Difference between revisions of "GCDAMP 2016 Fish PEP"

From Glen Canyon Dam AMP
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(15 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 24: Line 24:
 
------------Portal list on righthand side---------->
 
------------Portal list on righthand side---------->
 
|style="width:100%; font-size:120%;"|
 
|style="width:100%; font-size:120%;"|
 
  
 
== Fish projects in the [[GCDAMP Budget| '''FY15-17 TWP''']]: <br> ==
 
== Fish projects in the [[GCDAMP Budget| '''FY15-17 TWP''']]: <br> ==
'''Project 6. Mainstem Colorado River Humpback Chub Aggregations and Fish Community Dynamics (system-wide monitoring potentially harmful/invasive nonnative species and other rare native species) <br>'''
+
*Project 6. Mainstem Colorado River Humpback Chub Aggregations and Fish Community Dynamics (system-wide monitoring potentially harmful/invasive nonnative species and other rare native species) <br>
'''Project 7. Population Ecology of Humpback Chub in and around the Little Colorado River <br>'''
+
*Project 7. Population Ecology of Humpback Chub in and around the Little Colorado River <br>
'''Project 8. Experimental Actions to Increase Abundance and Distribution of Native Fishes in Grand Canyon <br>'''
+
*Project 8. Experimental Actions to Increase Abundance and Distribution of Native Fishes in Grand Canyon <br>
'''Project 9. Understanding the Factors Determining Recruitment, Population Size, Growth, and Movement of Rainbow Trout in Glen and Marble Canyons (Natal Origins) <br>'''
+
*Project 9. Understanding the Factors Determining Recruitment, Population Size, Growth, and Movement of Rainbow Trout in Glen and Marble Canyons (Natal Origins) <br>
'''Project 10. Where does the Glen Canyon Dam rainbow trout tailwater fishery end? - Integrating Fish and Channel Mapping Data below Glen Canyon Dam <br>'''
+
*Project 10. Where does the Glen Canyon Dam rainbow trout tailwater fishery end? - Integrating Fish and Channel Mapping Data below Glen Canyon Dam <br>
  
 
|}<!--
 
|}<!--
Line 45: Line 44:
 
|class="MainPageBG" style="width:55%; border:1px solid #cef2e0; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top; color:#000;"|
 
|class="MainPageBG" style="width:55%; border:1px solid #cef2e0; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top; color:#000;"|
 
{|width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"
 
{|width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Updates</h2>
+
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Questions </h2>
 
|-
 
|-
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 
|style="color:#000;"|
  
*[http://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/amwg/mtgs/16aug24/Attach_07a.pdf  Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center Science Updates (BO Compliance, Trout Updates, Green Sunfish, Fisheries PEP, Partners in Science)]
+
How could the program better balance priorities and trade‐offs focused on research and monitoring of
 
+
#Rainbow trout in Glen and Marble Canyons?
*[http://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/16oct18/Attach_06.pdf Update on Fisheries PEP]
+
#Humpback chub around the LCR confluence, and at other locations that may harbor secondary populations?
 
+
#Effectiveness of translocation efforts for of humpback chub?
*June 24 - Comments due to to Scott VanderKooi and David Braun on the stakeholder draft (link to the right) of the GCDAMP Protocol Evaluation Panel Prospectus: Fisheries Program Review
+
#Native and Nonnative fish status and trends outside of fixed study locations?
 
+
#Better accommodating concerns for protecting the value of all life forms in culturally sensitive areas while maintaining the quality science?
*August 1-5, 2016: Fish PEP Workshop, Flagstaff/Lees Ferry
+
 
+
----
+
 
+
== Protocol Evaluation Panel - Fisheries Program Review Aug 2-4, 2016.  Flagstaff, AZ ==
+
 
   
 
   
Tuesday, August 2:
+
|-
+
*Topic: (20) Fisheries PEP
+
*Date: Tuesday, August 2, 2016
+
*Time: 7:30 am, Mountain Time (Arizona, GMT-07:00)
+
*Meeting number: 355 394 039
+
*Meeting password: (This meeting does not require a password.)
+
*Host Key: 806693
+
  
Click the following link to view or edit your meeting information, or to start your meeting. <br>
+
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Findings and Recommendations </h2>
 +
|-
 +
|style="color:#000;"|
  
https://usgs.webex.com/usgs/j.php?MTID=md199cdd8c5a19e29ab91a628a71f7679  <br>
+
===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.
  
Teleconference: 1-703-648-4848  <br>
+
===Understanding drivers===
Code: 79181#  <br>
+
*“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 <br>
 +
Genetic considerations
  
Wednesday, August 3:
+
===Evaluating tradeoffs in monitoring efforts===
+
*Power analyses / simulations
*Topic: (20) Fisheries PEP
+
*Can some projects be downsized?
*Date: Wednesday, August 3, 2016
+
*Should some projects be discontinued / redesigned?
*Time: 12:00 pm, Mountain Time (Arizona, GMT-07:00)
+
*Meeting number: 359 163 549
+
*Meeting password: (This meeting does not require a password.)
+
*Host Key: 730753
+
+
Click the following link to view or edit your meeting information, or to start your meeting.  <br>
+
+
https://usgs.webex.com/usgs/j.php?MTID=m26e52bffe86afd0be9d91cf2753ee0a9  <br>
+
+
Teleconference: 1-703-648-4848  <br>
+
Code: 79181#  <br>
+
+
  
----
+
===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.”
  
Thursday, August 4:
+
=== Minimizing negative effects of program activities on fish===
+
*Clearly demonstrate need for particular levels of sampling
*Topic: (20) Fisheries PEP
+
*Engage tribes in monitoring and research programs
*Date: Thursday, August 4, 2016
+
*Time: 7:30 am, Mountain Time (Arizona, GMT-07:00)
+
*Meeting number: 354 257 840
+
*Meeting password: (This meeting does not require a password.)
+
*Host Key: 897946
+
  
Click the following link to view or edit your meeting information, or to start your meeting. <br>
+
===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.
  
https://usgs.webex.com/usgs/j.php?MTID=mf3ac40c55bc6fcda769126200029538b  <br>
+
===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.
  
Teleconference: 1-703-648-4848  <br>
+
===Emerging Issues===
Code: 79181#  <br>
+
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. [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17apr20/Attach_06b.pdf]
  
 
----
 
 
To TWG members (July 15, 2016):
 
 
On behalf of both the GCMRC and the Science Advisors Program (SAP), David Braun and I would like to invite you to attend and participate in the Fisheries Protocol Evaluation Panel (PEP) workshop that will occur August 1-5. You are invited to simply observe the panel’s deliberations, to participate in the discussions during the open sessions, or to give a presentation during one of the open sessions. '''We will provide a webinar link to these sessions for those of you who want to participate, but cannot attend in person.''' Attached is the [[Media:GCDAMP FY16 Fisheries PEP Prospectus final.pdf| '''final prospectus''']] we provided to panelists, which incorporates all comments and feedback that we received from TWG members.
 
 
Here is the current schedule for the review panel:
 
 
August 1, Monday: Travel day.
 
 
August 2, Tuesday AM: Meet at GCMRC for introductions, orientation, and program overview in an open session.
 
 
August 2-3, Tuesday PM to Wednesday AM: Travel to Lees Ferry, visit sites upstream in Glen Canyon, and make camp for the night. The purpose of this time in Glen Canyon is to allow the panel to experience the physical setting of the ecosystem and associated logistical constraints of working there, to hear and discuss presentations on the fisheries investigations by the GCMRC and cooperators, and for the panel to interact with and hear from GCDAMP stakeholders with particular interests in the fisheries research and monitoring program.
 
 
*We invite representatives of the Tribes, recreational fishing, boating, and other stakeholder groups to join us on the river Tuesday PM to Wednesday AM, to speak to and with the panelists. However, we will have limited space available and need to know who is interested in joining us. In the event of a high interest, we may be required to ask for participants to represent larger groups.
 
 
August 3, Wednesday AM: Return to Flagstaff.
 
 
August 3, Wednesday PM: Reconvene at GCMRC and meet in open sessions for the afternoon to hear presentations from GCMRC and cooperating scientists, as well as from GCDAMP stakeholders with particular interests in the fisheries research and monitoring program.
 
 
*We invite stakeholders to make presentations that highlight their perspectives regarding the fisheries research and monitoring program. The agenda can accommodate as many as six 20-30 minute time slots for stakeholder presentations between Wednesday afternoon and Thursday morning, including discussion time. Please notify us as soon as possible if you or another representative of your interests would like to present, so we can finalize the agenda. Please note that the PEP is not charged with considering fisheries management practices or policies, although these practices and policies do guide the kinds of information streams that the research and monitoring efforts need to generate.
 
 
August 4, Thursday AM: Meet at GCMRC in a final open workshop session for the morning, to complete the presentations by GCMRC and cooperating scientists, and GCDAMP stakeholders.
 
 
August 4, Thursday PM: Closed panel session to discuss potential questions, comments, and recommendations to the GCDAMP, and discuss assignments and the timeline for completing a draft report on its findings and recommendations.
 
 
August 5, Friday: Travel day.
 
 
 
After the conclusion of the in-person review, the panel will prepare a draft report for review and feedback from the GCMRC and the SAP Executive Coordinator. The panel will then prepare a final report incorporating the feedback from the GCMRC and the SAP Executive Coordinator. The GCMRC in turn will deliver the final report to the GCDAMP Secretary of the Interior’s Designee, Adaptive Management Work Group, and Technical Work Group for their consideration. We believe this will be a useful document as we look to develop the next triennial work plan for the GCDAMP.
 
 
Please let us know by Friday, July 22 if you would like to join us on the river or are nominating some individual to represent a group of your fellow stakeholders. In addition, please let us know at that time if you will attend any of the open sessions in Flagstaff in person or remotely and if you would like to give a formal presentation to the panelists. We will do our best to accommodate all who are interested in presenting, but we will have many topics to cover by the GCMRC and cooperators as well as by other stakeholders, so presentation times and time-slots will necessarily be limited. We will distribute a more detailed agenda and Webex information once we start finalizing presentation topics, presenters, and times of various events.
 
 
We look forward to the review of the fisheries program and the opportunity for scientists, stakeholders, and mangers to interact with the panelists and each other. We believe this will be a great opportunity for learning and improved understanding of past and ongoing research and monitoring projects as well as the concerns and perspectives of stakeholders as we all look to improve this important program. Thank you for your continued interest, engagement, and support of GCMRC and the GCDAMP research and monitoring program.
 
 
Sincerely,
 
 
Scott VanderKooi and David Braun
 
 
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 164: Line 136:
 
|class="MainPageBG" style="width:45%; border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;"|
 
|class="MainPageBG" style="width:45%; border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;"|
 
{| width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"
 
{| width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">2016 Fish PEP</h2>
+
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Links</h2>
 
|-
 
|-
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 
|style="color:#000;"|
  
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17apr20/Attach_06b.pdf Review of Fisheries Program TWG Summary - 2016 PEP Findings PPT]
+
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=PEP_reviews PEP Reviews page]
*[[Media:Fisheries PEP Report 2016-12-27.pdf| GCDAMP PEP Final Report for the Fisheries Program Review, December 27, 2016]]
+
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=2009_Fish_Monitoring_Program_PEP 2009 Fish Monitoring Program PEP]
*[[Media:GCDAMP FY16 Fisheries PEP Prospectus final.pdf| 2016 Fish PEP Prospectus: Stakeholder Final]]
+
*[[Media:2016 Fish PEP Agenda.docx| 2016 Fish PEP Agenda]]
+
*[ftp://ftpext.usgs.gov/pub/nonvisible/wr/PEP%202016%20documents/ GCMRC 2016 Fish PEP ftp site]
+
*[[Core Monitoring Plan| Description of the Scientific Protocol Evaluation Panel (PEP) Review Process]]; Core Monitoring Plan Appendix C:
+
  
 
|-
 
|-
  
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">2009 Fish PEP documents</h2>
+
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Presentations </h2>
 
|-
 
|-
 
|style="color:#000;"|
 
|style="color:#000;"|
  
[[File:PEP+biologists.JPG|400px]] <br>
+
*[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/17apr20/Attach_06b.pdf Review of Fisheries Program TWG Summary - 2016 PEP Findings PPT]
2009 Fish PEP participants: Mike Bradford (Chair), Mark Bevelhimer, Michael Hansen, Gordon Mueller, Doug Osmundason, Jim Rice, Dana Winkelman
+
*[http://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/amwg/mtgs/16aug24/Attach_07a.pdf  Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center Science Updates (BO Compliance, Trout Updates, Green Sunfish, Fisheries PEP, Partners in Science)]
 +
*[http://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/twg/mtgs/16oct18/Attach_06.pdf Update on Fisheries PEP]
  
*[[Media:GCMRC response.pdf| 2010-11 AMP Fish Monitoring: Incorporating Fish PEP Recommendations]]
+
|-
*[[Media:Fish PEP report final Sept 30 09 (1).pdf| 2009 Fish PEP Final Report (9/09)]]
+
*[[Media:PEP ppt 2009.pdf| 2009 Fish PEP Presentation (6/21/09)]]
+
*[[Media:PEP Review recommendations 090616.docx| Summary of Recommendations]]
+
*[[Media:PEP FishMonitoring.pdf | Draft Summary of Recommendations - Fish Monitoring (6/09)]]
+
*[[Media:PEP ppt 2009.pdf| Draft Summary of Recommendations (5/09)]]
+
*[[Media:PEP Review responses to questions June 17 draft.doc | Review of the Responses to Monitoring Questions]]
+
*[[Media:PEP responses.pdf| Responses to Monitoring Questions (5/09)]]
+
*[[Media:PEP FishResponses.pdf | Responses to Monitoring Questions]]
+
*[[Media:PEP Briefing Document.doc| Fish PEP briefing document]]
+
  
 +
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">2016 Fish PEP</h2>
 +
|-
 +
|style="color:#000;"|
  
|-
+
*[[Media:Fisheries PEP Report 2016-12-27.pdf| GCDAMP PEP Final Report for the Fisheries Program Review, December 27, 2016]]
 +
*[[Media:GCDAMP FY16 Fisheries PEP Prospectus final.pdf| 2016 Fish PEP Prospectus: Stakeholder Final]]
 +
*[[Media:2016 Fish PEP Agenda.docx| 2016 Fish PEP Agenda]]
 +
*[ftp://ftpext.usgs.gov/pub/nonvisible/wr/PEP%202016%20documents/ GCMRC 2016 Fish PEP ftp site]
 +
*[[Core Monitoring Plan| Description of the Scientific Protocol Evaluation Panel (PEP) Review Process]]; Core Monitoring Plan Appendix C:
  
 +
|-
  
 
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Reference Material</h2>
 
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Reference Material</h2>

Latest revision as of 15:46, 10 July 2018


140922 Natal Origins Fish -Science Trip 019.JPG

Fish projects in the FY15-17 TWP:

  • Project 6. Mainstem Colorado River Humpback Chub Aggregations and Fish Community Dynamics (system-wide monitoring potentially harmful/invasive nonnative species and other rare native species)
  • Project 7. Population Ecology of Humpback Chub in and around the Little Colorado River
  • Project 8. Experimental Actions to Increase Abundance and Distribution of Native Fishes in Grand Canyon
  • Project 9. Understanding the Factors Determining Recruitment, Population Size, Growth, and Movement of Rainbow Trout in Glen and Marble Canyons (Natal Origins)
  • Project 10. Where does the Glen Canyon Dam rainbow trout tailwater fishery end? - Integrating Fish and Channel Mapping Data below Glen Canyon Dam
-- --
--

Questions

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?

Findings and Recommendations

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]


Links

Presentations

2016 Fish PEP

Reference Material


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.