Rivrguy -
Let's see if I have this right-

Step 1 -The input from the district biologist (the person closest to the resource in this communication chain) communicates to the regional biologist.

Step 2 -the regional biologist communicates with the fish program deputy director.

Step 3 - the FP deputy director communicates with the FP director.

Step 4- FP director communicates with the Director of Fish Policy

Step 5 Director of fish Policy communicates with the Director.

In addition it looks like that there is a potential for the several different other communication pathways depending on the issues. For example for a policy issue several additional steps might be required with communication to the position implementing local Polices communicating to the State wide policy position who in turn communicating with the intergovernmental salmon manager who re-inserts into communication chain at the FP director. In addition the regional manager may also be involved.

In other words there are at least 5 to 8 rungs in the communication ladder (or more if there are side loops in that ladder) between those with hands on resource information to the final decision maker. In short it looks like there are lots of opportunities for miss understandings with the implied management failures.

Curt