In-person Meeting

July 27, 2018

Participants:

Denise Reed, Jim Hobbs, Mike Hendrick, Sam Luoma, You Chen Chao, Brett Harvey, Ben Geske, Jim Peterson, Erin McCreless, Matt Nobriga, Griffin Hill, Alison Collins, Maggie Christman, Rodd Wittler, Derek Hilts, Evan Carson, Chris Kwan, Mike Urkov, Scott Hamilton, JD Wikert, Dick Pool, Dave Mooney, Cathy Marcinkevage, Sheila Greene, Anna Allison, Brad Cavallo, Amanda Bohl, Russ Perry, Deanna Sereno, Bruce DiGennaro, Sally Rudd, Gabrielle Boisrame, Duane Linander, Mike Eakin

Update from Dave Mooney

  • From Reclamation's perspective, Structured Decision Making is a good framework for figuring out how management actions will help achieve desired objectives for fish, water supply, and flood risk
  • This rapid prototyping is a "first pass" to help participants understand the SDM process; the next step will be to decide whether to proceed with a more detailed SDM process in which we unpack the conceptual models in more detail
  • Important to note that the models will not be direct prescriptions of what actions should be taken; rather, they will be a basis for discussion and the models' strengths and weaknesses

Question: How does this process fit with other decision-making efforts, e.g., the Delta Smelt Resiliency Strategy?

  • This SDM process includes more objectives and a wider suite of management actions
  • Part of the goal is to build more communications between different stakeholder groups
  • It's good to have different groups approach the problem from different directions

Communication of results

  • Messaging is very important – we need to be clear about the decisions made in this process and how they will be used
  • Need to make this process a public dialogue
  • Need to communicate the uncertainty involved in rapid prototyping
  • Sensitivity analyses will help reduce uncertainty and determine project outputs but time is limited for conducting such analyses in the rapid prototyping process
  • In December when rapid prototyping is completed, communications should emphasize that the results of rapid prototyping are not finalized decisions but rather are the first stage of an open-ended process

Finalizing candidate actions with details

X2 actions

  • Specific values for X2 will depend on water year and water availability
  • For May-August period, CalSim model can't handle the 65km value, especially in critical water years
  • 81 km is probably feasible in most years except for critical water years; 74 km may be feasible depending on water year type, especially the wettest years
  • For fall period, there is already an X2 regulation in place that considers water year type
  • Rather than running models and sensitivity analyses with values we already know won't work, it might be better to use the Cal WaterFix EIR to guide reasonable values to feed into CalSim
  • Part of the goal here is to also look at water deliveries in the N and S Delta and compare tradeoffs between outcomes of actions
  • Question: Since we know some scenarios are impossible anyway would it be possible to look at incremental changes from a baseline value rather than just the 3 predetermined values? Answer: CalSim isn't set up to do this. However, can do simulations based on average monthly changes. It's still easier to use fixed values. The BiOp is based on prior water years.
  • It might be worth running the currently specified fixed values through the model for Spring-Summer and Fall, and letting some fail so can effectively communicate that some of these values are not realistic and explain why some values were chosen. However, shouldn't do too many of these model runs because it will be a waste of time

Reducing exports to increase OMR flows Jan 1 – June 15

  • Derek: should replace wording "exports for OMR flows" with "Constraining OMR flows"; exports fall out as a result
  • A challenge here is representing model responses if different sets of rules are used for different values
  • For flow pulses, need to look at future vs. past conditions and tie pulses to fish in the tributaries; Brad can work with JD and others to see what the pulses would look like
  • Models with different values will be run separately because it's too difficult to put them all in at once
  • Note that CalSim doesn't "know" anything about fish presence
  • Group made the decision to run the model with 2 scenarios: -1250 and -5000 cfs; these can serve as bookends
  • According to Derek, the -5000 OMR model run should be easy
  • The -1250 OMR run may induce unintended over-storing in the northern reservoirs and/or draining of San Luis

I:E ratio

  • We're getting at two things here: increasing flows down the San Joaquin during spring, and changing ratios
  • Current BiOp is the base case; values range from 1:1 in dry years to 4:1 in wet years. In general the values will depend on water year type
  • Suggestion to use SWRCB's 40% unimpaired flow proposal for increasing SJ River inflow into the Delta
  • Implementing the 1:1 ratio is less protective in April-May than the current BiOp. A March action would add more protection for fish.
  • If we allow water transfers in the San Joaquin basin, could potentially have higher fish survival through the lower San Joaquin; this may be worth the potential losses of entraining more fish at the pumps
  • It's unclear if or how these actions would affect Chinook and Delta Smelt

Preferential pumping of CVP

  • Derek: could ratchet down Banks export maximum pumping to 1000 cfs Dec-May, and could do post-processing of 4600 cfs (simulated Tracy pumping) to give an idea of how much could be done in the absence of an agreement between the projects to do more
  • This could induce excess storage and possible flood releases out of Oroville
  • CalSim relies on weights. The system can be perturbed some, but if an action calls for operations that are very different from current, the weights would need adjusting, which is difficult
  • If an action significantly alters the flow-salinity relationship, CalSim II's artificial neural network would need redoing; this would be the DWR Bay-Delta modeling group

Fish-friendly diversions (FFD)

  • Need to model water quality under this action – salinity, DOC, residence time. These would differ based on locations of the FFD
  • Proposed locations are in the Central Delta near Bacon Island and in the South Delta near Clifton Court Forebay
  • May be best for now just to model results for fish, then incorporate water quality later. No rules currently exist for modeling water quality related to this action; we would have to specify rules, e.g., bypass actions, which would be difficult.
  • Potential effects on Chinook
  • Allowing fish to get salvaged is probably better than shutting the gates and exposing them to predation
  • How the hydrodynamics change, e.g. flow and speed, will affect impacts on salmon, such as the potential to exacerbate predation. We can make educated guesses about how flow changes would affect routing
  • Brad says we should be able to evaluate these things
  • Need to decide how much the Delta survival of San Joaquin salmon would need to improve to make a meaningful difference, and if so, is the action actually achievable?
  • Is there sufficient survival data for Chinook? Brandes' work has quantified survival from Mossdale to Chipps Island, but not much for the tributaries
  • Delta Smelt
  • Need to specify whether we'll use the Rose et al. model (Kimmerer and Rose 2018) and/or the CSAMP model
  • Rose et al. (and Kimmerer and Rose 2018) modeled fish based on salinity, though this is a poor metric; however it's still important to look at water quality impacts of FFDs – Scott will talk to modelers about this
  • In Scott's model, would not add a water quality component; would return entrained fish to system and assume they survive, which is also how Kimmerer and Rose modeled it.

Franks Tract restoration

  • This would affect flow and salinity relationships. DSM2 hydrodynamics model is better for this than CalSim.
  • Eli Ateljevich from DWR has run different geometries around the area; we may be able to use his results
  • Talk to Tom Boardman about this

Conservation hatcheries for Delta Smelt

  • The group decided to increase the upper limit of additions to 1 million spawning adults and 100 million eggs
  • Might want to think about acreage available and fish densities
  • Can model survival estimates on current known/estimated rates, e.g. Rose et al. 2013b
  • Scott can look into potential ranges for survival

Big Break Tidal Wetland Restoration Project (ACOE/DWR Delta Islands and Levees Feasibility Studies) – (DWR DIRWM and DFM)

  • ACOE completed Final Engineers Report to ACOE HQ. Project still needs federal Legislative funding to move forward on final design and construction planning work.
  • DWR to work on developing CEQA document (MND) for the selected project. DWR (DFM) providing Letter of Support for project.
  • East Bay Regional Parks District is land owner of Big Break and is partnered with DWR for land use authorizations/approvals consistent with EBRPD Strategic Plans and Policies.
  • SDM Group should consider similar issues as those identified for Frank's Tract as applied to restored shallow tidal wetlands over 300+ acres in Big Break.

Reports from subgroups

Water delivery

  • Need to keep the data simple
  • Will probably ignore costs as they are too complicated to include
  • Shouldn't use the nodes from CalSim because they aggregate channels

Water quality

  • Multidimensional models in DSM2 focus on the age of water in an area
  • There are multiple ways to measure this; for example, you can model a water particle that flows out during low tide and returns during high tide
  • DSM2 gives DOC values; this is useful for drinking water quality purposes
  • There's no simple relationship between DOC and DO
  • Microcystis is an important component of water quality; blooms are related to nutrient input and residence time
  • Increasing flows through the Deepwater Ship Channel: this is a highly polluted area; how would it affect sediments and water quality downstream? Can we trace this?
  • Pyrethrin – any action that influences American River inputs would affect pyrethrin levels.
  • In general, we need to think about the sources of pollution we know about, and the degree to which these affect contaminant inputs into the Delta
  • X2 actions will affect residence times differently in different regions. Residence time is also important for selenium (from San Joaquin valley) and mercury

Flood risk

  • Need to determine how management actions might increase flood risk in specific areas. For example, how would adding water through pulse flows affect levee breaches or overtopping?
  • Does anyone know of people we could talk to about this and tools available to work with?
  • Need people to join this subgroup

Ag revenue

  • Dave Mooney: Reclamation has some tools for the Yolo Bypass we can experiment with to express objectives
  • Current group will be Gabrielle, Ben, and Erin; thers would be welcome!

Chinook

  • Sediment supplementation / increase turbidity action & pulse flows
  • This is similar to an action undertaken in Southern California (Causewell Reservoir) where increased turbidity during outmigration successfully reduced predation
  • Would be more helpful in drier years, can consider it as a low-flow augmentation
  • If considering this action as reservoir releases for food production rather than predation, need to take into account a) the switch from lake to riverine environment and b) that POM needs to be filtered out
  • Suggestion for modeling: could increase turbidity to a specific amount in Jan-May based on previous studies and set a specific distance – then model would associate NTU with a survival estimate
  • Proposal to implement action every 2 weeks in December-May
  • Chinook evolved with turbidity associated with decreases in flows and changes in climatic conditions
  • There are already some scheduled pulse flows for fall and spring runs
  • Suggestion to target pulse flows for spawning season
  • Example from elsewhere: in the Stanislaus, variability in the hydrograph is the strongest predictor of recruitment out of the system
  • Shouldn't constrain this action to just some runs; should look at whole hydrographic inflated season from September-June

Routing through the Delta

  • Correigh Greene and Noble Hendrix developed a rule set for how fish use the Delta
  • Outmigrating fish may experience carrying capacity issues, so we may want to consider bathymetry and shape of the Delta
  • Flow-survival relationship is defined by movement through the transition zone; need to decide whether to incorporate this

Delta smelt

  • Action to increase flows through Yolo Bypass for food production
  • Modeling zooplankton: Scott's model is similar to the Rose et al. model in that zooplankton (in grams carbon) is fixed data. Scott is working on a version where zooplankton would be endogenous to the model. May also create a separate "mini-model" that would relate flows in Yolo Bypass to changes in zooplankton.
  • Contaminants
  • Group needs to decide whether to include this
  • "Contaminants" is too broad a category; need to understand what the most important pesticides are and their concentration in Yolo Bypass
  • Talk to Shawn Acuna and Brian Bergamaschi (USGS) about this
Last updated on Dec 5, 2018