September 5, 2018 Slides
Emanuel Rodriguez, Felipe Carrillo, Mark Gard, Mike Beakes, Mike Urkov, Robyn Bilski, Sadie Gill, Levi Johnson, JD Wikert, Russ Perry, Corey Phillis, Rod Wittler, Mike Berry, Matt Brown, Mike Hendrick, John Kelly, Jim Peterson, Adam Duarte
Jim and Adam reviewed the scenarios proposed during the delta watershed expert meeting. Send website with contaminants by USGS. Ask Brett about Fish Screening scenario for Suisun Marsh access. Mike Berry brought up that during the rice field discussions contaminants were talked about as if they are not an issue. Based off the Delta meeting and UC Davis researchers talk about it as if it's a huge issue. Mike pointed out that we need to decide how the SIT wants to think about contaminants and make sure the logic is consistent. Jim discussed the difficulties with how to model contaminants if that is something the SIT wants to do. The SIT has to spend time thinking about how they want to model this, if they do. Nigel Quinn has monitored contaminants down the San Joaquin. JD mention Steve Louie used to work for the water board for contaminants. Mike Berry suggested the researcher at UC Davis. The SIT would like to invite these three folks to the next in-person SIT meeting to discuss how they should think about and model contaminants.
Senior Environmental Scientist
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Water Branch
830 S Street, Sacramento, CA 95811
Nigel W.T. Quinn
Staff Geological Scientist/Water Resources Engineer
Berkeley National Laboratory/US Bureau of Reclamation
We created a series of synthetic years based on the current DSM inputs to move forward with calibrating the Chinook DSMs. Matt said that it might not get at some of the environmental conditions in the winter that are based on operations. He is not sure how much that matters though, given the monthly time step of the DSMs. Send the spreadsheet to Matt and Mike U. and they will discuss on the phone.
Mark G. asked if folks were interested in the symposium at the 2019 AFS/WS conference in Reno, NV September 29th – August 3rd. Please email him a title of a talk, if you are interested. He was thinking "Modeling for assessing habitat restoration" or maybe something a little broader. Rod asked if we could focus the SIT Special Section for the AFS meeting. Jim said CAMNet and AMCS are also considering putting a symposium together for this conference too.
Rod discussed the CPAR projects. There were 128 projects identified in that framework. Of the 128, 47 were completed and ~81 projects are remaining. Some of these projects are not actually quantified, but he would like the SIT to look at this to see if the list of projects are still relevant and if we can put numbers to this and run it as a SIT scenario(s). Matt asked Rod send the list out to the SIT for them to discuss. JD said CPAR is really just some of the actions from the final restoration plan that a subgroup decided were more relevant based on their discussion so we will have the same issues as we have with the final restoration plan. Rod said he will get a proposal together for this and send to the SIT for the next in-person meeting.
Rod will discuss the monitoring performance measures sheet at the next in-person meeting. Adam will resend that sheet.
Regina Rieger from NCPA, Northern California Power Association (Regina.Rieger@ncpa.com) asked to be invited to the next in-person meeting so water and power folks can see what the SIT is doing. Adam will send SIT documents to Rod so he can share.
Rod said they are currently working on the calendar for the next call for charters.