Charlie Hewitt GeoLINK Lessons in applying CLAMs for Natural Resource Managers

CLAM – Coastal Lake Assessment and Management tool  Healthy Rivers Commission 2002 report  Sustainability Assessment tool  Catchment capability  Effect of remedial actions  Combinations of development and remedial actions (i.e. management plan)  iCAM contracted by DNR to prepare CLAMs as SA tools

CLAM – Coastal Lake Assessment and Management tool  Catchment management decision support tool – modelling  Land use  Export rates  Lake processes  Mgt actions  Lake specifics  etc.  Maximise effectiveness of limited funding

CLAM interface  Set combination developments and interventions  … probability distributions

Using CLAMs – 2 main points  Where do CLAMs fit in the NR manager’s toolbox?  How can CLAMs help ensure sustainability of coastal lakes AND sustainability of coastal lake planning processes and documents?

CLAMs among the NR manager’s other tools General management needs Tools Specific management strategy

How do CLAMs fit into the NR manager’s toolbox? General management needs include: Policy Stakeholders Lake processes Interventions and land use scenarios Targets Justify management Tools Specific management strategy

How do CLAMs fit into the NR manager’s toolbox? General management needs Tools include: WQ monitoring Hydrological modelling Participation Field studies Landuse Catchment modelling Decision support tools (eg. CLAM models) Specific management strategy Note: tools inform mgt strategy rather than implement it

How do CLAMs fit into the NR manager’s toolbox? General management needs Tools Specific management strategy Emphasis influenced by: Policy Style Existing knowledge Lake specifics Stakeholder expectations

The Search for the NRM El Dorado  An “everything” tool?  All tools are weak in isolation  eg. hydrological modelling data necessary for dynamic modelling and CLAM modelling  eg. WQ monitoring confirm/inform for all modelling  eg. AP interpretation (landuse data) necessary for dynamic export modelling and CLAMs….etc.  CLAMs ideal for data/tool integration

Understanding and maximising CLAMs  Strengths and weaknesses of CLAMs Management NeedsCLAM considerations Reflect policy (local, state and federal) Engage stakeholders Clarify assumptions about lake processes Consider/propose combinations of management and land use scenarios Set targets to assess management actions Justify overall management approach

Understanding and maximising CLAMs Management NeedsCLAM considerations Reflect policy (local, state and federal)  Local – yes (to the extent that information is available)  State – yes (to the extent that information is available)  Federal – high level Engage stakeholders Clarify assumptions about lake processes Consider/propose combinations of management and land use scenarios Set targets to assess management actions Justify overall management approach

Understanding and maximising CLAMs Management NeedsCLAM considerations Reflect policy (local, state and federal)  Anecdotal evidence  Huge variety of parameters  Relatively simple interface  Models very easy to modify Engage stakeholders Clarify assumptions about lake processes Consider/propose combinations of management and land use scenarios Set targets to assess management actions Justify overall management approach

Understanding and maximising CLAMs Management NeedsCLAM considerations Reflect policy (local, state and federal)  Integrate wide variety of data  Recognise inherent uncertainty in modelling However…  No new information on processes  No time-step (dynamic models) Engage stakeholders Clarify assumptions about lake processes Consider/propose combinations of management and land use scenarios Set targets to assess management actions Justify overall management approach

Understanding and maximising CLAMs Management NeedsCLAM considerations Reflect policy (local, state and federal)  Designed specifically for investigating combinations However…  Consideration limited to information available Engage stakeholders Clarify assumptions about lake processes Consider/propose combinations of management and land use scenarios Set targets to assess management actions Justify overall management approach

Understanding and maximising CLAMs Management NeedsCLAM considerations Reflect policy (local, state and federal) (ANZECC, policy, expectations) Engage stakeholders Clarify assumptions about lake processes Consider/propose combinations of management and land use scenarios Set targets to assess management actions Justify overall management approach

Understanding and maximising CLAMs Management NeedsCLAM considerations Reflect policy (local, state and federal) - Integrate data/tools – comprehensive consideration However… - Limited to available data Engage stakeholders Clarify assumptions about lake processes Consider/propose combinations of management and land use scenarios Set targets to assess management actions Justify overall management approach

Understanding and maximising CLAMs – the data leap of faith  Data vacuum is an occupational hazard  “Anecdotal data” ≠ “no data”  …but CLAMs need data  Do you know your existing land use?  How about riparian planting?  …be prepared to take the leap  So are CLAMs just a series of “hunches”? (combined)  Explicit about assumptions

CLAMs and existing estuary management framework  NSW estuary planning – integrative philosophy  Engage stakeholders  Link with EPS – ID data gaps  Link with EMS – options analysis  CLAM is a means, not an end

 Data/tool integration vital – CLAMs ideal  CLAM development – comprehensive consideration  ID data gaps  A data receptacle  Data/tool integration  Help ensure sustainability of ecosystem AND planning process CLAMs – it’s all about data/tool integration

 Questions  Please contact me at Understanding and maximising CLAMs