Fraser River sockeye salmon: data synthesis and cumulative impacts

the conclusions of the Expert Panel at the workshop in June 2010 sponsored by thePSC (Pacific Salmon Commission) (Peterman et al. 2010). The current report had moredata and analyses available to it than the PSC workshop.Response: Thank you for the positive feedback.c. The report falls short on interpretation of its own data analyses, though, as I describeat the end of section 6 of this review. I respect the fact that they were extremelycomplex analyses done in a relatively short time, but even this draft report could havebeen better at describing those analyses. Given that those analyses drew essentiallythe same conclusions as found by data from the other contractors, this problem is notas serious as it would have been if the original data analyses described here were theonly ones to go on.Response: The reviewer provides much more specific comments on this issue in Section 6 ofthis review. We have provided our responses to each of those points in Section 6.3. Are there additional quantitative or qualitative ways to evaluate the subjectarea not considered in this report? How could the analysis be improved?There are only a few places where I noted that the evaluations of hypotheses herecould be improved. These are noted in section 6 below as specific comments.Response: We have responded to the comments referred to here in Section 6.4. Are the recommendations provided in this report supportable? Do you haveany further recommendations to add?a. In general, the recommendations are well supported. The authors have done anexcellent job of relatively concisely compiling a complicated set of evidence. The onlyrecommendation that I might add is that management decisions still need to be made,despite the lack of appropriate data on some purported mechanisms affecting thedecline of Fraser sockeye salmon. There will always be uncertainties, and althoughsome of the judgments summarized here are qualitative, they at least describe the stateof the art and provide everyone with more information than they had before.Response: The challenge of making decisions under uncertainty is a good point, and wehave expanded our discussion of prioritization in Section 5.2.2.5. What information, if any, should be collected in the future to improve ourunderstanding of this subject area?a. I have nothing to add beyond what has already been included in the variousrecommendations in the report.6. Please provide any specific comments for the authors.1. I realize that this document was produced under considerable time pressure, but it123