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?