GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Multi-Attribute Evaluation o

Resources in GCDAMP

Technical Working Group

Feb 26, 2003
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Background

Need to establish quantitative targetmanagement and assess progress ovesetting targets is complicated by:

– Uncertainty about cause and effe

relationships, and

– Trade-offs among key resources

Focus has been on uncertainties; neestart exploring trade-offs
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Trade-offs

– Low steady flows will conserve trib

sediment inputs but reduce power GCD (certain)

– Short duration - high flows with suf

sediment in main channel and lowebenefit sand bars and camping bea

will reduce riparian vegetation anhabitat (certain)
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Trade-offs

– Increases in unsteady flows poten

negative effects on rainbow trou

beneficial effects for native fish. 

uncertainties:

• Reducing rainbow trout abundance in 

will increase fish size and benefit the fishery

• Reducing rainbow trout abundance in 

may increase native fish recruitment 

– If both hypotheses are correct the

trade-off. Instead it is a win-win s
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Targets and Trade-off

Some endpoints (e.g. some RBT abundances) may with others (e.g., viable HBC population)Cannot set achievable targets for these endpoints understanding trade-offs between the two

High Fluctuating 

Flows

RBT Early 

Survival

RH

Food Supply
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Setting Targets

How to set targets in multi-attribute man

– Identify endpoints– Identify specific management alternat– Estimate (or measure) impacts on end– Determine acceptable trade-offs amo– Select a management alternative(s) – Set targets - for endpoints (long term) 

indicators (short term)

– Monitor and adjust

First task is getting the multi-attribute fr
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Project Approach/Step

1. Define endpoints and attributes

Endpoints from GCDAMP ManagemAttributes are from MOs, GCM, and 

2. Identify management alternatives

From TWG

3. Estimate impact of alternatives on e

Using GCM and professional judgm

4. Explore trade-offs and uncertainties

Using GCM and trade-off analysis
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Endpoints

Endpoints are the fundamental ends trying to address, the resources for ware to be set.The project will select endpoints froGCDAMP management objectives

– 57 management objectives in 12 c– Mix of “means” and “ends”....

– Means are not less important than 

different. The project uses a subsendpoints from the MO’s
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Endpoints

Proposed project endpoints:

(2) Native Fish - HBC(4) Rainbow Trout 

– above Par

(6) Vegetation 

– Spring and ma

(9) Recreation 

– Camping beach

(10) Power - Revenue(11) Cultural Resources
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Endpoints

Other MOs not addressed for now:

1 (Food Base), 7 (Water Quality) and 8 

– Are means of influencing the endpoints. The

GCM, and can be reported as interim indica

12 (Science)

– Is also a means, but is a process oriented ob

modeled.

3 (Extirpated)

– Is not directly addressed, but 2 (Native/HBC

proxy for it.

5 (Kanab Ambersnail)

– Is not addressed. It can be added in the futu
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Attributes

Attributes are the measurable metrics uhow a management alternative affects aThey should be:

• Clearly related to the endpoints• Measurable or predictable• Meaningful to scientists• Meaningful to (non-technical) decis• Sensitive to the alternatives under 

Examples:

– Power: Annual Revenues ($/year)

– Recreation: Area of Sandy Beaches (he

or % of 199x beach area)
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Attributes and Impacts

Use the attributes to compare the al

MO Endpoint Attributes A 

2 Native Fish - HBC abundance 4 Rainbow Trout abundance 6 Vegetation ha of desired veg communities

9 Recreation ha of sandy beaches

10 Power annual revenues11 Cultural Resources frequency of flooding/erosion
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Explore Trade-offs

Hypothetical decision at end of current 

MO Endpoint Attribute Continue Current 

2 Native Fish - HBC abundance 2-3 4 Rainbow Trout abundance 100 6 Vegetation ha of desired veg communities -- 

9 Recreation ha of sandy beaches -- 

10 Power/Financial annual revenues 100 11 Cultural Resources frequency of floodin

g/erosion

-- 
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Refining Attributes

Need to be specific in defining what the key performance are:

Rainbow

• Abundance only? Or does size/condition matt

Vegetation

• What types of communities are preferred?

Recreation

• Hectares of beach? Or % of 199x area?

Humpback chub

• Abundance? Or “probability of achieving a vi

two attributes – for LCR and Other?

Interaction between model capability / profeand stakeholder preferences
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Why defining attributes = setti

Might assume that target should be at peak – 100kBut what if peak RBT causes declines in HBC? Or what if you can get 80% of the peak at 20% of the cost? 

0

0.20.40.60.8

1

0 50 100 

Lees Ferry RBT Ab

Utility
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

0

0.20.40.60.8

1

0 2 4 

LC R H B C Abun

Utility

Refining Attributes

Should establish important thresholds when defining attributesThey help you identify alternatives and assess performance, but they aren’t necessarily fixed targets

Current 1990’s 
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Estimating Impacts

The project will use GCM and professioto estimate impacts of management althe endpointsPredicted values for the attributes will compare alternatives and expose trade
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Estimating Impacts – GCM St

Hydrology

GCD 

Operations

Physical 

Habitat

Q 

Turbidity 

Temperature 

Backwater

Food Base
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Estimating Impacts – GCM St

Hydrology

GCD 

Operations

Tributary Sediment Inputs

Riparian

Vegetatio

Sediment

Deposition
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Making Trade-offs

Which is preferred? 

– Answer 

depends on values

Set targets based on alternative selected

MO Endpoint Attribute

2 Native Fish - HBC abundanc4 Rainbow Trout abundanc6 Vegetation ha of desired 

communit

9 Recreation ha of sandy be

10 Power annual reve11 Cultural Resources frequency 

flooding/ero
GCDAMP Multi-Attribute Evaluation 

Next Steps

Confirm the endpoints (working group followuConfirm attributes, threshold values (work

modeling)

Summarize proposed endpoints, attribute

alternatives to be modeled (briefing note 

Model alternatives Workshop to explore uncertainties and tra

- Game with GCM to test sensitivity of resul

parameter values and alternative hypothe

- Provide value judgments about preference

outcomes