ceer adaptive management/nepa integration panel session … · 2014. 9. 17. · usace mrrp program...

20
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® CEER Adaptive Management/NEPA Integration Panel Session Missouri River F&W Recovery Program (MRRP) April Fitzner, PMP Senior Program Manager Aaron Quinn – AM Project Manager

Upload: others

Post on 25-Jan-2021

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG®

    CEER Adaptive Management/NEPA Integration Panel Session Missouri River F&W Recovery Program (MRRP)

    April Fitzner, PMP

    Senior Program Manager

    Aaron Quinn – AM Project Manager

    http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.itsnature.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/pallid1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.itsnature.org/sea/fish/pallid-sturgeon/&h=512&w=753&sz=177&tbnid=JwZ5hHBVeUJWlM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=142&prev=/search?q=pallid+sturgeon+picture&tbm=isch&tbo=u&zoom=1&q=pallid+sturgeon+picture&hl=en&usg=__6RqqVLM-nazOFF6Vvepa15NP1gc=&sa=X&ei=iAa6TfnVIIjQiALQy4yrDw&ved=0CB8Q9QEwAA

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Fort Peck

    Oahe

    Garrison

    Big Bend

    Fort Randall Gavins Point

    Montana

    Kansas

    Iowa

    Nebraska

    North Dakota

    South Dakota

    Wyoming

    Missouri

    Colorado

    Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project Sioux City, IA – St. Louis, MO

    Congressionally Authorized Project Purposes

    Flood Control Navigation

    Hydropower Irrigation

    Recreation Water Supply Water Quality

    Fish and Wildlife (Including endangered species)

    Missouri River Mainstem Reservoir System

    2

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Hydrograph at Sioux City 140,000 120,000

    100,000

    80,000

    60,000

    40,000

    20,000

    0

    Natural

    Regulated

    Jan Mar Feb Apr May Jul Jun Aug Sep

    Dis

    char

    ge (c

    ubic

    feet

    per

    sec

    ond)

    Mountain snow runoff

    Plains snow runoff

    3

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Biological Opinion • 1990/1993 – initiated / reinitiated consultation with FWS;

    • Informal / formal Sec 7 consultation for next 11 yrs

    • 2000 BiOp: • Operation of system jeopardized continued existence of pallid sturgeon,

    least tern and piping plover; • RPA would preclude jeopardy

    • Actions: spring flow rise, low summer flows (split navigation season), Ft Peck flow enhancement

    • 2003 – Corps requests reconsultation • Agree to original RPA but propose replacing certain elements

    • Modified drought conservation plan; • Gavins Point summer release schedule; • Construct 1200 acres of SWH; • Hatchery propagation improvements; • Adaptive management (research, monitoring, evaluation and flow tests)

    • Implementation of these measures allow the Corps to continue to operate the system for the 8 Authorized Purposes

    4

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Interior Least Tern

    Piping Plover

    Threatened and Endangered Species

    Pallid Sturgeon (High Uncertainty age 0)

    • Elements of the Biological Opinion

    • Habitat Construction / Channel Modification

    • Propagation / Hatchery Support • Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation • Adaptive Management • Flow Modifications

    • Release adjustments for nesting birds from May through August

    • Gavins Point spring pulse in March and May for pallid sturgeon

    • Independent Science Advisory Panel determined existing pulse not meeting intended objectives

    • Spring pulse temporarily suspended; will re-examine as part of the Missouri River Recovery Program Management Plan

    5

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    MRRP Authorities/Mandates

    Least Tern Endangered 1985

    Piping Plover Threatened 1986

    Pallid Sturgeon Endangered 1990

    BSNP Mitigation Expanded WRDA 1999 166,750 acres

    BSNP Mitigation WRDA 1986 44,900 acres

    MRRIC WRDA 2007

    Endangered Species Act Water Resources Development Act

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    CHALLENGE: Integrating Adaptive Management into NEPA Planning to Expedite Large-Scale Ecosystem Restoration / Recovery Implementation MRRP Management Plan - . The 2003 Amended BiOp

    issued by USFWS required an implementable comprehensive Adaptive Management Plan (AM). In order to do this it is necessary to complete a NEPA analysis to disclose impacts associated with potential AM actions.

    Therefore, compliance with this BiOp element is occurring simultaneous to program NEPA assessment.

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    • Goal of the Management Plan will provide NEPA compliance for current and future management actions and develop a focused and cost effective monitoring and AM process.

    • The plan would also utilize information collected from Corps monitoring efforts to date (about 11 years) to evaluate the reasonableness, effectiveness, and the programmatic impacts of current actions and potential future actions to avoid jeopardy

    • We are currently in the second year of a three year study

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Adaptive Management Concept

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Objectives

    • Provide overview of AM Concept • Describe Effects Analysis, AM Strategy

    development, and AM Implementation Phases

    • Describe hypotheses evaluation and routing concept

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Basic AM Process

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Goals for applying AM • Involve MRRIC, stakeholders,Tribes and other federal and

    state agencies in the MRRP process

    • Integrate Planning, Implementation, and Monitoring & Investigations activities across the MRRP

    • Ensure monitoring and investigations are directly tied to clear, measurable objectives

    • Ensure data is collected, analyzed, and documented in a way that results in learning from the outcomes of management actions and influences decision-making regarding management actions

    • Ensure that necessary adjustments are made to the MRRP to achieve success in meeting objectives

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    AM Implementation

    AM Strategy Components

    -CEMs

    -Hypotheses

    -Objectives

    -Quantitative Models

    -Mgt. Actions

    -Research

    -Monitoring

    Assess Monitoring and Research Results

    Compare results to Decision

    Criteria

    Document in Draft AM Annual Strategic Review or Periodic Review

    MRRIC/ISAP Recommendations

    and Advice

    USFWS/USACEPolicy and Mgt.

    Decisions

    Implement and

    Monitor Mgt.

    Actions

    ConductFocused Research

    ConductSystem-level Monitoring

    Implement Mgt. Plan/AM Strategy Actions

    Draft AM Annual Strategic Review or Periodic Review

    Example Annual Decisions:

    •Refine /adjust current mgt. actions?

    •Refine monitoring techniques?

    •Hypothesis trending positive or negative?

    Example Periodic Decisions:

    •Test different hypothesis?

    •Adjust current mgt. actions?

    •Implement new mgt. action?

    •Change or refine research focus?

    •Update AM Strategy Components?

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Annual and 3-5 Year AM Assessment Cycles

    Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5Year 1 Year 6

    Strategy Implementation (Periodic Cycle)

    Strategy Development / Revision

    Strategy Implementation (Annual Cycle)

    Annual Strategic Review

    Annual Strategic Review

    Annual Strategic Review

    Periodic Review

    Revision of AM Strategy(if needed)

    Determination of needs for Periodic

    Review

    Annual Strategic Review

    Annual Strategic Review

    Determination of needs for Periodic

    Review

    MRRIC Engagement Participation Following Strategy Development Engagement Process

    MRRIC Engagement

    MRRIC Engagement

    Information Provided / Annual Forum

    Information Provided / Annual Forum

    Information Provided / Annual Forum

    Information Provided / Annual Forum

    Information Provided / Annual Forum

    Development of Recommendations for

    Periodic Review

    Information Provided / Annual Forum

    Development of Recommendations for

    Periodic Review

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    General Governance Structure

    Policy and Guidance

    USACE/USFWS Senior Staff

    AM Process Management

    USACE MRRP Program Manager, USFWS

    Missouri River Basin Coordinator

    AM Process Technical Teams

    USACE and USFWS AM staff, Standing EA Team

    MRRIC SAM WorkgroupSPA Taskgroup

    ISAPINFORMATION BASE-Hypotheses-Objectives- Monitoring Data-Research Results-Models-Peer Reviewed Literature

    Full MRRIC

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    AM Strategy Components • Fundamental and Means Objectives • CEMs (Conceptual Ecological Models) • Hypotheses • Quantitative models • Mgt. actions and alternatives • Decision criteria • Monitoring and focused research • Assessment process • Data Management Plan and Information Base • Reporting • Governance and decision-making process

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    EA, MP, and AM Phases

    Phase 1: Effects Analysis

    CEMs, concepts

    Information Evaluation

    Working Population Effects Model

    Hypotheses Evaluation

    Hypotheses Reserve

    EA Phase I Report

    Design Monitoring, Assessment, Research

    AM Strategy Report

    Implement

    Monitor

    Assess AM Reporting

    Update Loop

    Phase 2: Design AM Strategy

    Phase 3: AM Implementation

    Research

    Learning

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    Decision Triggers • the AM process must include clear criteria for adjustments

    to project activities in response to information provided by new information from research, monitoring, and implementation of mgt. actions.

    • Commitments need to be in place to ensure that

    management will react and change appropriately during the AM process.

    • The process must clearly identify the adjustments that will

    be made when monitoring during project implementation indicates that the action is not achieving its intended result, is causing unintended and undesirable effects, or the scale/magnitude of the activity needs to be adjusted to better achieve objectives.

  • BUILDING STRONG®

    NEPA Challenges

    • Uncertainty of future actions due to AM • How to adequately assess to get NEPA

    coverage? • Supplemental EAs? • Out year budgets

    • Scrutiny of funding activities with high uncertainty

    Good reference: DOI ESM-10-20 Adaptive Management and NEPA

  • US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG®

    Wrap Up and Questions?

    http://moriverrecovery.usace.army.mil

    http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.itsnature.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/pallid1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.itsnature.org/sea/fish/pallid-sturgeon/&h=512&w=753&sz=177&tbnid=JwZ5hHBVeUJWlM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=142&prev=/search?q=pallid+sturgeon+picture&tbm=isch&tbo=u&zoom=1&q=pallid+sturgeon+picture&hl=en&usg=__6RqqVLM-nazOFF6Vvepa15NP1gc=&sa=X&ei=iAa6TfnVIIjQiALQy4yrDw&ved=0CB8Q9QEwAA

    �CEER Adaptive Management/NEPA Integration Panel Session ���Missouri River F&W �Recovery Program �(MRRP)Missouri River Mainstem �Reservoir SystemHydrograph at Sioux CityBiological OpinionSlide Number 5MRRP Authorities/MandatesSlide Number 7Slide Number 8Adaptive Management Concept ObjectivesBasic AM ProcessGoals for applying AM AM ImplementationAnnual and 3-5 Year �AM Assessment CyclesGeneral Governance StructureAM Strategy ComponentsEA, MP, and AM PhasesDecision TriggersNEPA ChallengesWrap Up �and�Questions?�