Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />The species experts involved in this study raised many questions <br />concerning the use of the existing temperature model simulations and physical <br />habi tat/hydraulic simulations. Most of the concern has resulted from the. <br />independent nature by which the research activities have been carried out and a <br />general lack of understanding of the integration of information from the <br />hydrology, temperature, habitat, and species components. The concerns of the <br />species experts have led to a series of recommendations which should now drive <br />future instream flow activities. Discussions between the fishery researchers <br />and those responsible for the hydrology, temperature ,and physical habitat <br />simulations must now take place and be integrated. on-the-ground sampling <br />procedures must be designed to assure complete compatibility among the various <br />models. <br /> <br />Upper-level managers and decisionmakers must be patient and understand <br />that these mid-course adjustments are an important part of the process and are <br />to be expected given the meager understanding of the life history and habitat <br />requirements of these fishes when the modeling effort was initiated. However, <br />enough knowledge has been gained by the fisheries researchers to guide the <br />water routing, temperature, and physical habi tat simulation efforts. <br />Therefore, immediate attention should be given to the following: <br /> <br />1. Hydrology modelers should meet with the fishery researchers to determine <br />at what critical points weekly or even daily flow time steps are needed <br />and for what periods of the year. <br /> <br />2. This should be followed by interaction with the temperature modelers to <br />provide the capability for weekly and daily temperature simulations. <br /> <br />3. The existing physical habitat sampling sites should be modified to reflect <br />the habitat needs that are critical at those sites and in some cases the <br />existing sites may need to be completely abandoned and replaced. New <br />microhabi tat sampling procedures which are compatible with the habitat <br />needs of the fish as defined by the fishery researchers, must be described <br />and implemented immediately. <br /> <br />4. The database produced from this contract effort should be continually <br />updated and the sampling and research efforts rescoped to ensure that <br />habitat suitability information is of the highest quality and is applied <br />in a valid, scientifically supportable manner. <br /> <br />Clair B. Stalnaker <br />Chief, Aquatic Systems Branch <br />National Ecology Center <br />U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service <br />Fort Collins, Colorado <br /> <br />iii <br />