David P. Braun, Sound Science LLC and

GCDAMP Executive Coordinator for Science Advisor

GCDAMP TWG Meeting, April 20, 2017

4/20/2017 
Presentation Objectives

 Purpose: Initial feedback on draft triennial wo

and budgets for FY 2018‐2020

 Key themes

 Requirements for adaptive management under  Implications of 2017 Knowledge Assessment (KA

 Outline

 Unknowns and uncertainties indicated in KA re LTEMP resource‐specific objectives/learning ne Unique constraints of CRE adaptive manageme Comments on GCMRC and Reclamation work p

4/20/2017 
KA Unknowns and Uncertainties:

Status and Trend Results

Resource

Unknown

Status AND

Unknown

Trend AND

Low

Confidence

Unknown

Status OR

Unknown

Trend AND

Low

Confidence

Known Status

AND Known

Trend BUT

Low

Confidence

Unknow

Status O

Unknow

Trend B

NOT Lo

Confiden

AquaƟc food base 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 

Archaeological and cultural resources 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Humpback chub 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 

Hydropower and energy 0.0% 0.0% 12.5% 0.0% 

Invasive fish species 0.0% 3.6% 14.3% 3.6% 

Rainbow trout fishery 0.0% 5.3% 0.0% 52.6% Recreational experience 16.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Riparian vegetation 37.5% 0.0% 25.0% 12.5% 

Sediment 0.0% 0.0% 31.3% 6.3% 

Water quality 28.6% 28.6% 0.0% 42.9% 

Grand Total 7.4% 3.3% 10.7% 13.9% 

4/20/2017 
KA Unknowns and Uncertainties:

Drivers and Constraints Results

Resource

Unknown

Strength AND

Unknown

DirectionAND Low

Confidence

Unknown

Strength OR

Unknown

DirectionAND Low

Confidence

Known

Strength AND

Known

Direction BUT

Low

Confidence

Unknow

Strength 

Unknow

Direction 

NOT Lo

Confiden

AquaƟc food base 0.0% 13.6% 50.0% 0.0% 

Archaeological and cultural resources 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Humpback chub 0.0% 21.4% 7.1% 7.1% Hydropower and energy 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 23.6% Invasive fish species 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Rainbow trout fishery 0.0% 0.0% 64.3% 0.0% 

Recreational experience 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Riparian vegetation 0.0% 12.5% 37.5% 45.8% Sediment 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12.5% Water quality 16.7% 20.8% 8.3% 33.3% 

Grand Total 1.8% 6.4% 14.5% 15.9% 

4/20/2017 
KA Unknowns and Uncertainties:

LTEMP Exp’l. & Mgt. Actions Resu

Resource

Unknown

Strength AND

Unknown

DirectionAND Low

Confidence

Unknown

Strength OR

Unknown

DirectionAND Low

Confidence

Known

Strength AND

Known

Direction BUT

Low

Confidence

Unknow

Strength 

Unknow

Direction 

NOT Lo

Confiden

AquaƟc food base 0.0% 0.0% 54.5% 0.0% 

Archaeological and cultural resources 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% Humpback chub 25.0% 33.3% 16.7% 0.0% Hydropower and energy 4.5% 0.0% 0.0% 3.4% Invasive fish species 71.8% 0.0% 10.3% 5.1% 

Rainbow trout fishery 0.0% 70.0% 10.0% 0.0% 

Recreational experience 2.4% 2.4% 23.7% 0.4% 

Riparian vegetation 28.6% 26.8% 16.1% 10.7% Sediment 0.0% 7.1% 17.9% 21.4% 

Water quality 89.7% 0.0% 0.0% 10.3% 

Grand Total 16.1% 5.9% 16.2% 4.2% 

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Resource‐Specific Objectiv

1. Archaeological and Cultural Resources. Maintain the integrity of p

affected NRHP‐eligible or listed historic properties in place, where 

with preservation methods employed on a site‐specific basis.

2. Natural Processes. Restore, to the extent practicable, ecological pa

processes within their range of natural variability, including the na

abundance, diversity, and genetic and ecological integrity of the pl

animal species native to those ecosystems.

3. Humpback Chub. Meet humpback chub recovery goals, including 

a self‐sustaining population, spawning habitat, and aggregations i

Colorado River and its tributaries below the Glen Canyon Dam.

4. Hydropower and Energy. Maintain or increase Glen Canyon Dam e

energy generation, load following capability, and ramp rate capabi

minimize emissions and costs to the greatest extent practicable, co

with improvement and long‐term sustainability of downstream re

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Resource‐Specific Objectiv

5. Other Native Fish. Maintain self‐sustaining native fish species pop

their habitats in their natural ranges on the Colorado River and its 

6. Recreational Experience. Maintain and improve the quality of recr

experiences for the users of the Colorado River Ecosystem. Recreat

includes, but is not limited to, flatwater and whitewater boating, r

camping, and angling in Glen Canyon.

7. Sediment. Increase and retain fine sediment volume, area, and dist

the Glen, Marble, and Grand Canyon reaches above the elevation o

average base flow for ecological, cultural, and recreational purpose

8. Tribal Resources. Maintain the diverse values and resources of trad

associated Tribes along the Colorado River corridor through Glen, Grand Canyons.

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Resource‐Specific Objectiv

9. Rainbow Trout Fishery. Achieve a healthy high‐quality recreationa

trout fishery in GCNRA and reduce or eliminate downstream trouconsistent with NPS fish management and ESA compliance.

10. Nonnative Invasive Species. Minimize or reduce the presence and e

aquatic nonnative invasive species.

11. Riparian Vegetation. Maintain native vegetation and wildlife habit

various stages of maturity, such that they are diverse, healthy, prod

sustaining, and ecologically appropriate.

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Experimental & Managem

Actions: Foci of Adaptive Manage

 Fall HFEs > 96‐hr duration (≤ 45k cfs, in October or No Fall HFEs ≤ 96‐hr duration (≤ 45k cfs, in October or No Humpback chub translocation Larval humpback chub head‐start program Macroinvertebrate production flows Mechanical removal of invasive fish species Mechanical removal of rainbow trout from LCR reach Proactive Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in April, May, or June Riparian vegetation restoration Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in March or April Trout management flows Summer LFEs (second decade only)

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Adaptive Management Learning M

Resource Topics

WY 2017-2026 LTEMP Experimental & Management Actions  Archaeological and 

Cultural Resources

Natural Processes (incl. food web & WQ) 

Humpback Chub 

Hydropower and 

Energy

Other Native Fish

Recreational

Experience

Sediment

Tribal Resources

Fall HFEs > 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Fall HFEs ≤ 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Humpback chub translocation  Larval humpback chub head-start program Macroinvertebrate production flows     Mechanical removal of invasive fish species  Mechanical removal of rainbow trout from LCR reach  Proactive Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in April, May, or June    Riparian vegetation restoration    Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in March or April    Trout management flows  

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Adaptive Management Learning M

Explanatory notes (per ROD) Effects of action on

resource are explicit,

primary concern ofexperiment; also may be

trigger or off‐ramp criteria

 Effects are explicit,

secondary concern ofexperiment

o All other effects of all

actions covered implicitlyin mandate to monitor for

“... long‐term unacceptable

adverse impacts on the

[listed] resources...”

Resource Topics

WY 2017-2026 LTEMP Experimental & Management Actions  Archaeological and 

Cultural Resources 

Natural Processes (includes food web) 

Humpback Chub

Hydropower and 

Energy

Fall HFEs > 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.   Fall HFEs ≤ 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.   Humpback chub translocation  Larval humpback chub head-start program Macroinvertebrate production flows    Mechanical removal of invasive fish species  Mechanical removal of rainbow trout from LCR reach  Proactive Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in April, May, or June   Riparian vegetation restoration   Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in March or April   Trout management flows  

4/20/2017 
Key Constraints on CRE Adaptive Managem

 “Classic” A/M follows “B.A.C.I.” design princip

 Before‐After, Control‐Impact experimental des Multiple observations to filter out effects of oth

 CRE constraints

 One dam, one river, one canyon

 Control‐Impact comparisons mostly impossible

 Observation frequency highly constrained

 Most actions require specific triggering conditions; 

considerations may also apply

 No ability to control for or sample across other facto

4/20/2017 
Requirements for Successful LTEMP A/M L

 Clear hypotheses about “other factors” that can aff

experimental outcomes

 aka “antecedent conditions” and “drivers and constr

 Effective monitoring (with appropriate sampling) 

 Condition (key characteristics or criteria) Drivers and constraints Antecedent conditions

 Clear objectives for all focal resources and threats

 Must be specific; qualitative or quantitative Crucial for assessing what “works” (or not) relative t

program goals

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Adaptive Management Learning M

Resource Topics

WY 2017-2026 LTEMP Experimental & Management Actions  Archaeological and 

Cultural Resources

Natural Processes (incl. food web & WQ) 

Humpback Chub 

Hydropower and 

Energy

Other Native Fish

Recreational

Experience

Sediment

Tribal Resources

Fall HFEs > 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Fall HFEs ≤ 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Humpback chub translocation  Larval humpback chub head-start program Macroinvertebrate production flows     Mechanical removal of invasive fish species  Mechanical removal of rainbow trout from LCR reach  Proactive Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in April, May, or June    Riparian vegetation restoration    Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in March or April    Trout management flows  

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Adaptive Management Learning M

Resource Topics

WY 2017-2026 LTEMP Experimental & Management Actions  Archaeological and 

Cultural Resources

Natural Processes (incl. food web & WQ) 

Humpback Chub 

Hydropower and 

Energy

Other Native Fish

Recreational

Experience

Sediment

Tribal Resources

Fall HFEs > 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Fall HFEs ≤ 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Humpback chub translocation  Larval humpback chub head-start program Macroinvertebrate production flows     Mechanical removal of invasive fish species  Mechanical removal of rainbow trout from LCR reach  Proactive Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in April, May, or June    Riparian vegetation restoration    Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in March or April    Trout management flows 

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Adaptive Management Learning M



Resource Topics

WY 2017-2026 LTEMP Experimental & Management Actions  Archaeological and 

Cultural Resources

Natural Processes (incl. food web & WQ) 

Humpback Chub 

Hydropower and 

Energy

Other Native Fish

Recreational

Experience

Sediment

Tribal Resources

Fall HFEs > 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Fall HFEs ≤ 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Humpback chub translocation  Larval humpback chub head-start program Macroinvertebrate production flows     Mechanical removal of invasive fish species  Mechanical removal of rainbow trout from LCR reach  Proactive Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in April, May, or June    Riparian vegetation restoration    Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in March or April   Trout management flows  

4/20/2017 
LTEMP Adaptive Management Learning M

Resource Topics

WY 2017-2026 LTEMP Experimental & Management Actions  Archaeological and 

Cultural Resources

Natural Processes (incl. food web & WQ) 

Humpback Chub 

Hydropower and 

Energy

Other Native Fish

Recreational

Experience

Sediment

Tribal Resources

Fall HFEs > 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Fall HFEs ≤ 96-hr duration, ≤ 45k cfs, in Oct. or Nov.    Humpback chub translocation  Larval humpback chub head-start program Macroinvertebrate production flows     Mechanical removal of invasive fish species  Mechanical removal of rainbow trout from LCR reach  Proactive Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in April, May, or June    Riparian vegetation restoration    Spring HFEs ≤ 45k cfs in March or April    Trout management flows 

4/20/2017 
Potential IRP Topics for FY18

‐20

 Riparian vegetation restoration “learning managem

objectives under LTEMP

 Incorporation of tribal traditional cultural values i

GCDAMP adaptive management and learning pro

 Socioeconomic assessment of non

‐hydropower va

value of these studies for the AMP and alternative

approaches that might be considered

 Opportunities and constraints for taking

a broade

ecosystem perspective on the resources affected by 

operations and experiments

 How the larger landscape affects what goes on with

canyons, both shaping and interacting with the eff

dam operations

4/20/2017 
Questions?

4/20/2017