Conference Call

July 24, 2019 Slides

By phone:

Bruce Mclaughlin, Mike Urkov, Mike Wright, Sadie Gill, John Kelly, Heather Casillas, Robyn Bilski, Matt Brown, Kate Spear, Bernard Aguilar, Steve Zeug, Carl Dealy, Corey Phillis, Mike Beakes, Kirk Nelson, Cesar Blanco, Rod Wittler, JD Wikert, Page Vick, Chris Hammersmark, Mike Berry, Pam Taber, Michael Prowatzke, Cyril Michel, Jim Peterson, Adam Duarte

Status of interim Science Coordinator (Cesar)

  • No significant update from last call.
  • Announcement sometime in August

Update on watershed expert meetings (Mike U.)

  • Beginning to get materials together
  • Trying to zero in on dates and locations
  • 5 watershed expert meetings

One on the model itself Second on the inputs to model Third geographic explicit meetings to talk about specific geographic issues: one in the north valley, one is the middle valley, one in the south valley

  • Targeting middle of September for meeting
  • Model meeting and model input meeting is for people who are new to the process and are optional for people to go to
  • doing the first two meetings in the regular SIT meetings? Possibly.
  • Need more time what the model meeting and model input meeting to make sure FlowWest is getting the right audience
  • The meetings are going to be super awesome

Update on habitat decay proposal (Rod)

  • Data from Tricia Bratcher on Clear Creek in hand
  • John Hannon to supply data from Stanislaus and American
  • Will also reach out to Chris H

Update on predator contact points project (Corey / Cyril)

  • Cyril’s Presentation
  • Corey summary: charter selected in 2017. Determined that contact points / predation was contributing uncertainty to the model results.
  • Submerged Aquatic Vegetation study was not completed.
  • Question: what is the difference between colors on the heat map? Colors are density of predation events, not illumination measurement.
  • Question: site selection was mostly random. Tried to find areas that were easy to work with. Randomly selected control reach by coin flip.
  • Sites were mostly shoreline. No consideration of thalweg.
  • Initial conclusion is cold light has higher predation than warm light.
  • Upstream / downstream relationship did not seem to be important.
  • Predators attracted to light? Or opportunity to feed more efficiently? Not sure yet.
  • Preliminary indication is that light was correlated with higher predator density.
  • Light maps built from surface measurements. Some suspicion that cold light has better penetration deeper into the water column.
  • Water quality also a factor.
  • Hoping to circle back to Submerged Aquatic Vegetation. Think mechanical removal study might be better than chemical treatment of SAV.
  • Where was study? Largely down by Bolden Island near Mokelumne.
  • Used Hatchery Fish from Moke. Lead time is about a year for permitting.
  • For Correlative study, samples occurred during the day.
  • Looking for contacts for nighttime satellite imagery. Looking for 1 meter squared resolution.
  • Mike Berry has a team that has measured light intensity. Report is pending.
  • Zach Leady / USBR also might have access to higher resolution imagery.
  • Will we see percentage predation? Yes. Hope to be able to make predictions of predation reduction.
  • Correlative study was done during the day.

Update on Temperature Estimation in Tributaries (Mike W. / Kirk)

Update on Data Guidance working group (Mike U. / Sadie / JD)

  • Didn’t get as much done as we had hoped because focussing on expert outreach meetings
  • Going to develop expert guidance according to location
  • Examples of things that inform the process include: growth rate, survival rate, territory, habitat
  • Developing a list of items to help better inform the charters
  • Capturing basic project information: rate of expenditure, the rate of completion, the effect of how effective a project was, other elements like changes to survival rates
  • Anyone can participate
  • Hope to help charter writers understand what data the SIT is interested in
  • will not be ready for the current FY2020 charters, but could be ready for projects in January of 2020

Communicating Key Uncertainties and Data Gaps (All)

  • Looking for a more refined list of implementation versus monitoring and research directed at uncertainty in the DSM.
  • Review of Monitoring Data Needs available here
  • Current list of funding priorities, information is important to the SIT
  • Information on the question marks would be very helpful.
  • RBDD screw trap is included because it could be used for Winter Run. Will be used for a finer scale calibration
  • Egg to fry survival is used in NMFS Winter Run model.
  • SIT model calculates Egg to Fry as emergence, not swim down to a point.
  • SIT should not have a mistaken impression that data needs are all automatically covered in this table. From a programmatic perspective we have to be right-sized. List could change over time.
  • Heather: SIT makes decisions based on data in the model, so need to maintain the balance.
  • JD: Well in advance of review of Charters, the monitoring list should be updated and adjusted.
  • Rod: This list belongs to the SIT, which represents the data needed to do its job.
  • Third section is project-specific monitoring. Ongoing special committees or other charters. Could be updated.
  • How to provide feedback?
  • Some projects will be on multiple lists
  • Solicitation was lacking on amount of funds, and the allocation between implementation, monitoring, and research. Would like to see clear priorities.
  • Some confusion about the actual manner of the solicitation.
  • Still need these processes to run through normal solicitation / acquisition process.
  • Description of critical data needs was unclear for charter authors

Discuss the Chinook DSM juvenile delta rearing survival function (All)

  • Presentation
  • Steve summarizing Brad’s questions about delta. How diversions are affecting fish not subject to south delta pumping
  • Estimates are not empirically derived.
  • What’s the concept that fish are directly affected by diversions? Mostly by how they are sloshing back and forth.
  • Difference between rearing and moving?
  • Brad might have some thoughts on an improved method for dealing with exports / diversions in the delta.
  • Not necessarily just entrainment, but some sort of measure of environmental quality.
  • Based on DSM inputs don’t have much of an effect in the North Delta.

New Business (All)

  • Cesar: next in-person meeting? Not scheduled until after August. Will work with FlowWest until we have enough to warrant a meeting.
  • Want to make sure we don’t over-tax resources as we are reaching out to experts and participants.
  • August 7 phone meeting will be a Zoom meeting.