Conference Call

November 9, 2018 Slides

Participants:

Erin McCreless, Jim Peterson, Ben Geske, Chris Kwan, Gabrielle Boisrame, Mike Urkov, Russ Freeman, You Chen Chao, Zack Leady, Russ Freeman, Matt Nobriga, Shawn Acuna, Kevin Clark, Rod Wittler, Derek Hilts, Mike Hendrick, Denise Reed, Scott Hamilton, Bruce Digennaro, Chandra Chilmakuri, JD Wikert, Shelley ?, Josh Israel, Brett Harvey, Sam Luoma, Mario Manzo

Reminder: No in-person workshops in November or December (happy holidays!)

Web portal

  • The web portal is now available at deltasdm.com
  • We'll use this to post updates, meeting agendas and notes, etc., to reduce email burdens on people
  • We will add a "welcome package" with summary and background documents for new members
  • We will add background papers and case studies using SDM – methods, applications, rapid prototyping

Data visualization

  • Mike Urkov presented an interactive ShinyApp visualization tool where users can explore the outcomes of different management actions (X2 and OMR scenarios) for Chinook salmon. This isn't a final version, just an example of what kinds of tools can be developed. We will add a statement to clarify that this is a demonstration tool, not a final product.
  • Please contact Mike Urkov (murkov@flowwest.com) with ideas for visualizations and tools you'd like to see

Group updates

Water availability

  • CalSim runs for X2 and OMR scenarios have been completed (see notes and presentations from previous meetings for these results)
  • Fremont weir notch and San Joaquin pulse flow models are in process
  • DSM2 modeling is currently held up by administrative hurdles, but will get back on track ASAP

Water quality

  • We had originally asked for model results for DOC, turbidity, and residence time. It's highly unlikely we'll be able to include turbidity and DOC due to a lack of boundary data. Residence time is possible, but is too involved and time-consuming to include in the rapid prototyping.
  • We've identified a short list of contaminants to include in the water quality modeling, based on conversations with Jim Orlando (USGS). There are three categories:
  • Most frequently detected in the Delta RMP monitoring (compounds found in ≥ 50% of samples): Hexazinone, Boscalid, Diuron, Methoxyfenozide, Metolachlor, Azoxystrobin, 3,4-Dichloroaniline, Dithiopyr, N-(3,4-Dichlorophenyl)-N'-methylurea, Simazine
  • Highly toxic compounds: bifenthrin, cyhalothrin, cypermethrin, chlorpyrifos, diazinon, malathion, fipronil, carbendazim
  • Metals: mercury, selenium, copper
  • We will query CEDEN and NWIS for data on these contaminants in the main Delta tributaries. Monitoring is patchy and there may not be sufficient data on all these contaminants.
  • The goal is to map out what contaminants occur where, to inform risk assessment
  • How will management actions affect contaminants? If an action changes the inputs from a given watershed, this will change the distribution of and exposure to different contaminants – examples of such actions are San Joaquin flow actions, notches, pulse flows, and X2 actions (for the Sacramento)

Chinook salmon

  • The previous version of SIT salmon model had static habitat information. There have been problems with the spawning habitat data in the tributaries, which caused problems with model calibration. The new model will have dynamic habitat data; once this has been fixed, we will continue with model calibration. This should be completed by the end of November.

Delta smelt

  • We're currently working on estimating food production resulting from the pulse flow actions. Jared Frantzich has shared data indicating that pulse flows through the Yolo increase chlorophyll concentrations by ~3-5 fold. We need to find a way to convert chlorophyll into copepods.
  • Matt suggests that IEP phytoplankton and zooplankton data might provide useful information. They have long-term chlorophyll and copepod data, and we can look for correlations between them.
  • However, so far no strong relationship has been found, possibly because of lag times.
  • A lit review might help with this
  • Shawn suggests contacting April Hennessey at CDFW
  • Brett and Jared may be able to help with this

Ag revenue

  • We've had conversations with Scott and Josue Medellin (UC Davis) about modeling impacts of the actions on ag revenue
  • Metrics that could be useful and that can be modeled are:
  • Growth in ag revenue – economy-wide impacts; impacts to industries that depend on agriculture, e.g., food processing
  • Net ag revenue – income to farmers
  • Employment – impacts on all people employed in the agriculture industry
  • Scott explained that this is an optimization model that looks at changes/disturbances to the system, and adjusts changes in acreage compared to a baseline. It relies on inputs from CalSim.
  • Do we want to include this in the rapid prototyping?
  • Depends on feasibility of getting the modeling and results in time.
  • General agreement that it would be good to include this if there is enough time and people available to do the work. This topic is interesting because it is a different type of objective than the others we're looking at.
  • If it turns out we don't have enough time/resources, we should clearly explain at the end of the process why we didn't include it.
  • Scott suggests that in future stages, we could also take similar approaches to look at impacts on salmon fisheries.
  • Suggestion that we might also want to look at changes in land values. We will ask Josue about this.
  • Mario knows economists at USBR who might be able to help with this. They can help us identify factors we should consider.
  • We will develop a scope of work and timelines, and will report back to the group in the next conference call.
Last updated on Dec 5, 2018