Difference between revisions of "The Bugflow Experiment"
Cellsworth (Talk | contribs) |
Cellsworth (Talk | contribs) |
||
Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
|style="color:#000;"| | |style="color:#000;"| | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | |- | |
+ | ! <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;"> LTEMP Experimental Action: Aquatic Resource-Related Experimental Treatments | ||
+ | </h2> | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |style="color:#000;"| | ||
− | + | ==[http://ltempeis.anl.gov/documents/final-eis/vol1/Chapter_2-Alternatives.pdf Chapter 2 LTEMP EIS, Page 71]== | |
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | A more diverse and productive aquatic food base could benefit a variety of priority | |
− | + | resources, including native fish (including the endangered humpback chub), the rainbow trout | |
+ | fishery, and other riparian species that occur in Glen, Marble, and Grand Canyons. Mayflies | ||
+ | (Ephemeroptera), stoneflies (Plecoptera), and caddisflies (Trichoptera), collectively referred to as | ||
+ | EPT, are important components of a healthy aquatic food base, but they are notably absent from | ||
+ | the Glen and Marble Canyon reaches and very low in abundance and diversity in the Grand | ||
+ | Canyon. GCMRC has hypothesized that EPT taxa are recruitment limited, because daily flow | ||
+ | fluctuations to meet hydropower demand cause high egg mortality, and the absence of EPT has | ||
+ | an adverse effect on the carrying capacity and condition of the trout fishery and native fish | ||
+ | communities. EPT are thought to be recruitment limited because Glen Canyon Dam fluctuations | ||
+ | create a large varial (intermittently wetted) zone along shorelines. Because the Colorado River in | ||
+ | Glen, Marble, and Grand Canyons is canyon-bound and the tributaries that join the river all have | ||
+ | comparatively low flow, the size of the varial zone does not appreciably decrease with distance | ||
+ | downstream. Thus, although water temperature regimes become more naturalized with distance | ||
+ | downstream, the effect that daily flow fluctuations to meet hydropower demand have on the | ||
+ | stability of shoreline habitat does not attenuate much with distance from the dam. | ||
+ | |||
+ | This hypothesis attributes the absence of EPT and the poor health of the invertebrate | ||
+ | assemblage to the width of the varial zone, similar to earlier investigations (Blinn et al. 1995), | ||
+ | but focuses on the effects unstable shorelines have on the eggs of these species. This hypothesis | ||
+ | assumes that egg-laying by EPT occurs principally along shorelines. According to the | ||
+ | hypothesis, EPT taxa downstream of Glen Canyon Dam are recruitment limited, because daily | ||
+ | flow fluctuations to meet hydropower demand negatively affect habitat quality along the | ||
+ | shorelines where egg laying is assumed to occur. | ||
+ | |||
+ | To test this hypothesis, macroinvertebrate production flows would be provided every | ||
+ | weekend from May through August (34 days total). The flow on weekends would be held | ||
+ | steady at the minimum flow for that month, which would ensure that the insect eggs laid during | ||
+ | weekends would remain submerged throughout larval development. If the hypothesis is true, | ||
+ | there would be an increase in insect production due to the reproductive success of insects that | ||
+ | laid eggs during weekends. No change in monthly volumes, ramping rates, or the maximum | ||
+ | daily range in flow during weekdays would be required for this experiment. To offset the smaller | ||
+ | water releases that would occur during weekends within a given month, larger releases would | ||
+ | need to occur during the weekdays within a given month. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Implementation of macroinvertebrate production flows would consider resource | ||
+ | condition assessments and resource concerns using the processes described in Sections 2.2.4.3 | ||
+ | and 2.2.4.4. These flows may not be tested when there appears to be the potential for | ||
+ | unacceptable impacts on the resources listed in Section 2.2.4.3. | ||
+ | Effects of the tests would be evaluated using observation to determine the location where | ||
+ | insect eggs are deposited and the emergence rates of species. Depending on the outcome of the | ||
+ | tests, the experiment could be discontinued if there were unacceptable effects on other resources. | ||
+ | There is also the possibility that implementation would result in confounding interactions with | ||
+ | TMF experiments, and this will be discussed during the communication and consultation process | ||
+ | as described in Section 2.2.4.4. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==[https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Documents/Biol_Opin/120059_LTEMP%20BiOp_11-25-16.pdf (Biological Assessment, pages 30-41) ]== | ||
+ | Low steady weekend flows (“Macroinvertebrate Production Flows”) would be conducted to test whether the | ||
+ | flows would increase insect abundance. On an experimental basis, for example, | ||
+ | flows would be held low and steady for two days per week (weekends) from May | ||
+ | through August to attempt to improve the productivity of the aquatic food base, | ||
+ | and increase the diversity and abundance of mayflies (Ephemeroptera), stoneflies | ||
+ | (Plecoptera), and caddisflies (Trichoptera), which are collectively referred to as | ||
+ | EPT. | ||
|} | |} | ||
Line 82: | Line 123: | ||
*[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=FOOD_BASE Food Base Page] | *[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=FOOD_BASE Food Base Page] | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
|- | |- | ||
Line 109: | Line 136: | ||
|style="color:#000;"| | |style="color:#000;"| | ||
+ | Modeling Assumptions: | ||
+ | *Macroinvertebrate Production Flows (MPFs) would occur every weekend from May - Aug (34 days, we scheduled July to have the 5th weekend because that how it works out in 2016) | ||
+ | *Weekend flow = minimum flow for the month = weekday minimum flow (see weekly hydrographs on the monthly tabs) | ||
+ | *Hybrid Public Draft monthly volume, ramp rates, or daily change parameters | ||
+ | *Moved weekend water to weekday releases | ||
+ | *Energy prices used in this modeling are for a Saturday, Sunday, and a weekday for May, June, July, and August 2016. These are the energy prices Argonne used in the LTEMP modeling for 2016. | ||
− | + | Hybrid Public Draft 8.23 MAF volumes: | |
+ | *May = 632 | ||
+ | *June = 663 | ||
+ | *July = 749 | ||
+ | *August = 800 | ||
+ | Ramp rates: 4,000 up and 2,500 down | ||
− | + | Daily change: | |
+ | *May = 9 | ||
+ | *June = 10 | ||
+ | *July = 10 | ||
+ | *August = 10 | ||
+ | |||
+ | Minimum release: 5,000 cfs | ||
+ | Maximum release: 25,000 cfs | ||
+ | |||
+ | |} |
Revision as of 10:33, 23 January 2018
|
What is the “Macroinvertebrate Production Flow (MPF)" experiment? |
--- |
--- |
--- |
---|
|
|