Recommendations from the SMC Bioassessment Workgroup Presentation to the Executive Committee 9/24/13

Goals of the Regional Monitoring Program Answer three management questions: What is the health of streams in Southern California? By watershed By land use type Are conditions getting better or worse over time? What stressors are associated with poor biological condition?

Successes To Date Collected 458 samples through 2012 (2013 data in process) Other than San Jacinto, most watersheds will have 30+ sites each Improved coordination and efficiencies among partners Training and auditing in multiple protocols; improved QA/QC Ensured SoCal representation in development of multiple indices (bio-objectives, algae indices, possibly PHAB) Provided robust dataset for many applications, including causal assessments

Where Are We Now? Finished sampling the 5th and final year of the stream survey program 2014: Conduct analyses for five-year report Take a “year off” to explore special studies & new indicators Agree on potential design modifications for next five year period 2015: Publish five-year report Initiate second phase of the stream survey using modified design

Tasks from the Last Executive Committee Meeting Identify effort reductions that will free up resources without sacrificing power to detect trends Explore projects focusing on three issues of concern: Nonperennial streams Causal Assessment Hydromodification

Reduced Sampling Effort Opportunity to reduce sampling effort to free up resources for special studies Focus effort on revisiting previously sampled sites Reduced up-front recon cost Improves ability to detect trends over time Caution from workgroup to not dilute overall integrity of sampling program Recommendation Reduce “core” sampling effort by 50% Cost savings = $450,000 (assuming $10,000/site)

Nonperennial Streams Comprise ~60% of the region’s stream miles, and over 90% in certain watersheds Largest gap in our knowledge of regional stream health Tools to properly assess all non-perennial streams still don’t exist Bioassessment tools for short-term non-perennial New CRAM module for highly ephemeral

Nonperennial streams

Nonperennial streams Recommendation: Test new assessment tools in non-perennial reference streams Include both intermittent and ephemeral streams Conduct multiple visits per site to understand temporal patterns Est. cost: $300,000 -$450,000 Highly scalable (based on # sites, samples per site, specific indicators, etc.) Can be funded by in-kind contributions

Causal Assessment Will be a required follow-up for biological objectives Exact methodology (e.g., CADDIS) is unfamiliar to many partners Regional program should be able to support causal assessments by: Generating comparator data Sharing associated costs (data management, training) Caution from workgroup that causal assessment may be more appropriately dealt with as individual projects

Causal assessment Recommendation Conduct a 1-2 day workshop to familiarize SMC staff with the causal assessment process (based on State guidance) Encourage individual agencies to explore limited causal assessments using SMC data Estimated cost: $20,000 - $30,000

Hydromodification New permits require hydromodification monitoring and assessment Regional monitoring program can support local programs Regional context Reference sites Understanding relationship between physical effects and biology Caution from workgroup: Existing hydromodification assessment tools are unfamiliar Need additional information on effort relative to benefit

Hydromodification Recommendation Mine PHAB/CRAM data to explore if those data can be used to support hydromodification assessment tools Estimated cost = $75,000 Test existing hydromodification assessment tools at selected sites Estimated cost = $15,000 for training + $2,000/site (in kind) First recommendation is from workgroup, and second is from SCCWRP?

Options to Consider Options Criteria Reduce sampling effort Assess non-perennial streams Causal assessment training Mine PHAB/CRAM data Test hydromodification indicators Support decisions for 2015 Ability to support through in-kind Cash necessary/saved Support among workgroup

Funded by in-kind services Decision? Support 2015 decision Funded by in-kind services Cash necessary Workgroup Support Reduce sampling effort No $450,000 saved High Non-perennial streams Yes $300,000 - $450,000 Causal assessments $20,000 - $30,000 Mixed Mine PHAB/CRAM $75,000 Hydromod Assessment $2,000/site $15,000 (training)

Trends and tradeoffs Get guidance from Exec Committee: Confirm that regional trends are the main priority, and that watershed- or landuse-specific trends are not as high priority.