Difference between revisions of "GCDAMP 2016 Fish PEP"

How could the program better balance priorities and trade‐offs focused on research and monitoring of –

1. Rainbow trout in Glen and Marble Canyons?
2. Humpback chub around the LCR confluence, and at other locations that may harbor secondary populations?
3. Effectiveness of translocation efforts for of humpback chub?
4. Native and Nonnative fish status and trends outside of fixed study locations?
5. Better accommodating concerns for protecting the value of all life forms in culturally sensitive areas while maintaining the quality science?

Rainbow trout monitoring

• “The quality of catch effort data…is likely reduced due to the inability to account for incomplete capture.”
• “To maintain a quality fishery it is necessary to understand the factors affecting vital rates, currently these estimates are only provided through the intensive research sampling efforts.”
• CPE monitoring is “providing a robust view of status and trends of exotic species” over large areas, and intensive methods have limited spatial extent.
• Maintain the integrity of the long–term CPUE monitoring data
• Build on this long-term monitoring effort to estimate the annual response of RBT to conditions.
• Try fitting open models to RBT tagged during CPUE monitoring.
• Evaluate tradeoffs of different monitoring schemes via simulation.

Understanding drivers

• “Incorporate all levels of ecosystem (e.g., nutrients, benthic invertebrates, temperature, Lake Powell)” to better understand factors affecting RBT population dynamics.
• Develop RBT conceptual model to facilitate communication within and outside the program.

Humpback chub

• Quantify impacts of RBT on HBC.
• Focus on drivers of vital rates more, abundance less.
• Improve efficiency of HBC monitoring and research through coordination and power analysis.
• Consider more research into a potential second population.

Translocations

Need to clearly define goals

• Providing nursery areas for grow-out?
• Establishing new populations?
• Needs clear set of hypotheses.
• Different stocking methods?

Need for quantitative analysis
Genetic considerations

Evaluating tradeoffs in monitoring efforts

• Power analyses / simulations
• Can some projects be downsized?
• Should some projects be discontinued / redesigned?

Monitoring Broad-Scale Fish Community Status and Trends

• Current sampling likely effective for trout, carp, walleye and smallmouth bass. Ineffective for catfish, striped bass.
• Stratified random design may be poor design for detecting invasions if likely entry points are not sampled yearly.
• Suggest pit tagging and open models.
• Also suggest incorporating PIT-tag antennae into design.
• “PEP recommends that a separate invasive detection program be considered. This separate program would use a variety of sampling gears deployed at fixed sites where nonnative are known to exist or where introduction is most likely to occur.”
• “Identify nonnative fish population or distribution indices or rules sets that would trigger nonnative fish control options to be employed”
• “Develop ways to routinely solicit information from fishing guides and anglers regarding composition of the recreational fishery.”

Minimizing negative effects of program activities on fish

• Clearly demonstrate need for particular levels of sampling
• Engage tribes in monitoring and research programs

Program communication and Outreach

• Need to develop population metrics for characterizing RBT population in Lees Ferry that are understood by and acceptable to angler stakeholders.
• Develop an integrated conceptual model.
• Consider increased citizen science.

Adaptive Management

PEP recommended we focus on models throughout the adaptive management process (Information-theoretic approach).

• Modify RBT and HBC models to incorporate alternative hypotheses of the factors affecting demography.
• Integrate two population models.
• Recommendations that the translocations be more hypothesis driven with hypotheses linked to specific management actions and criteria for success clearly defined.

Emerging Issues

Need to more formally integrate reservoir and downstream ecosystem monitoring.

• Effects of warmer water and lower nutrients levels associated with lowered lake levels and potentially decreased inflows identified as key uncertainty.
• Reconsider risk associated with Quagga effects in the reservoir on reservoir outflows (increased water temperature, altered nutrients).
• Invasive species: “focus on prevention”

Shifts in benthic macrophyte community: consider research / modelling on nutrient assimilation and stoichiometry dynamics and differences in secondary production on different vegetation.

• Climate Change – need ecosystem and/or bioenergetics modelling.
• Program should consider TCD as a management option for warming waters – what would effects be on nutrients / temperature and effects for rainbow trout and native species. [1]

• PEP Reviews page
• 2009 Fish Monitoring Program PEP

• Review of Fisheries Program TWG Summary - 2016 PEP Findings PPT
• Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center Science Updates (BO Compliance, Trout Updates, Green Sunfish, Fisheries PEP, Partners in Science)
• Update on Fisheries PEP

• GCDAMP PEP Final Report for the Fisheries Program Review, December 27, 2016
• 2016 Fish PEP Prospectus: Stakeholder Final
• 2016 Fish PEP Agenda
• GCMRC 2016 Fish PEP ftp site
• Description of the Scientific Protocol Evaluation Panel (PEP) Review Process; Core Monitoring Plan Appendix C:

• Link to the GCMRC FY15-17 Triennial Budget and Workplan
• Link to the GCDAMP Fish Page
• 2012 Desired Future Conditions
• GCDAMP Monitoring and Research Planning Page
• 2009 Core Monitoring Information Needs - Native Fish
• Overview of the 2009 Core Monitoring Information Needs: Native Fish - Workshop for Stakeholders

References Cited/High Priority Reading List for Panel Review:

Avery, L.A., Korman, J., and Persons, W.R., 2015, Effects of increased discharge on spawning and age-0 recruitment of rainbow trout in the Colorado River at Lees Ferry, Arizona: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 34, no. 4, p. 671-680, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02755947.2015.1040560.

Bureau of Reclamation, and U.S. Geological Survey, 2014, Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program triennial budget and work plan—Fiscal years 2015-2017: Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Regional Office and U.S. Geological Survey, Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, prepared in cooperation with the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program, 469 p. (Projects 5-10 only, p. 199-378; PDF with only project summaries included in full reference list).

Dodrill, M.J., Yackulic, C.B., Kennedy, T.A., and Hayes, J.W., 2016, Prey size and availability limits maximum size of rainbow trout in a large tailwater—Insights from a drift-foraging bioenergetics model: Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 73, no. 5, p. 759- 772, http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2015-0268.

Dongoske, K.E., Jackson-Kelly, L., and Bulletts, C., 2010, Confluence of values—The role of science and Native Americans in the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program, in Melis, T.S., Hamill, J.F., Bennett, G.E., Coggins, L.G., Jr., Grams, P.E., Kennedy, T.A., Kubly, D.M., and Ralston, B.E., eds., Proceedings of the Colorado River Basin Science and Resource Management Symposium, November 18-20, 2008, Scottsdale, Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5135, 133-140 p., http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5135/.

Jordan, J., and Hamill, J.F., 2015, Lees Ferry recreational trout fishery management recommendations--The voice of Lees Ferry recreational anglers, guides, and businesses: Trout Unlimited, International Federation of Fly Fishers, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, and Wildlife for Tomorrow, 13 p., http://www.trcp.org/images/uploads/wygwam/Lees-Ferry-Recommendations-final-8-6-5.pdf.

Kennedy, T.A., Muehlbauer, J.D., Yackulic, C.B., Lytle, D.A., Miller, S.W., Dibble, K.L., Kortenhoeven, E.W., Metcalfe, A.N., and Baxter, C.V., 2016, Flow management for hydropower extirpates aquatic insects, undermining river food webs: BioScience, v. 66, no. 7, p. 561-575, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw059.

Korman, J., Martell, S.J.D., Walters, C.J., Makinster, A.S., Coggins, L.G., Yard, M.D., and Persons, W.R., 2012, Estimating recruitment dynamics and movement of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the Colorado River in Grand Canyon using an integrated assessment model: Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 69, no. 11, p. 1827-1849, http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/F2012-097.

Korman, J., Yard, M.D., and Yackulic, C.B., 2016, Factors controlling the abundance of rainbow trout in the Colorado River in Grand Canyon in a reach utilized by endangered humpback chub: Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 73, no. 1, p. 105-124, http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2015-0101.

National Park Service, 2013, Comprehensive fisheries management plan, Grand Canyon National Park, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI): Coconino County, Ariz., Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon National Park, 46 p. (p. 1-17 only), https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=65&projectID=35150&documentID=56565

Persons, W.R., Van Haverbeke, D.R., and Dodrill, M.J., 2016 (in review), Colorado River fish monitoring in Grand Canyon, Arizona—2002-2014 humpback chub aggregations: U.S. Geological Survey report XXXX. [Available upon request by contacting Scott Vanderkooi, [email protected]].

Rogers, S., 2015, Fisheries management plan Colorado River-Lees Ferry 2015-2025: Arizona Game and Fish Department, Sport Fish Restoration, Region II Fish Program, 15 p., http://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/15oct20/pdfs/Attach_06c.pdf.

Rogowski, D.L., Osterhoudt, R.J., Winters, L.K., and Wolters, P.N., 2016, Colorado River fish monitoring in Grand Canyon, Arizona—2015 annual report: Flagstaff, Arizona Game and Fish Department, submitted to U.S. Geological Survey, Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, cooperative agreement #G13AC00086.

Stone, D.M., and Gorman, O.T., 2006, Ontogenesis of endangered humpback chub (Gila cypha) in the Little Colorado River, Arizona: American Midland Naturalist, v. 155, no. 1, p. 123-135, http://dx.doi.org/10.1674/0003-0031(2006)155[0123:OOEHCG]2.0.CO;2.

Van Haverbeke, D.R., Stone, D.M., Coggins, L.G., and Pillow, M.J., 2013, Long-term monitoring of an endangered desert fish and factors influencing population dynamics: Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management, v. 4, no. 1, p. 163-177, http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/082012- JFWM-071.

Ward, D.L., and Morton-Starner, R., 2015, Effects of water temperature and fish size on predation vulnerability of juvenile humpback chub to rainbow trout and brown trout: Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, v. 144, no. 6, p. 1184-1191, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00028487.2015.1077160.

Winters, L.K., Rogowski, D.L., and Wolters, P.N., 2016, Status of the Lees Ferry rainbow trout fishery—2015 annual report: Flagstaff, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch, Colorado River Research Office, submitted to U.S. Geological Survey, Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, cooperative agreement #G10AC00147, 47 p.

Yackulic, C.B., Yard, M.D., Korman, J., and Van Haverbeke, D.R., 2014, A quantitative life history of endangered humpback chub that spawn in the Little Colorado River—Variation in movement, growth, and survival: Ecology and Evolution, v. 4, no. 7, p. 1006-1018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.990.

Yard, M.D., Coggins, L.G., Baxter, C.V., Bennett, G.E., and Korman, J., 2011, Trout piscivory in the Colorado River, Grand Canyon—Effects of turbidity, temperature, and fish prey availability: Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, v. 140, no. 2, p. 471-486, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00028487.2011.572011.

Zuni Tribe, 2010, Cover letter from Governor Norman J. Cooeyate and Tribal Council Resolution regarding the Grand Canyon as a register-eligible Zuni TCP and mechanical removal: Zuni Indian Reservation, New Mex., Zuni Tribe, Resolution #M70-2010-C086, submitted to Bureau of Reclamation and Secretary of the Interior Kenneth Salazar, 6 p.