12/2/2009

1

General General Core Monitoring Monitoring Plan

TWG Comments Comments and Suggestions Suggestions

By Shane Capron

Chair, Technical Technical Work Group

TWG December 1, 2009 1

LIST OF TWG

COMMENTORS

• Arizona Arizona Game and Fish Department Department

• Pueblo of Zuni

• Western Western Area Power Administration Administration

• Colorado Colorado Water Conservation Conservation Board

• National National Park Service

• Bureau of Reclamation

TWG December 1, 2009 2

• Arizona Arizona Department Department of Water

Resources

• Grand Canyon Wildlands Wildlands Council Council

• *Science *Science Advisors
12/2/2009

2

GOALS OF THE

PRESENTATION/SESSION

 Review major TWG comments, comments, solicit solicit any others, others, create a list (handouts: (handouts:

LIST OF MAJOR TWG ISSUES TO BEGIN CONSIDERATION CONSIDERATION CONSIDERATION CONSIDERATION, SPECIFIC SPECIFIC SPECIFIC SPECIFIC ISSUES) ISSUES) ISSUES) ISSUES)

 Determine Determine the most important important of the comments, comments, rank these to

determine support

 Develop Develop plan to address address the comments, comments, timeline timeline for completion completion of GCMP

 Criteria Criteria for being “in” the list, comments comments that require require substantial substantial changes changes

to the document, document, approach, approach, or strategy strategy

 Thus, specific specific technical technical changes, changes, edits, general general discussion discussion or comments comments

TWG December 1, 2009 3

are generally generally not included included here, will be responded responded to by GCMRC as usual,

no time for discussion discussion today

GENERAL GENERAL ISSUES & OUT OF SCOPE

 General Issues: line numbers, numbers, authors, authors, 2 week review

 Outside Outside the scope of this review: review:

 NPS many issues, GCPA

 NPS as only a reviewer reviewer and not a scientific scientific peer

 The scope of the GCDAMP constrains constrains our ability ability to reach scientific scientific adaptive adaptive

management goals

 Management Management agencies agencies need a role outside outside of TWG/AMWG TWG/AMWG process process

 Administrative Administrative history history for program program

 General General criticism criticism of GCMRC

 There are management management information information needs assumed assumed to be met by TWG, but

that are not built into the program program (NPS 24)

TWG December 1, 2009 4

 Need periodic periodic reviews reviews of GCMRC as a program, program, by SA or others, others, cost vs.

benefit, focus, etc.

 Relationship Relationship with tribes, tribes, and integration integration into the program, program, too much

burden falls on GCRMC yet the tribes are left out of much of this plan

 Reporting Reporting issues was a common theme
12/2/2009

3

CORE MONITORING MONITORING DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT APPROACH APPROACH

• Support Support for general general core monitoring monitoring plan first and then individual individual plans

• Need to identify identify key goals of our long term monitoring monitoring program program

• Develop Develop Develop Develop individual individual individual individual plans slowly based on scientific scientific scientific scientific merits

• Sediment Sediment was provisionally provisionally approved approved by TWG in 2008

STRENGTHS STRENGTHS OF THE PLAN

• Strong monitoring monitoring protocols protocols (SA7)

• Strength Strength is in the research research protocols protocols and being responsive responsive to general general AMP needs

• AMP hasn’t been as clear as GCMRC might like, makes their job more difficult difficult

TWG December 1, 2009 5

• Staff on site, long term perspective, perspective, good coordination coordination within GCMRC

• Chapter Chapter 1 background

• We appreciate appreciate all the hard work that has been put into the long history history here to

develop core monitoring

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES RESPONSIBILITIES

 Roles and responsibilities responsibilities of GCMRC, TWG, AMWG, and

DOI should be directly directly discussed, discussed, who is responsible responsible for

what in this process? process?

 What sideboards sideboards should there be for TWG participation? participation?

 What are we expecting expecting GCMRC to bring forward forward in the

individual individual CMPs, are there specific specific expectations expectations (e.g.,

tribal involvement involvement in goal 11, risk assessments) assessments)

TWG December 1, 2009 6

 What is needed and by whom in the process process to achieve achieve

approval approval of an effective effective plan?
12/2/2009

4

TWO STRATEGIES

Two strategies strategies are weaved together together without without explicitly explicitly discussing discussing them, which makes it

difficult difficult to discuss discuss the issues

Science Strategy

• Systems Systems level discussion discussion vs. individual individual resources resources

• Monitoring Monitoring protocols, protocols, SA support support of this strategy strategy

Adaptive Management Strategy

• Choices Choices in the CMP are not just science, science, they are management management based on risk, reward, reward, and cost

• Should include include discussion discussion of trade‐offs between between precision, precision, increased increased monitoring, monitoring, cost, and

effectiveness effectiveness and how the program program should look at the scientific scientific implications implications

l h l i C (S i 2 )

TWG December 1, 2009 7

• Unclear how step 4 results in CMPs (Section 1.2 p1)

• ? During step 4 the AMP would like to be integrated integrated through through adaptive adaptive management management in

choosing choosing what should be CM and what should not

• This can’t be done successfully successfully without without support support from GCMRC in a strategy strategy which provides provides the

necessary necessary and important important information information for managers managers to consider consider when making choices choices

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT (PROCESS)  4 Steps to develop develop plans: 4 steps on page 1 in section section 1.2 and 3 steps (steps 2‐4) on page

24 section 2.7

 P. 12: general general approach approach described described by GCMRC is a “Christmas “Christmas tree” plan, with the

ornaments

 SA 11: In adaptive adaptive management management programs programs it cannot be expressed expressed too strongly strongly the

importance importance of continued continued guidance guidance from stakeholders stakeholders and managers. managers.

 Managers Managers must have a substantial substantial role or there will be no buy‐in, were stakeholder stakeholder

considerations/priorities considered?

 Adaptive Adaptive management management is critical critical in this step, select the choices choices together together based on the

foundation foundation built by GCMRC and early TWG/AMP TWG/AMP involvement involvement (CMINs) (CMINs)

 Development Development of CM may need to be an iterative iterative process process with criteria criteria about what is

TWG December 1, 2009 8

considered

 Large gulf between between science science and management management in the program, program, exemplified exemplified by KA, what are

the implications implications of uncertainty uncertainty in science science and management? management?

 Step 4: should section section 2 be rewritten rewritten to describe describe in more detail the process process for the

development development of the individual individual plans in greater greater detail (i.e., expanded expanded discussion discussion of Step 4)?

This could include include an adaptive adaptive management management component component with sideboards sideboards on the process process to

allow forward forward movement movement of the plan
12/2/2009

5

CRITERIA CRITERIA FOR ELEMENTS ELEMENTS OF INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL PLANS

(DESCRIPTION (DESCRIPTION OF STEP 4)

 Full integration integration of CMINs/SSQs CMINs/SSQs into the strategy strategy for each goal

 Risk assessment assessment for critical critical choices choices (qualitative (qualitative or quantitative quantitative based on available available

resources). Examples:

o Discussion of trade‐offs between between statistical statistical precision, precision,sampling sampling intensity/extent, intensity/extent, cost, and

effectiveness effectiveness and how the program program should look at the scientific scientific implications implications of these trade offs

o This includes includes recommendations recommendations on design and statistical statistical analysis, analysis, including including the use of power

analysis analysis to develop develop designs designs and set sampling sampling levels to achieve achieve desired desired precision precision

o Frequency/extent: Frequency/extent: a series of options options might be given which show how the power is reduced, reduced, or

other effect including including cost, by either reducing reducing or increasing increasing sampling sampling rate or extent

 Describe Describe criteria criteria for activity activity inclusion inclusion in core monitoring monitoring proposals. proposals. Examples: Examples:

o Core monitoring monitoring proposal proposalshould be based on priority: priority: high priority priority items should be included, included,

some elements elements of core monitoring monitoring will be higher priority priority than others and should be identified identified

TWG December 1, 2009 9

some elements elements of core monitoring monitoring will be higher priority priority than others and should be identified identified

o Confidence: Confidence: include include only those activities activities with high confidence confidence of relating relating to the eventual eventual DFCs

o CMIN: activity activity is essential essential to address addressthe minimalist minimalist view point for the CMIN (is everything everything

core?). core?).  April 9, 2004 CMT memo: in this document, document, the CMT suggests suggests that the long term plan

“adopt a minimalist minimalist framework framework (e.g., no ornaments ornaments on the Christmas Christmastree)”

CRITERIA CRITERIA FOR ELEMENTS ELEMENTS OF INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL PLANS

(DESCRIPTION (DESCRIPTION OF STEP 4)

 To what extent have PEP recommendations recommendations been implemented implemented including including design

and statistical statistical analysis, analysis, including including the use of power analysis analysis to develop develop sampling sampling

designs designs and set sampling sampling levels to achieve achieve desired desired precision precision

 More integration integration of tribal monitoring monitoring in each CMP/goal, CMP/goal, critical critical lack of tribal

integration integration now with emphasis emphasis on other areas which may be a responsibility responsibility of

the NPS. Better integrate integrate tribal values in ecosystem ecosystem management management (Figure (Figure 4), TCPs

TWG December 1, 2009 10
12/2/2009

6

OVERALL COST  Missing Missing is concerns concerns of CMT and others to avoid the “Christmas “Christmas tree” approach approach and to keep

the budget in the 40‐60% range of the science science budget. budget. Support Support a process process which allows for

core monitoring monitoring choices choices which use less of the budget. budget.

 We lack information information on trade‐offs between between statistical statistical precision precision and sampling sampling intensity intensity that

will drive costs, these analyses analyses should drive our decision decision making

 Budget should be divided divided into core monitoring, monitoring, research research and development development with

monitoring, monitoring, and experimental experimental components components (e.g., Knowledge Knowledge Assessment Assessment  color approach) approach)

 GCMRC has grown beyond the scope of the 1996 ROD, and could be replaced replaced in part by a

consortium consortium of academics academics for core monitoring. monitoring. Costs don’t appear to be competitive competitive with

what could be achieved achieved through through other routes

 The description description of the present present staffing staffing plan should include include how many individuals individuals are

l d i h t it h iti t fill d d d t il 

TWG December 1, 2009 11

employed in what capacity, why some positions are or are not filled, and more detail on

how well the program program involves involves outside outside collaborators, collaborators, and how many students students are

supported supported by the program. program. A justification justification should be provided provided about how the present present

staffing staffing varies from the original original concept concept for GCMRC in the ROD. How does the plan for 26

FTEs fit with budgetary budgetary constraints constraints we know are coming? coming? Higher staff levels inevitably inevitably

mean increasing increasing costs greater greater than CPI. Relate staffing staffing needs with org chart

DFCs

 How can we accurately accurately determine determine which of the core monitoring monitoring

proposals proposals meets our needs, or perhaps perhaps is beyond our needs without without

specified specified specified specified DFCs for the MOs? Can we proceed proceed proceed proceed without without without without DFCs, and if so how

and what does it mean to the program? program? Many of the elements elements may not

need DFCs, others might really need them, how do we move forward forward

and advise AMWG?

TWG December 1, 2009 12
12/2/2009

7

SCOPE OF MONITORING

 Geographic Geographic scope is defined defined as CRE, which discusses discusses tribes, tribes, tribes

should be included

 GCMRC seems to have constrained constrained the scope of monitoring monitoring beyond

the language language identified identified in the plan

 CMP should be focused focused on monitoring monitoring for dam operations operations

 Lack of a strong species species inventory inventory limits our ability ability to understand understand

ecosystem ecosystem processes, processes, greater greater emphasis emphasis on inventory inventory programs programs is

needed

TWG December 1, 2009 13

 Need to identify identify how other agency monitoring monitoring programs programs will be

integrated integrated (e.g., NPS I&M program) program)

GOALS

There were a number of comments comments specific specific to each goal, can

be found under SPECIFIC SPECIFIC ISSUES handout handout

TWG December 1, 2009 14
12/2/2009

8

DISCUSSION

CM is important important to future LTEP and annual

budget process

GCMP seems responsive responsive to myriad CMINs, but

the AMP hasn’t had a chance to decide if all

Buy in is important important

GCMP will morph into MRP in next draft 2012,

this mostly sets up process process to identify identify

individual individual CMPs and describe describe overall overall

scientific strategy

these activities activities should be CM or in a

different different category category of activity activity (adaptive (adaptive

management)

Can we integrate integrate adaptive adaptive management management into

this process process and complete complete this work?

TWG December 1, 2009 15

PROCESS PROCESS TO CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS AT WORKSHOP WORKSHOP

• List of issues to consider consider

• What will it take TWG to move forward? forward?

Must have’s vs. nice to have’s

• Gauge support: support: put stickers stickers on board with all of the

options, options, have a couple of rounds so that all of the top

issues can be identified. identified.

• Discuss Discuss timeline timeline and expectations expectations

TWG December 1, 2009 16