GCDAMP Planning

GCDAMP Guiding Documents The GCDAMP is based on an adaptive environmental assessment and management (AEAM) approach to natural resources management (Holling, 1978; Walters, 1986), now commonly called ―adaptive management. The approach assumes that managed natural resources will always change, that scientific understanding of ecosystems is constantly improving, and that natural resource managers need the best available information to make decisions. AEAM unites the strengths of different scientific disciplines to meet the information needs of resource managers. It encourages scientists and managers to work collaboratively to use scientific information in the management process. AEAM consists of two parts—adaptive assessment and adaptive management. Assessment investigates how ecological systems work and evaluates management alternatives to achieve goals. Management involves learning by doing and testing, which may include monitoring system responses to natural changes (passive adaptive management) or deliberate manipulation of key processes (active adaptive management). Adaptive management acknowledges that policies must satisfy social objectives, but policies also need to adapt to both changes in understanding and changes in managed systems. Managers using an AEAM approach learn how a natural system works and how their actions affect the system; this knowledge helps them to perform better in complex and uncertain environments.

Long-term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) The LTEMP provides the basis for decisions that identify management actions and experimental options that will provide a framework for adaptively managing Glen Canyon Dam operations over the next 20 years	LTEMP Science Plan The LTEMP Science Plan describe a strategy by which monitoring and research data in the natural and social sciences will be collected, analyzed, and provided to DOI, its bureaus, and to the GCDAMP in support of implementation of LTEMP.	GCDAMP Strategic Plan The GCDAMP Strategic Plan (AMPSP) is a long-term plan drafted in August 2001 by GCDAMP and GCMRC participants that identifies the AMWG’s vision, mission, principles, goals, management objectives, information needs, and management actions.	Strategic Science Plan The GCMRC Strategic Science Plan (SSP) identifies general strategies for the next 5 years to provide science information responsive to the goals, management objectives, and priority questions as described in the AMPSP and other planning direction approved by the AMWG.	Core Monitoring Plan The GCMRC Core Monitoring Plan (CMP) describes the consistent, long-term, repeated measurements using scientifically accepted protocols to measure status and trends of key resources to answer specific questions. Core monitoring is implemented on a fixed schedule regardless of budget or other circumstances (for example, water year, experimental flows, temperature control, stocking strategy, nonnative control, etc.) affecting target resources.	Monitoring and Research Plan The GCMRC Monitoring and Research Plan (MRP) specifies (1) core monitoring activities, (2) research and development activities, and (3) long-term experimental activities consistent with the strategies and priorities established in this SSP to be conducted over the next 5 years to address some of the strategic science questions associated with AMWG priority questions.	Triennial Work Plan (TWP) The GCMRC Triennial Work Plan (TWP) identifies the scope, objectives, and budget for monitoring and research activities planned for a 3-year period. When completed, the triennial work plan will be consistent with the MRP.

Guiding Documents 2016 LTEMP ROD The DOI will work in consultation with the AMWG to update GCDAMP guiding documents (e.g., GCDAMP strategic plan, vision, mission, and charters) to reflect and be fully consistent with the priorities expressed in the FEIS and in this ROD. The goals and objectives in Section l.4 of the LTEMP FEIS will be carried forward as the goals in the GCDAMP guiding documents. Processes and documents will be evaluated and streamlined or combined as necessary. The DOI, in consultation with the AMWG, will develop monitoring metrics for the goals and objectives using those in Appendix C of the FEIS as a starting point. [1] Vision and Mission [2] The combined Vision and Mission statement reads as follows: The Grand Canyon is a homeland for some, sacred to many, and a national treasure for all. In honor of past generations, and on behalf of those of the present and future, we envision an ecosystem where the resources and natural processes are in harmony under a stewardship worthy of the Grand Canyon. We advise the Secretary of the Interior on how best to protect, mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve the integrity of the Colorado River ecosystem affected by Glen Canyon Dam, including natural biological diversity (emphasizing native biodiversity), traditional cultural properties’ spiritual values, and cultural, physical, and recreational resources through the operation of Glen Canyon Dam and other means. We do so in keeping with the federal trust responsibilities to Indian tribes, in compliance with applicable federal, state, and tribal laws, including the water delivery obligations of the Law of the River, and with due consideration to the economic value of power resources. This will be accomplished through our long-term partnership utilizing the best available scientific and other information through an adaptive ecosystem management process. Principles [3] The nine principles of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program are: The goals represent a set of desired outcomes that together will accomplish our vision and achieve the purpose of the Grand Canyon Protection Act. Some of the objectives and actions that fall under these goals may not be the responsibility of the Adaptive Management Program, and may be funded by other sources, but are included here for completeness. The construction of Glen Canyon Dam and the introduction of non-native species have irreversibly changed the Colorado River ecosystem. Much remains unknown about the Colorado River ecosystem below Glen Canyon Dam and how to achieve the Adaptive Management Program goals. The Colorado River ecosystem is a managed ecosystem. An ecosystem management approach, in lieu of an issues, species, or resources approach, will guide our efforts. Management efforts will prevent any further human-induced extirpation or extinction of native species. An adaptive management approach will be used to achieve Adaptive Management Program goals, through experimentation and monitoring, to meet the intent of the Grand Canyon Protection Act, Glen Canyon Dam Environmental Impact Statement, and the Record of Decision. Dam operations and management actions will be tried that attempt to return ecosystem patterns and processes to their range of natural variability. When this is not appropriate, experiments will be conducted to test other approaches. Because management actions to achieve a goal may benefit one resource or value and adversely affect another, those action alternatives that benefit all resources and values will be pursued first. When this is not possible, actions that have a neutral impact, or as a last resort, actions that minimize negative impacts on other resources, will be pursued consistent with the Glen Canyon Dam Environmental Impact Statement and the Record of Decision. If the target of a management objective proves to be inappropriate, unrealistic, or unattainable, the Adaptive Management Program will reevaluate that target and the methods used to attain it. Recognizing the diverse perspectives and spiritual values of the stakeholders, the unique aesthetic value of the Grand Canyon will be respected and enhanced. Priorities of the GCDAMP The GCDAMP priorities are set by the GCPA of 1992, the LTEMP FEIS, and ROD, and related mitigation requirements for endangered species and cultural resources. The GCDAMP priorities include the management and experimental actions; mitigation and environmental commitments; and research and monitoring identified in the L TEMP FEIS and ROD, and these will be the highest priorities for GCDAMP over the term of the LTEMP. [4] GCDAMP Goals The 12 goals of the Adaptive Management Program are: Protect or improve the aquatic food base so that it will support viable populations of desired species at higher trophic levels Maintain or attain viable populations of existing native fish, remove jeopardy for humpback chub and razorback sucker, and prevent adverse modification to their critical habitats Restore populations of extirpated species, as feasible and advisable Maintain a naturally reproducing population of rainbow trout above the Paria River, to the extent practicable and consistent with the maintenance of viable populations of native fish Maintain or attain viable populations of Kanab Ambersnail Protect or improve the biotic riparian and spring communities, including threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat Establish water temperature, quality, and flow dynamics to achieve the GCDAMP ecosystem goals Maintain or attain levels of sediment storage within the main channel and along shorelines to achieve the GCDAMP ecosystem goals Maintain or improve the quality of recreational experiences for users of the Colorado River ecosystem, within the framework of the GCDAMP ecosystem goals Maintain power production capacity and energy generation, and increase where feasible and advisable, within the framework of the GCDAMP ecosystem goals Preserve, protect, manage, and treat cultural resources for the inspiration and benefit of past, present, and future generations Maintain a high-quality monitoring, research, and adaptive management program [5] Five Priority Questions In August 2004, the AMWG reviewed these goals and identified five priority questions to help guide the GCDAMP science program: Why are the humpback chub not thriving, and what can we do about it? How many humpback chub are there and how are they doing? Which cultural resources, including traditional cultural properties, are within the area of potential effect, which should we treat, and how do we best protect them? What is the status and trends of cultural resources and what are the agents of deterioration? What is the best flow regime? What is the impact of sediment loss and what should we do about it? What will happen when a temperature control device is tested or implemented? How should it be operated? Are safeguards needed for management? The GCMRC will use these five priority questions as the primary, but not exclusive, basis for designing the science program.

Documents and Links The Long-term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) LTEMP Science Plan DOI Direction 2012 Desired Future Conditions PEP reviews Core Monitoring (CMAHG) AdHoc Group Page Science Questions and Information Needs 2012 Core Research Questions 2005 Core Monitoring Information Needs 2004 GCDAMP Goals and AMWG Priority Questions AMWG priority questions and Strategic Science Questions (SSQs) Research Information Needs Science Advisors Information Needs Papers and Presentations 2022 2022 AMWG river trip: Question about AMP 2022 AMWG river trip: Discussions on the AMP Vision and Mission 2022 AMWG river trip: Discussion about the TWG and AMWG 2022 AMWG river trip: Discussions on Grand Canyon Smallmouth Bass 2021 Example Metrics for the Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan Monitoring Metrics Draft Plan 2018 GCDAMP Program Goals PPT AMWG Desired Future Conditions PPT AMWG Desired Future Conditions PPT 2014 Memo from Executive Committee to TWG Chair Dated May 19, 2014, Subject: Preliminary Review Comments on GCMRC Science Plan 2012 Desired Future Conditions and Ad Hoc DFC Review Committee Comments 2011 A Prospectus to Evaluate Tradeoff and Decision Support Methods for the GCDAMP PPT 2010 The use of Bayesian networks to guide investments in flow and catchment restoration for impaired river ecosystems by B. Stewart-Koster, et. al. Causal Criteria Methods Manual - Methods for applying the multiple lines and levels of evidence (MLLE) ecosystems by B. Stewart-Koster. Science and Management Presentation and Discussion with Report: "Evaluating Criteria Guiding Transition of Science and Management Activities in Adaptive Management Programs" Morris K. Udall Foundation Brochure on Workable Solutions to Environmental Conflict Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program Published Research on Experimental Activities AIF: Scientific Controls in Adaptive Management and PPT Evaluating Criteria Guiding Transition of Science Activities to Management Actions in Adaptive Management Programs PPT ADHOC groups SCAHG ---- Steering Committee Ad-Hoc Group CMAHG ---- Core Monitoring Ad-Hoc Group AHCIO ---- Ad-Hoc Committee on What's In and Out of the Strategic Plan