Environment TWG Semi Annual Meeting

1. Environment TWGSemi Annual Meeting Cornwall, Ontario October 16, 2003

2. Study Guiding Principles • Study Board has defined several guiding principles to help direct the study (August 2003, handout available) • Two that are important to this group A) Criteria and regulation plans will be environmentally sustainable and respect the integrity of the Lake Ontario – St. Lawrence River ecosystem B) Criteria and Regulation plans will product a net benefit to the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River system and its users and not result in disproportionate loss to any particular interest or geographic study area.

3. ETWG Direction • Plan of Study • Geographic scope: L.Ontario to Lac St. Pierre, Quebec- unchanged • Effect of water level fluctuations on the “natural environment” • Define effects, resulting from regulation of the Lake Ontario –St. Lawrence System

4. Study Plan • Studies required ETWG to determine the effects of past water level regulation on biological organisms and their habitats • Potential effects of proposed new regulation plans on biota and habitat.

5. ETWG Study Overview • How do we define issues • Public Concerns • Study Goal • Plan of Study • Source Tools • Professional judgment • Site Specific Studies • Modeling • Existing Data

6. ETWG Study Overview • Two types of studies • Studies that determine the effects of past water level regulation on biological organisms and their habitats • Studies to determine the potential impacts of proposed new regulation plans on biota and habitat

7. Study Progress • Board Meetings- Rochester, Buffalo, Montreal. • ETWG at Rochester and Montreal • Major ETWG issues- Budget, Economic Valuation and Study Goals and Objectives • ETWG meetings- last one in February, but integration group has met 3 times to solve process and technical problems

8. ETWG Budget • Approved Budgets 2003/2004 • Canadian Committed $1,214,000 • United States Committed $707,280 • Next year/this year the budget in total is expected to be Canada: $835CDN in March 2004 ; US $200US now.

9. ETWG Admin.Schedule • US Fiscal Year End • October 29- PFEG SVM Workshop • November 1, 2003- Canadian Interim Report and Invoices • November 21st, 2003 – Integration Subgroup Meeting • December 2-3 Board Meeting, Workplans First Cut Budget • December 8- 2004/2005 Call for proposal** • January 9, 2004 Last date for proposal submission • January 27-28 Finalize Year 4 Work Plans • February 28- Many final reports are due • March 12-13 PFEG SVM Workshop • ETWG Semi Annual ( )

10. ETWG Technical Schedule • Summer field work coming to an end, some field work scheduled for winter • Data analysis and model development is progressing • ETWG planning meeting in Cornwall • IERM developed by January, 2004 • Populate model by March 2004 • Quality Review by Feb, 2004 • PFEG Workshop with SVM continues

11. Performance Indicators • General performance indicators have not changed • Specific performance indicators will come out of this year’s analysis of information • IERM model is advancing • Will evaluate water management plans and define significant environmental effects of a proposed plan • Quantitative and qualitative evaluations- apply professional judgment, precautionary principle

13. Study Update 1Contacts • Habitat • Wilcox, Hudon, Patterson, Ingram, Morin. • Rare Species • Schiavone, Klein, Giguere • Birds • Ingram, Lehoux, Des Granges • Fish • Minns, Doka, Casselman, Farrell, • De Lafontaine, Armellin, Minglebier • Herpetiles • Gibbs, Armellin

14. Study Update 2Contacts • Muskrats • Toner, Farrell • International Reserve Lands • Barkley • IERM • DePinto, Redder, Morin • SVM • PFEG Werick, Leger, • ETWG DePinto, Morin ETWG Leads Parker , Atkinson , Read

15. Wetlands 1 •Wetlands Lake Ontario • Summer field work has been completed • Advanced in defining existing conditions and modeling what is likely to occur in terms of wetlands over a variety of time spans and water levels. • Modeling is continuing, based on 4 different geomorphic types and dependent and independent variables have been defined

16. Wetlands 2 • Need to integrate wetland data with mapping. Should be soon, but each geomorphic type will be handled separately • Data will be provided for Lake Ontario/Upper St. Lawrence as: – time-weighted percent of wetland in each of 5- 7 plant community types. –percent of wetland in plant community type averaged across 100-yr • Still need to define common terminology for wetland types, but discussions are ongoing

17. Wetlands 3 – Lower River • Summer field work has been completed • Performance indictors have not changed • May have some new ones that can be added • Focus on Lake St. Pierre • Products: Plant productivity at various water levels and types of plant habitat at various water levels • Critical time periods will be identified • Still need to define common terminology

18. Performance IndicatorsLinking Water Levels-flow to Habitat Quality

19. Modeling Habitat Diversity in Lake St. Pierre in relation with levels-flow • Regulation Plans • (Daily Q at Cornwall 1960-2002) • 1958D-with deviations (actual) • 1958-D without deviation • 1998 • Pre-regulation • Meteorological Service of Canada • Hydrodynamic Model • DEM topometry (pixel elevation) • 8 discharge scenarios Daily discharge at Sorel Daily water level at each pixel Habitat diversity model (linkage between habitat categories and hydrological conditions in the current and past growth season) Prediction of habitat category at each pixel • GIS • Interpolation • Mapping • Validation of predictions • IKONOS imagery (2002) • Aerial photographs • For each year (1960-2002) • Surface area • Productivity • Habitat diversity index • For each habitat type • Biomass data • Productivity models

20. Rare Species • A collection of species have been identified as being of special status • Group is refining the locations, and the habitat requirements For plants, birds and fish… • Looking at impacts from various water level regimes on habitat and populations • Gaining assistance from the modeling specialists to utilize habitat data and move into IERM and SVM • Maps, habitat and site specific impacts are being amassed for entire study area.

21. Birds • Field data collection has ended • Conducting statistical analysis and selecting variables for input to IERM • Modeling is progressing, some species will be closely tied to habitat and water levels • Loss of habitat is more important in river, while physical change (flooding and stranding) in Lake Ontario is perhaps more important

22. Birds 2 • Two models under development 1) Adverse impacts from short term water level changes 2) Habitat alteration over longer timeline • Will be able to predict bird population trends • Habitat trends for groups of birds

23. Birds 3 • Dabbling Ducks in the St. Lawrence River • No comparable study in Lake Ontario,not an issue • Summer field season is complete • 4 performance indicators are being refined all geared to refining population models • Waterfowl nest losses and habitat losses, brood rearing habitat losses , migration • As impacted by water level changes (timing, starting water level, range)

24. Fish • Three elements • Habitat Suitability- Models have been developed for LSL and LO to date, USL to follow • Fish guild and species habitat performance indicators • Dynamic Population models • Pike ,Yellow Perch, Smallmouth/Largemouth Bass • Assisting SAR group with habitat supply analysis for fish

25. Species-Specific Habitat Requirements (4 life stages): [Northern Pike, Largemouth Bass, Smallmouth Bass, Yellow Perch] • Fish Guild Habitat Requirements (3 life stages) Suitability (0-1) S Suitabilities * Area & Temperature 2 daily output values per life-stage: • Area-weighted suitability • Suitability-weighted temperature Daily output to Pop Model

26. Daily input from GIS Model Northern pike population model Egg (egg-hatch) Spawn weighted suitable area (WSA) Habitat: emergents, 0-0.5m Daily growth and survival as a function of temperature Hatch (yolk sac) Fry WSAs Habitat: emergents and fringe submergents, 0-1m Fry (free-swimming – 50mm) Daily growth and survival as a function of temperature and density YOY WSAs Habitat: submergents, 0.5-2m YOY (50mm-end of season) Annual growth as a function of temperature and density, survival set an at annual rate Juvenile and adults WSAs Habitat: submergents, fringe non-vegetated areas, 0.5-5m Juveniles and adults (age 1+) Hatch density Fry density Juvenile and adult density P:B Mean length at age Looped through dynamic water level time series

27. Herpetiles • Herpetile studies tied to outcome of wetland studies • Flexible approach to collecting information to allow integration to wetland data • Collecting tadpoles and turtle data at hundreds of sites and characterizing in terms of water depth and habitat • Develop abundance index for a few key species and link to each wetland type. • Need to work with modelers to convey information to IERM

28. Muskrats 1 • Performance indicator is effect of water levels on muskrat populations in Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River • Muskrat populations are regulated by water levels, the type of available vegetation, and density-dependent factors. • Muskrats are extremely sensitive to hydrologic management due to associated changes in the availability of food and cover. Muskrat populations quickly respond to changes in water levels, usually within two years, making them an important indicator species. • It is possible that relatively minor changes to the current water level management plan could dramatically influence muskrat populations. 

29. Muskrats 2 • Winter muskrat house counts will be used to estimate muskrat populations throughout the study area. House counts offer a reliable, efficient technique that allows both spatial and temporal comparisons to be made. • Models will integrate existing field data, as well as proposed field data from the study area. • Model output will consist of areas, defined by elevations and consequent water depth, depicting suitability for muskrat establishment and estimated densities. Additionally, Lake Ontario sites being evaluated by other working groups, as well as wetlands located within Native American territories, will also be evaluated. • This approach will result in spatially explicit models of habitat suitability that are driven by proposed water level scenarios. 

30. International Reserve Lands • St. Regis Tribe is coordinating • Review of ecological state of wetlands on reserve lands • wetlands and fisheries focus • Need to improve contacts with other specialists and modelers

31. Integration Subgroup • Formed after last February meeting • To tackle process and technical problems • Ex. Economic valuation,goals and principles, consitency in habitat nomenclature, process steps for moving research into SVM, legislative review, schedule, IERM development, decision making process for water management plans • Approach is to bring issue to subgroup where issue will be addressed and distributed to ETWG

32. Integrated Ecosystem Response Model • Afternoon presentation • Being developed by DePinto, Redder and Morin • Goal is to develop links between research and SVM • Provide modeling assistance to researchers • Very tight schedule

33. Shared Vision Model • Study Board has accepted the “Shared Vison Model” as a method of defining the best water management plan that meets the needs of all interests • PFEG is tasked with development of model, but ETWG will develop the environmental wing of the SVM • SVM presentation, answer questions posed by ETWG on the general model