Adaptive Management Adaptive Management MRG ESA Collaborative MRG ESA Collaborative
ProgramProgram“Steps to a New/Amended “Steps to a New/Amended BA/BO for the Middle Rio BA/BO for the Middle Rio
Grande”Grande”Part 1 - presented by: Part 1 - presented by:
Valda Terauds, CGWPValda Terauds, CGWP
U.S. Bureau of ReclamationU.S. Bureau of Reclamation
Steps in Adaptive Steps in Adaptive ManagementManagement
1.1. Problem definitionProblem definition2.2. Determination of Determination of
ecosystem management ecosystem management goals and objectivesgoals and objectives
3.3. Determination of the Determination of the ecosystem baselineecosystem baseline
4.4. Development of Development of conceptual modelsconceptual models
5.5. Selecting future Selecting future restoration or restoration or management actionsmanagement actions
6.6. Implementing actionsImplementing actions7.7. Monitoring and Monitoring and
ecosystem responseecosystem response8.8. Evaluation of actions Evaluation of actions
with proposals for with proposals for modificationmodification
Identify the needs
Design/adjusta plan of action
Implementthe plan
Monitor the outcome
Evaluateresults
Step 1 – Problem Step 1 – Problem DefinitionDefinition
Current BO Not Hydrologically Current BO Not Hydrologically SustainableSustainable What will native RG flows support?What will native RG flows support? How far will 8,000 AFY Supplemental How far will 8,000 AFY Supplemental
Water go?Water go?
Native Flows and BO Native Flows and BO TargetsTargets
Water demands to meet Water demands to meet 2003 BO not sustainable2003 BO not sustainable Historic hydrologic Historic hydrologic
variability variability Native Otowi flows alone Native Otowi flows alone
cannot reliably meet BO cannot reliably meet BO targetstargets
(ISC 2004 evaluation for WAMS (ISC 2004 evaluation for WAMS Workgroup)Workgroup)
Climate changeClimate change Basin overappropriationBasin overappropriation Population/demand growthPopulation/demand growth
FIGURE 4PERCENT OF MONTHS IN WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL MEAN MONTHLY FLOW ARE LESS
THAN THE REQUIRED FLOWS
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
MONTH
PE
RC
EN
T
% of Time Flows at Otowi March April May June 1-15 June 16-30 July August September Octobera) Meet BO Target 95 85 87 79 92 74 74 71 85b) Do not Meet BO Target 5 15 13 21 8 26 26 29 15BO TargetEmbudo Flows to Meet BO Target (cfs) 390 400 410 420 260 280 260 260 250
Continuous Flow to San Marcial 100 cfs Albuquerque (Central)
Month
Supplemental Water Supplemental Water SourcesSources
Historic sources: SJC project leases & Historic sources: SJC project leases & emergency agreements with New Mexico emergency agreements with New Mexico (relinquish Compact credits)(relinquish Compact credits)
Reclamation is limited by legislation to Reclamation is limited by legislation to leases from willing partiesleases from willing parties
SJC project water contractor usage SJC project water contractor usage increasingincreasing Municipal diversion projects coming on line Municipal diversion projects coming on line
(Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Espanola)(Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Espanola) Future supplemental water leases: 8,000 Future supplemental water leases: 8,000
AFYAFY Emergency water agreements are not Emergency water agreements are not
sustainable for long-term planningsustainable for long-term planning
Historic Supplemental Water Usage Historic Supplemental Water Usage (1997-2006)(1997-2006)
7,780 (2005) – 202,269 (2000) AFY7,780 (2005) – 202,269 (2000) AFY
Actual Supplemental Water Use
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
Month
Su
pp
lem
en
tal W
ate
r (A
F)
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
Estimated Historical Year Minnow BO Estimated Historical Year Minnow BO
DemandDemand
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
11019
40
1942
1944
1946
1948
1950
1952
1954
1956
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
Dem
and
(1,
000
af)
Estimated Supplemental Water Estimated Supplemental Water DemandsDemands
(MRGESA Collaborative Program-former WAMS Estimates)(MRGESA Collaborative Program-former WAMS Estimates)
2003 BO Condition2003 BO Condition Estimated DemandEstimated Demand
Article VII YearArticle VII Year 27,000 to 97,000 ac-ft27,000 to 97,000 ac-ft
DRY (non Article DRY (non Article VII)VII)
53,000 to 66,000 ac-ft53,000 to 66,000 ac-ft
AVERAGEAVERAGE 32,000 to 42,000 ac-ft32,000 to 42,000 ac-ft
WETWET 21,000 to 30,000 ac-ft21,000 to 30,000 ac-ft
Actual 2003 BO Usage (Article VII): 7,780 to 46,781 AFY
Future Supplemental Water available: 8,000 AFY
Supplemental Water & Supplemental Water & 2003 BO2003 BO
2003 BiOp Supplemental Water (2003-2006)
02,0004,0006,0008,000
10,00012,00014,00016,00018,000
Time (month)
Su
pp
ele
men
tal W
ate
r (a
cre
-feet)
2006
2005
2004
2003
Supplemental water use for 2003 BO (2003-2006): 7,780 to 46,781 AFY all under Dry Year designations due to Article VII restrictions
How is Supplemental Water How is Supplemental Water Used?Used?
Support minnow spawnSupport minnow spawn Keep river wet to June 15Keep river wet to June 15 Managed recession after June 15 – Managed recession after June 15 –
less than 8 miles/day dryingless than 8 miles/day drying Meet late season BO flow targetsMeet late season BO flow targets
Average Monthly Supplemental Average Monthly Supplemental Water UseWater Use
2003 BO Average Use (2003-2006) 2003 BO Average Use (2003-2006) =24,144 AFY=24,144 AFY2003 BiOp Average Supplemental Water Use (2003-2006)
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
month
Su
pp
lem
enta
l Wat
er (
acre
-fee
t)
Series1 0 0 745 1,790 3,053 5,790 1,965 3,461 5,906 1,433 0 0
Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
MRGESA Collaborative MRGESA Collaborative Program Program August 2006 WorkshopAugust 2006 Workshop
Goal: Explore stakeholder ideas & Goal: Explore stakeholder ideas & concepts to develop a long-term concepts to develop a long-term sustainable, stable BOsustainable, stable BO
Constraint: 8,000 AFY Supplemental WaterConstraint: 8,000 AFY Supplemental Water Concepts:Concepts:
Add Critically Dry Year to BO (Concept A)Add Critically Dry Year to BO (Concept A) Maintain Quality Reach below Isleta (Concept Maintain Quality Reach below Isleta (Concept
B)B) Adaptive Management per Hydrologic & Adaptive Management per Hydrologic &
Biologic Conditions (Concept C)Biologic Conditions (Concept C)
Concept A & B Modeling Results-Dry Concept A & B Modeling Results-Dry SequenceSequenceQuestion: Assuming 50,000 acre-feet of storage water was available initially and 8,000 acre-feet each year thereafter, when would the storage water be exhausted?
Year Minnow
BOY Storage Minnow Release
Runout Month
Minnow BOY Storage
Minnow Release
Runout Month
Minnow BOY Storage
Minnow Release
Runout Month
Acre-feet Acre-feet Acre-feet Acre-feet Acre-feet Acre-feet Acre-feet
1 682,500 50,000 4,900 50,000 3,300 50,000 32,900 2 713,400 41,600 23,900 43,100 8,200 22,100 12,500 3 449,100 23,400 23,100 Apr 39,800 38,900 June 16,200 15,700 June4 296,500 7,900 7,900 RO 7,900 7,900 RO 7,900 7,700 RO5 713,400 7,900 7,600 RO 7,900 7,500 RO 7,900 2,900 6 713,400 7,900 7,500 RO 7,900 7,500 RO 12,100 5,800 7 416,900 8,000 7,900 RO 8,000 7,900 RO 13,100 12,700 RO8 449,100 5,100 5,100 RO 4,000 3,900 RO 4,800 4,700 RO9 449,100 7,400 7,300 RO 7,000 6,900 RO 7,300 7,200 RO10 296,500 7,900 7,900 RO 7,900 7,900 RO 7,900 7,700 RO
Dry 10-year Hydrologic Sequence
Native Flow at Otowi
Base Concept "B"Concept A
Concept A & B: Low Flow Analysis Concept A & B: Low Flow Analysis ResultsResults
Number of Days Flow is Less Than 100 cfs in Ten Years(average/dry sequence)
2003 BO Concept A Concept B 2003 BO Concept A Concept B 2003 BO Concept A Concept B
Jun 49 54 18 170 180 181 74 185 199
Jul 27 30 17 240 242 176 229 229 216
Aug 26 27 23 229 229 169 146 146 141
Sep 15 15 16 207 207 177 161 161 161
Oct 3 8 3 231 229 203 106 109 110
Nov 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0
Central Blw Isleta Blw San Acacia
SWM-URGWOM Unlimited Supply SWM-URGWOM Unlimited Supply Modeling: Modeling:
Wet, Dry-Average, Dry DecadesWet, Dry-Average, Dry DecadesAnnual Supplemental Water Use vs. Otowi
Flows
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
0 500,000 1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Otowi Supply Index Flow (AF)
Su
pp
lem
en
tal W
ate
r R
ele
ase
(AF
)
Reservoir Storage to Meet BO Needs: 90,000 AF
Results of Analyses – Concepts A & BResults of Analyses – Concepts A & B Neither concept provides significant water Neither concept provides significant water
savings over current BO savings over current BO Both concepts fail BO targets when Otowi Both concepts fail BO targets when Otowi
flows fall below 500 KAFflows fall below 500 KAF 8,000 AFY supplemental water supplies 8,000 AFY supplemental water supplies
exhausted after single 500KAF flow year & exhausted after single 500KAF flow year & most future simulation years fail BO targetsmost future simulation years fail BO targets
Low flow days are almost the same for Low flow days are almost the same for current BO and Concepts A & Bcurrent BO and Concepts A & B
MRGESA Collaborative MRGESA Collaborative Program Program December 2006 WorkshopDecember 2006 Workshop
MRGESA Collaborative ProgramMRGESA Collaborative Program December 2006 WorkshopDecember 2006 Workshop
Concept C – Adaptive Concept C – Adaptive ManagementManagement
Natural flows, MRGCD deliveries, Natural flows, MRGCD deliveries, pumping, and some supplemental pumping, and some supplemental water maintain designated reaches water maintain designated reaches under “normal” conditions.under “normal” conditions.
Some supplemental water is banked for Some supplemental water is banked for drier years or to enhance wetter years.drier years or to enhance wetter years.
Adaptive management principles are Adaptive management principles are applied to allocation of supplemental applied to allocation of supplemental waterwater
HighAverageExtreme
ForecastSnowpack
Projected Runoff& Timing
Species Status
Ecosystem Status
RGSM – Population, Recruitment, Distribution
SWFL – Population, Reproductive Success, Distribution
Channel Conditions, Restoration Needs,
Groundwater Levels, Wetlands Health
ImprovingStable
Declining
ImprovingStable
Declining
Available Water
MRGCD StorageRequired Compact Delivery
Supplemental Water Supplies
HighAverageExtreme
Past River
Dynamics
Frequency, Timing, Duration of High Flows, Geomorphic Changes,
Amount of Drying
ImprovingStable
Declining
Current AOP
Concept “C” AOP
Path to Amended/New Path to Amended/New BA/BOBA/BO
Water managers and stakeholders – varying Water managers and stakeholders – varying levels of urgency to move to a sustainable BOlevels of urgency to move to a sustainable BO
BA requires new “action” BA requires new “action” – Define Concept C– Define Concept C New action needs to show demonstrable change New action needs to show demonstrable change
in water use and expected species responsein water use and expected species response Agency and stakeholder contributions to the Agency and stakeholder contributions to the
actionaction New action BA and resulting BO need to be New action BA and resulting BO need to be
legally defensiblelegally defensible Action & regulatory agencies need more Action & regulatory agencies need more
informationinformation Hydrologic & Biologic flexibilitiesHydrologic & Biologic flexibilities Implementing Adaptive ManagementImplementing Adaptive Management
Working the Adaptive Working the Adaptive Management StepsManagement Steps
2.2. Determination of ecosystem management goals and Determination of ecosystem management goals and objectivesobjectives
• Work within 8,000 AFY Supplemental Water constraint Work within 8,000 AFY Supplemental Water constraint • Provide baseline in critically dry times with enhanced Provide baseline in critically dry times with enhanced
ecosystem support in wetter conditionsecosystem support in wetter conditions3.3. Determination of the ecosystem baselineDetermination of the ecosystem baseline
• Identify critical water needs & refugia for ecosystem & Identify critical water needs & refugia for ecosystem & speciesspecies
4.4. Development of conceptual modelsDevelopment of conceptual models• Identify questions/hypotheses to be answered/testedIdentify questions/hypotheses to be answered/tested
5.5. Selecting future restoration or management actionsSelecting future restoration or management actions• Identify current year priorities for testingIdentify current year priorities for testing
6.6. Implementing actionsImplementing actions• 2007 Experimental Activities Program2007 Experimental Activities Program
7.7. Monitoring and ecosystem response Monitoring and ecosystem response • In progress – preliminary resultsIn progress – preliminary results
Questions for Concept CQuestions for Concept C
1) What are minimum biological water 1) What are minimum biological water needs during critically dry times?needs during critically dry times?
2) What refugial options do the species 2) What refugial options do the species have when there is inadequate water have when there is inadequate water supply?supply?
3) What are long-term recurrence intervals 3) What are long-term recurrence intervals for certain flows that maintain long-term for certain flows that maintain long-term population and ecosystem viability? population and ecosystem viability?
2007 Focus Areas2007 Focus Areas Minimize the use of existing Supplemental Water Minimize the use of existing Supplemental Water
suppliessupplies Use native Rio Grande flows to support silvery minnow spawnUse native Rio Grande flows to support silvery minnow spawn Closely coordinate recession with rescue activitiesClosely coordinate recession with rescue activities Better understand surface water, bank storage, groundwater Better understand surface water, bank storage, groundwater
interactioninteraction Identify characteristics of in-stream habitats during Identify characteristics of in-stream habitats during
periods of drying (focus on Isleta Reach)periods of drying (focus on Isleta Reach) Evaluate pools that form during drying and monitor physical, Evaluate pools that form during drying and monitor physical,
chemical, and silvery minnow usage/healthchemical, and silvery minnow usage/health Evaluate general water quality characteristics and flows Evaluate general water quality characteristics and flows
associated with wasteways and outfalls in the Isleta reachassociated with wasteways and outfalls in the Isleta reach Population Viability & Habitat Analysis – Silvery Population Viability & Habitat Analysis – Silvery
MinnowMinnow What are key lifestage and habitat features that are most What are key lifestage and habitat features that are most
significant in contributing to population health and robustnesssignificant in contributing to population health and robustness
2007 Experimental 2007 Experimental ActivitiesActivities
Ways to stretch/manage the spring hydrographWays to stretch/manage the spring hydrograph Evaluate continuous flow targets based on spawn Evaluate continuous flow targets based on spawn
monitoringmonitoring Active management of river recessionActive management of river recession Monitored in-stream refugiaMonitored in-stream refugia Wetted reach and river drying monitoringWetted reach and river drying monitoring Diurnal monitoring of the wetted front, water Diurnal monitoring of the wetted front, water
quality and fish stressquality and fish stress Wasteway/outfall monitoringWasteway/outfall monitoring Bank storage and groundwater interactionsBank storage and groundwater interactions Population viability and habitat analysis Population viability and habitat analysis
Historic Frequency: Historic Frequency: Spawning & Overbanking Spawning & Overbanking
FlowsFlows
Flows >3,000 cfs > 7 days
21/32 yrs
Flows >5,000 cfs > 5 days
11/32 yrs
Sample Activity DescriptionSample Activity DescriptionWays to Stretch/Manage the Spring Hydrograph
Proposed Activity: Ways to Stretch/Manage the Spring Hydrograph (Cochiti, other Native and Supplemental Water management options) Objective (Hypothesis to be tested/question(s) to be answered): Test flexibility in management of native Rio Grande flows to meet flow requirements of 2003 Biological Opinion and conserve current water supplies acquired by Reclamation (i.e. Supplemental Water) to meet those needs. Description: Cochiti Reservoir is a Corps of Engineers facility design and constructed primarily as a flood control structure for snowmelt runoff control on the mainstream of the Rio Grande. Cochiti frequently stores significant amounts of spring and early summer runoff that would cause flooding downstream. The dam is operated to release stored water as quickly as possible without causing downstream flooding. Reclamation, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Engineer Advisers for the Rio Grande Compact have asked the Corps to consider conducting a short-term re-regulation of native flows at Cochiti. The Engineer Advisers requested “the Corps to provide a 7 to 10-day stable flow greeter than 2,000 cubic feet per second in the middle Rio Grande downstream of Cochiti and Jemez Canyon reservoirs during snowmelt runoff from the natural flow of the Rio Grande.” The request was subject to two caveats: “that the re-regulation occur form direct flow of the Rio Grande only if sufficient direct flow is available in excess of middle valley diversion demand and that deliveries of water to Elephant Butte Reservoir not be reduced by the operation.” Reclamation requests that the Corps consider any re-regulation of native Rio Grande flows, subject to the same caveats previously described, which could help meet flow requirements of the 2003 Biological Opinion and conserve Supplemental Water Supplies. Implementation Period: May 1 – June 15, 2007 Water Operations Element(s): Regular coordination monitoring of flows by water operations staff at . Field Monitoring Element (s): N/A Implementing Agency: Corps of Engineers in coordination with Reclamation and Fish and Wildlife Service.
Preliminary 2007 DataPreliminary 2007 DataWays to Stretch/Manage Spring Ways to Stretch/Manage Spring
HydrographHydrograph Cochiti Deviations Cochiti Deviations
(Corps & Cochiti (Corps & Cochiti Pueblo)Pueblo) Use native Rio Grande Use native Rio Grande
flows to meet silvery flows to meet silvery minnow spawning & minnow spawning & recruitment needsrecruitment needs
Stored 9,674 AF from Stored 9,674 AF from May 4 to June 9May 4 to June 9
Spawning release to Spawning release to test correlation test correlation between >3,000 cfs for between >3,000 cfs for 7 to 10 days and 7 to 10 days and RGSM spawn & RGSM spawn & recruitment (Dudley, recruitment (Dudley, et. al., 2006)et. al., 2006)
Stored water released Stored water released by June 15by June 15
RESULT: Spawning Flow Target Achieved, 0 AF Supplemental Water Used
Spring 2007 Flows
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
5/1/
2007
5/8/
2007
5/15
/200
7
5/22
/200
7
5/29
/200
7
6/5/
2007
Date
Dis
ch
arg
e (
cfs
)
RG Below Cochiti Albuquerque San Acacia Otowi
Cochiti Inflow / ReleaseCochiti Inflow / Release
Deviation Deviation Storage & Storage &
Release PeriodRelease Period
Sample Activity DescriptionSample Activity DescriptionWetted reach and river drying monitoring
Proposed Activity: Wetted and Drying Reach Monitoring below Isleta Dam Objective (Hypothesis to be tested/question(s) to be answered):
1. What are the physical and chemical characteristics of remaining wetted reaches and pools created during river recession?
2. What diurnal variations occur in physical and chemical characteristics of these pools and drying reaches?
3. What sources of water support wet reaches and pools? 4. What potential sources of water (e.g., wasteways, outfalls, other) could be used to
support isolated pools created by drying? 5. Are fish using the perennially wet reaches and/or isolated pools created following
river drying? 6. Is there evidence of negative impacts to fish: health, competition, predation, etc.
Description: Monitor river conditions during and following recession to identify trends in the development of pools and perennially wet reaches below Isleta Diversion Dam. Once recession has begin, an initial two-week period of daily monitoring will be undertaken to document the rate and variations in drying occurring as a result of recession. Twice daily measurements will include GPS surveys of drying, photodocumentation of drying, and water quality measurements including pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and ammonia nitrogen. Beginning in July, weekly discharge data, photodocumentation and GPS surveys will be performed to continue monitoring the extent of drying. Sources of water supplying wetted reaches and pools will be documented. If a pool becomes isolated, the nearest potential surface water source shall be identified and noted. If the source is a named source (e.g., river flow across dam, wasteway, outfall) the source name shall be noted, together with an estimate of the discharge at the time of measurement. Weekly water quality measurements including at a minmum pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen and water quality samples will be obtained beginning in July and continuing until the end of the irrigation season in October. Source water identification will continue to be performed, with discharge measurements obtained on a weekly basis. Notes concerning fish presence and health will be documented, if observed. Implementation Period: June 15 through October 31 Water Operations Element(s): Coordination with BOR water operations concerning the start and rate of recession. Coordination with River Eyes – to see if this activity is more easily implemented into the monitoring actions already conducted. MRGCD coordination for access. Field Monitoring Element (s): Monitoring will be performed as river conditions develop south of Isleta Diversion Dam. If resources are limited, the focus area priority will be the reach between Isleta and San
Acacia Diversion Dams, with additional monitoring south of San Acacia Diversion Dam performed if sufficient resources are available. Water quality measurements are identified in the table below. Parameter Method Frequency Location(s) Reporting Discharge/Flowmeter Field Probe monthly See Map Monthly Temperature Field Probe monthly See Map End of Season pH Field Probe monthly See Map End of Season Dissolved Oxygen Field Probe monthly See Map End of Season Ammonia Nitrogen Field Probe monthly See Map End of Season Conductivity Field Probe monthly See Map End of Season Number of Staff, and Estimated LOE by task: Field Activities-diurnal monitoring (June 15 to June 30): 2 staff, twice daily discharge and water quality monitoring (1920 hours) Field Activities – weekly monitoring (July 1 through October 31): 2 staff, weekly discharge and water quality monitoring (432 hours). Data Analysis: 1 staff 160 hours Reporting: 1 staff 80 hours Equipment (purchase costs - possibly shared with other activities): Digital Camera - $300 GPS Unit – Trimble GeoXM Handheld w/ software/batteries - $4000 Discharge/Flow Meter: Level Troll 700 (15 psi) - $2000
Multi-Parameter Water Quality Meter: In Situ Troll 9000 - $7000 Note: Equipment could be shared with other activities (e.g., wasteway/outfall monitoring) and would only require a single expenditure if multiple monitoring activities are funded and coordinated.
Transportation (gov. vehicle), 100 miles per event – 2800 miles total Estimated Total Activity Cost: $100,000 (Labor = $80K, Equipment = $20K) Diurnal monitoring labor = $20,000 Weekly monitoring labor + reporting = $60K Implementing Agency: BOR for initial two-week diurnal monitoring with River Eyes assistance for continued weekly monitoring.
Preliminary 2007 Data: Preliminary 2007 Data: In-In-Stream RefugiaStream Refugia
Scientific Name Common Name
Total Collecte
d
Percent Compositi
on
1 Carpiodes carpio river carpsucker 281 8.5
2 Cyprinella lutrensis red shiner 527 16.0
3 Cyprinus carpio common carp 77 2.3
4 Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad 45 1.4
5 Gambusia affinis western mosquitofish 242 7.4
6 Hybognathus amarus Rio Grande silvery minnow
121 3.7
7 Ictalurus furcatus blue catfish 37 1.1
8 Ictalurus punctatus channel catfish 275 8.4
9 Larvae sp Larvae sp 1,377 41.9
10
Micropterus dolomieu smallmouth bass 1 0.0
11
Micropterus salmoides salmoides
northern largemouth bass 3 0.1
12
Percina macrolepida bigscale logperch 4 0.1
13
Pimephales promelas fathead minnow 59 1.8
14
Platygobio gracilis flathead chub 43 1.3
15
Pylodictis olivaris flathead catfish 4 0.1
16
Unknown Unknown 194 5.9
Health Symptoms
Species Healthy Dead Fungus LerniaHemorrhagic
LesionsAnemia
Signs ofPredation
MultipleSymptoms
Cyprinella lutrensis(red shiner)
506 3 0 13 5 0 0 0
Hybognathus amarus
81 8 0 1 30 0 0 1
Pimephales promelas(fathead minnow)
41 1 5 6 6 0 0 0
Platygobio gracilis(flathead chub)
30 0 4 1 8 0 0 0
Preliminary Preliminary 2007 Data:2007 Data:Wasteway & Wasteway &
Outfall Outfall MonitoringMonitoring
Flow Velocity Depth Temp pH EC Ammonia DOSummary Statistics Units ft/s ft oF units umhos ppm ppmMax 4.34 4.5 92.5 9.05 818.7 0.4823 18.41Median 0.33 2.1 76.84 7.82 550.1 0.2056 11.19Average 0.81 2.01 76.73 7.85 554.38 0.27 11.87Min 0 0.24 71.49 7.12 395.2 0.1353 4.25RGSM Recovery Plan Habitat Preferences <1 ft/s <0.75 summerPerennial Pools BOMin 35Max 85BuhlMin 7.3 386 <0.6 lethalAverage 8 458Max >36oC lethal 8.1 578 >2mg/Las N
Sabinal Drain
RGSM PVA WorkshopRGSM PVA Workshop Held Sept. 12 & 13, 2007 @ FWSHeld Sept. 12 & 13, 2007 @ FWS Develop life history model for RGSMDevelop life history model for RGSM Preliminary accomplishmentsPreliminary accomplishments
Detailed discussion & consensus for values used for model Detailed discussion & consensus for values used for model inputsinputs
Additional discussion needed: metapopulation, carrying Additional discussion needed: metapopulation, carrying capacity, etc.capacity, etc.
PVA Session 2 – October 9, 2007 @ FWSPVA Session 2 – October 9, 2007 @ FWS PVHA to be scheduled by end of 2007 – address key PVHA to be scheduled by end of 2007 – address key
habitat components with broader group of habitat components with broader group of stakeholdersstakeholders
Desired Outcomes: Desired Outcomes: Guide potential management actions for RGSM by lifestage Guide potential management actions for RGSM by lifestage
and critical habitat component(s)and critical habitat component(s) Predictive model used to evaluate management actions Predictive model used to evaluate management actions
offering sensitivity analyses & probability assessment of offering sensitivity analyses & probability assessment of impact to RGSM demographic trajectoryimpact to RGSM demographic trajectory
Next StepsNext Steps Evaluate 2007 Experimental Activities Reports Evaluate 2007 Experimental Activities Reports
(due Dec 31)(due Dec 31) What worked, what did not, why?What worked, what did not, why? New/modified questionsNew/modified questions Agency & Stakeholder contributions to Agency & Stakeholder contributions to
action definedaction defined Decision: February 2008 – Pursue New or Decision: February 2008 – Pursue New or
Amended BA/BO by March 2009 or additional Amended BA/BO by March 2009 or additional year of activities and BA/BO in March 2010?year of activities and BA/BO in March 2010?
2008 experimental activity design2008 experimental activity design Procurement (April 2008)Procurement (April 2008) Implementation (May 2008)Implementation (May 2008)
Lessons Learned (to Lessons Learned (to Date)Date)
Creating an atmosphere among Creating an atmosphere among participants to design and execute participants to design and execute experiments while experiments while “making it safe to “making it safe to fail”fail” is difficult is difficult
Stay Tuned - we are a work in Stay Tuned - we are a work in progress!progress!
Unanswered, Modified, New Unanswered, Modified, New QuestionsQuestions
2007 summer river conditions did not 2007 summer river conditions did not create long-standing isolated pools to create long-standing isolated pools to answer extended period water quality, answer extended period water quality, fish usage, fish health questionsfish usage, fish health questions
Multi-year habitat usage?Multi-year habitat usage? Water wheeling/local recharge Water wheeling/local recharge
opportunities through MRG project?opportunities through MRG project? SWFL, riparian ecosystem needs?SWFL, riparian ecosystem needs? A multitude of other questions….yours?A multitude of other questions….yours?