data to fill in knowledge gaps.

The Team discussed this proposal at length. Among concerns that were expressed included whether this assessment was actually needed, how labor-intensive it would be, how much it would cost and who would pay for it, and what was meant by resource "priorities" and how they would be used. The Team ultimately agreed with the first stage (short-term resource assessment) of the Regional Resource Assessment concept as presented. However, given concerns by the Team for the cost-benefit of the second stage (long-term, more-detailed resource assessment) of such an effort, the Team recommends evaluation of the need for the second stage and, if concluded to be needed, development of a more-detailed proposal.

Identification of opportunities for the GLBE Team to improve implementation of the EBM approach and Role of the states, tribes, and others to GLBE Team meetings

Time expired before these agenda items were discussed, and the Team chose not to extend the meeting to address them. Accordingly, Bob asked that Team members send to him any comments on these issues via cc:mail within 2 weeks; Bob will compile the recommendations and share them with the ExCom for further action, as appropriate.

The Team delegated to the ExCom the decision as to where and when (after the field season) the next meeting would be convened.

The Team brainstormed positive features and those needing improvement of the meeting.

Positive aspects of this meeting included: high level of participation of Team members; the budget was not discussed; substantial revisions to the Team's Plan were not discussed; discussion was open and honest; participation was based on good preparation for the meeting; real resource issues were discussed.

Aspects of the meeting needing improvement included: too much time was devoted to descriptions of field station EBM activities; the seating/table arrangement was not conducive to face-to-fact interaction; EBM activities that would not have occurred otherwise should be identified; the meeting room should be located at the hotel; Team members should prioritize agenda items in advance of the meeting; project leaders should send senior staff if they cannot attend the meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:59 am.

Summary of Decisions / Action Items:

Finalize Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem Team field station descriptions. (Krska)

Follow up on updates of Region 3's state-by-state Congressional briefing books. (Krska)

Inform the field of current Congressional briefings. (John Christian)

Future use of the Great Lakes Ecosystem "Michigan Outdoor-ama" display

Janet Smith to contact Bud Oliveira and Joan Guilfoyle by the end of the week of March 7 to establish the feasibility of displaying a modified version of the Outdoor-ama display in one of the Congressional office buildings to coincide with reauthorization of the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act, scheduled for some time in April 1997. (Janet Smith)

The ExCom and those who contributed to the Outdoor-ama display, i.e., Jim Hudgins, Ed DeVries, Denny Lavis, will work together to address necessary modifications and logistics associated with the display's deployment in Washington, D.C., in association with reauthorization of the GLFWRA; whether or not such use of the display is feasible, the ExCom will address the future use of the display. (ExCom and Michigan Outdoor-ama planning staff)

Revisions to the GLBE Team's Plan: recommended minor modifications will be discussed at the next full Team meeting (recommended changes should be identified in the preliminary agenda in advance of the meeting), as needed; more significant changes, such as those that may be associated with the Service's implementation of provisions of the Government Performance and Results Act, will be brought before the Team only as needed.

Revise the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem map for inclusion with the Team's Plan as an addendum: depict the true "hydrological" watershed (ecosystem) boundaries with solid lines and depict the Service's administrative boundaries, i.e., Rainy River (Minnesota) and Kankakee River (Illinois and Indiana) boundaries with a foot-noted dotted line to explain the differences. (Krska)

The GLBE Team adopts the Focus Area Concept as described in the ExCom's draft document dated January 21, 1997: Each Basin Team will meet to identify one to three Focus Areas, including the completion of a Focus Area Profile, by May 5, 1997; Krska will distribute a complete set of completed profiles to all Basin Teams; Basin Teams will initiate Focus Area efforts immediately, as appropriate. (Basin Teams/Krska)

The GLBE Team agrees with the first stage (short-term resource assessment) of the Regional Resource Assessment concept as presented to the Team by Tom Larson (Region 3, Ascertainment and Planning); given concerns by the Team for the cost-benefit of the second stage (long-term, more-detailed resource assessment) of such an effort, among others, the Team recommends evaluation of the need for the second stage and, if determined to be needed, development of a more-detailed proposal. (Larson)

Recommended measures for improving the GLBE Team's implementation of the EBM approach will be forwarded from Team members to the ExCom via cc:mail by March 20, 1997. The ExCom will categorize and address recommendations for presentation to the full Team for final decision, as appropriate. (Team/ExCom)

The ExCom will determine the time and place for the next full Team meeting on behalf of the full Team. (ExCom)

Attendance list:

John Christian (R3 ARD), Dick Dyer (R5 Geographic Associate), Bud Oliveira (R3 Legislative Liaison), Bob Krska (R3 Ecosystem Coordinator), Gary Klar (Marquette SLC), Mike Tansy (Seney NWR Team Leader), Larry Martin (Ottawa NWR), Rich Greenwood (FWS Liaison to GLNPO), Bob Lumadue (Ann Arbor LE), Faber Bland (Pendills Creek NFH), David Huntly (Jordan River NFH), Dieter Busch (Lower Great Lakes FRO), Don Tiller (Iroquois NWF; R5 Team Leader), Bob Kavetsky (East Lansing FO), Doug Spencer (Shiawassee NWR), Jim Hudgins (Michigan PL), Jerry McClain (Alpena FRO), Mark Holey (Green Bay FRO), Roderick May (Genoa NFH), Kent Kroonemeyer (Reynoldsburg FO), Paul Burke (Twin Cities FO), Ken Phillips (LaCrosse Fish Health Center), Tom Larson (R3-AP) Elizabeth McCloskey (NISO), Tom Busiahn (Ashland FRO), Janet Smith (Green Bay FO).

Meeting minutes prepared by: Bob Krska based on the meeting notes of Kent Kroonemeyer

Final minutes distributed April 15, 1997