Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Science Program Dwr topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DWR and scientists propose life‑cycle model focused on longfin smelt to set long‑term flow protections
Summary
DWR and partner scientists proposed building a longfin smelt life‑cycle model and related monitoring program to inform long‑term flow protection, saying the life‑cycle model could be completed within roughly three years.
At the Jan. 23 workshop Department of Water Resources (DWR) and cooperating scientists described an approach that pairs new monitoring and a longfin smelt life‑cycle model with the Healthy Rivers & Landscapes (HRL) commitments and the State Water Project incidental take science program to develop a longer‑term base‑flow protection criterion.
Why it matters: DWR and CDFW presenters emphasized that a multi‑driver life‑cycle model (flow, temperature, food, habitat, entrainment and adult stock) can integrate complex drivers to generate a more defensible long‑term flow objective than a single threshold. DWR stated that the model will be part of the HRL science program and could be used to propose base‑flow protections for later board consideration.
What DWR and scientists said - Dr. Lenny Grimaldo and Dr. Luis Conrad (DWR scientists) argued that while several species respond to different mechanisms, longfin smelt currently shows a relatively direct relationship to spring outflow and is well suited as a focal species for a life‑cycle model. - Dr. Chandra Chilamacuri summarized the proposed timeline: DWR expects to develop the longfin life‑cycle model "within 3 years" and to use that model to inform a recommendation for a flow protection criterion during the VA term and in time for periodic plan review. Staff described interim analyses (Bay‑Delta monitoring expansions beginning 2022–2023) that are already providing more juvenile and larval data in the west‑bay and San Pablo Bay regions.
How it would be used and limits DWR described the model as a tool to integrate multiple drivers so the board could avoid relying solely on 1 dimensional outflow thresholds. Presenters said the model would be used in a check‑in process: the HRL science program and incidental‑take research would provide new empirical information, the life‑cycle model would be updated and staff would present results to the board for consideration (the proposal foresees reporting and adaptative revisions within the VA term).
Independent responses Environmental and fishery presenters welcomed additional science but cautioned that a model‑first approach cannot be used to delay immediate regulatory protections. Several environmental groups warned that, even with a life‑cycle model, legally enforceable regulatory protections must be in place in case the VA program fails to deliver promised flows and habitat measures.
Representative excerpt "We have already started the development of the longfin lifecycle model. ... We expect for that model to be complete within 3 years," DWR scientists said in the staff panel.
Ending DWR's life‑cycle modeling proposal received broad attention as a way to reduce single‑variable approaches to flow protection. Board members and outside parties asked for specific deliverables, timelines, and for interim protective measures if modeling and the HRL implementation show insufficient near‑term improvements.
