Adaptive Management MRG ESA Collaborative Program “Steps to a New/Amended BA/BO for the Middle Rio Grande”

1. Adaptive Management MRG ESA Collaborative Program“Steps to a New/Amended BA/BO for the Middle Rio Grande” Part 1 - presented by: Valda Terauds, CGWP U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

2. Steps in Adaptive Management • Problem definition • Determination of ecosystem management goals and objectives • Determination of the ecosystem baseline • Development of conceptual models • Selecting future restoration or management actions • Implementing actions • Monitoring and ecosystem response • Evaluation of actions with proposals for modification Identify the needs Evaluate results Design/adjust a plan of action Monitor the outcome Implement the plan

3. Step 1 – Problem Definition • Current BO Not Hydrologically Sustainable • What will native RG flows support? • How far will 8,000 AFY Supplemental Water go?

4. Native Flows and BO Targets • Water demands to meet 2003 BO not sustainable • Historic hydrologic variability • Native Otowi flows alone cannot reliably meet BO targets (ISC 2004 evaluation for WAMS Workgroup) • Climate change • Basin overappropriation • Population/demand growth

5. Supplemental Water Sources • Historic sources: SJC project leases & emergency agreements with New Mexico (relinquish Compact credits) • Reclamation is limited by legislation to leases from willing parties • SJC project water contractor usage increasing • Municipal diversion projects coming on line (Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Espanola) • Future supplemental water leases: 8,000 AFY • Emergency water agreements are not sustainable for long-term planning

6. Historic Supplemental Water Usage (1997-2006)7,780 (2005) – 202,269 (2000) AFY

7. Estimated Historical Year Minnow BO Demand

8. Estimated Supplemental Water Demands(MRGESA Collaborative Program-former WAMS Estimates) Actual 2003 BO Usage (Article VII): 7,780 to 46,781 AFY Future Supplemental Water available: 8,000 AFY

9. Supplemental Water & 2003 BO Supplemental water use for 2003 BO (2003-2006): 7,780 to 46,781 AFY all under Dry Year designations due to Article VII restrictions

10. How is Supplemental Water Used? • Support minnow spawn • Keep river wet to June 15 • Managed recession after June 15 – less than 8 miles/day drying • Meet late season BO flow targets

11. Average Monthly Supplemental Water Use2003 BO Average Use (2003-2006) =24,144 AFY

12. MRGESA Collaborative Program August 2006 Workshop • Goal: Explore stakeholder ideas & concepts to develop a long-term sustainable, stable BO • Constraint: 8,000 AFY Supplemental Water • Concepts: • Add Critically Dry Year to BO (Concept A) • Maintain Quality Reach below Isleta (Concept B) • Adaptive Management per Hydrologic & Biologic Conditions (Concept C)

13. Concept A & B Modeling Results-Dry Sequence Question: 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?

14. Concept A & B: Low Flow Analysis Results Number of Days Flow is Less Than 100 cfs in Ten Years (average/dry sequence)

15. SWM-URGWOM Unlimited Supply Modeling: Wet, Dry-Average, Dry Decades Reservoir Storage to Meet BO Needs: 90,000 AF

16. MRGESA Collaborative Program December 2006 Workshop • Results of Analyses – Concepts A & B • Neither concept provides significant water savings over current BO • Both concepts fail BO targets when Otowi flows fall below 500 KAF • 8,000 AFY supplemental water supplies exhausted after single 500KAF flow year & most future simulation years fail BO targets • Low flow days are almost the same for current BO and Concepts A & B

17. MRGESA Collaborative ProgramDecember 2006 WorkshopConcept C – Adaptive Management • Natural flows, MRGCD deliveries, pumping, and some supplemental water maintain designated reaches under “normal” conditions. • Some supplemental water is banked for drier years or to enhance wetter years. • Adaptive management principles are applied to allocation of supplemental water

18. Past River Dynamics Improving Stable Declining Frequency, Timing, Duration of High Flows, Geomorphic Changes, Amount of Drying Available Water MRGCD Storage RequiredCompact Delivery Supplemental Water Supplies High Average Extreme Current AOP Forecast High Average Extreme Snowpack Projected Runoff & Timing Concept “C” AOP Species Status Improving Stable Declining RGSM – Population, Recruitment, Distribution SWFL – Population, Reproductive Success, Distribution Ecosystem Status Channel Conditions, Restoration Needs, Groundwater Levels, Wetlands Health Improving Stable Declining

19. Path to Amended/New BA/BO • Water managers and stakeholders – varying levels of urgency to move to a sustainable BO • BA requires new “action” – Define Concept C • New action needs to show demonstrable change in water use and expected species response • Agency and stakeholder contributions to the action • New action BA and resulting BO need to be legally defensible • Action & regulatory agencies need more information • Hydrologic & Biologic flexibilities • Implementing Adaptive Management

20. Working the Adaptive Management Steps • Determination of ecosystem management goals and objectives • Work within 8,000 AFY Supplemental Water constraint • Provide baseline in critically dry times with enhanced ecosystem support in wetter conditions • Determination of the ecosystem baseline • Identify critical water needs & refugia for ecosystem & species • Development of conceptual models • Identify questions/hypotheses to be answered/tested • Selecting future restoration or management actions • Identify current year priorities for testing • Implementing actions • 2007 Experimental Activities Program • Monitoring and ecosystem response • In progress – preliminary results

21. Questions for Concept C 1) What are minimum biological water needs during critically dry times? 2) What refugial options do the species have when there is inadequate water supply? 3) What are long-term recurrence intervals for certain flows that maintain long-term population and ecosystem viability?

22. 2007 Focus Areas • Minimize the use of existing Supplemental Water supplies • Use native Rio Grande flows to support silvery minnow spawn • Closely coordinate recession with rescue activities • Better understand surface water, bank storage, groundwater interaction • Identify characteristics of in-stream habitats during periods of drying (focus on Isleta Reach) • Evaluate pools that form during drying and monitor physical, chemical, and silvery minnow usage/health • Evaluate general water quality characteristics and flows associated with wasteways and outfalls in the Isleta reach • Population Viability & Habitat Analysis – Silvery Minnow • What are key lifestage and habitat features that are most significant in contributing to population health and robustness

23. 2007 Experimental Activities • Ways to stretch/manage the spring hydrograph • Evaluate continuous flow targets based on spawn monitoring • Active management of river recession • Monitored in-stream refugia • Wetted reach and river drying monitoring • Diurnal monitoring of the wetted front, water quality and fish stress • Wasteway/outfall monitoring • Bank storage and groundwater interactions • Population viability and habitat analysis

24. Historic Frequency: Spawning & Overbanking Flows Flows >3,000 cfs > 7 days 21/32 yrs Flows >5,000 cfs > 5 days 11/32 yrs

25. Sample Activity Description

26. Preliminary 2007 DataWays to Stretch/Manage Spring Hydrograph • Cochiti Deviations (Corps & Cochiti Pueblo) • Use native Rio Grande flows to meet silvery minnow spawning & recruitment needs • Stored 9,674 AF from May 4 to June 9 • Spawning release to test correlation between >3,000 cfs for 7 to 10 days and RGSM spawn & recruitment (Dudley, et. al., 2006) • Stored water released by June 15 RESULT: Spawning Flow Target Achieved, 0 AF Supplemental Water Used

27. Cochiti Inflow / Release Deviation Storage & Release Period

28. Sample Activity Description

29. Preliminary 2007 Data: In-Stream Refugia

30. Preliminary 2007 Data:Wasteway & Outfall Monitoring Sabinal Drain

31. RGSM PVA Workshop • Held Sept. 12 & 13, 2007 @ FWS • Develop life history model for RGSM • Preliminary accomplishments • Detailed discussion & consensus for values used for model inputs • Additional discussion needed: metapopulation, carrying capacity, etc. • PVA Session 2 – October 9, 2007 @ FWS • PVHA to be scheduled by end of 2007 – address key habitat components with broader group of stakeholders • Desired Outcomes: • Guide potential management actions for RGSM by lifestage and critical habitat component(s) • Predictive model used to evaluate management actions offering sensitivity analyses & probability assessment of impact to RGSM demographic trajectory

32. Next Steps • Evaluate 2007 Experimental Activities Reports (due Dec 31) • What worked, what did not, why? • New/modified questions • Agency & Stakeholder contributions to action defined • Decision: February 2008 – Pursue New or Amended BA/BO by March 2009 or additional year of activities and BA/BO in March 2010? • 2008 experimental activity design • Procurement (April 2008) • Implementation (May 2008)

33. Lessons Learned (to Date) • Creating an atmosphere among participants to design and execute experiments while “making it safe to fail” is difficult • Stay Tuned - we are a work in progress!

34. Unanswered, Modified, New Questions • 2007 summer river conditions did not create long-standing isolated pools to answer extended period water quality, fish usage, fish health questions • Multi-year habitat usage? • Water wheeling/local recharge opportunities through MRG project? • SWFL, riparian ecosystem needs? • A multitude of other questions….yours?