N. Scott Urquhart, Director Space-Time Modeling and Analysis Program (STARMAP)

1. AN ACADEMICIAN’S VIEW OF EPA’sECOLOGY PROGRAMESPECIALLY ITSENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (EMAP) N. Scott Urquhart, Director Space-Time Modeling and Analysis Program (STARMAP) Department of Statistics Colorado State University

2. TOPICS FOR TODAY • Some Disclaimers • My Experience and Perspectives • Ecology and the Clean Water Act • Impact of EMAP and Related Activities • (Including examples) • Academics and EPA-Relevant Research • Importance of Well-Focused “Requests for Applications” (RFA)

3. SOME DISCLAIMERS • No One Can Speak for All Academics in an Area! • My Funding: A Cooperative Agreement • This talk was developed under the STAR Research Assistance Agreement CR-829095 awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Colorado State University. This presentation has not been formally reviewed by EPA.  The views expressed here are solely those of presenter and STARMAP, the Program he represents. EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this presentation.

4. MY EXPERIENCE and PERSPECTIVES • Trained as a Statistician, but • Have Worked with Ecologists for 45 Years • Relevant Post-Doctoral Experience: • 25 years in Agricultural experiment stations • Wildlife and range science • Water quality • Beneficial uses of sewage sludge • Variety of ecology projects

5. MY EXPERIENCE and PERSPECTIVES(continued) • 10 years of direct contact with EMAP • From a department of statistics • Mainly with aquatic resources • Specifically related to lakes and streams • Developed the methodology to • Evaluate the power of • EMAP-type designs to detect trend. • Directed STARMAP for nearly 4 Years • Developing analysis methodology for EMAP-type data

6. ECOLOGY and the CLEAN WATER ACT • The Clean Water Act (CWA) Specifically Mentions Aquatic Life As • “… the protection and propagation of a balanced indigenous population of shellfish, fish and wildlife, • and to allow recreational activities …” • Statements like this occur at least 28 times in the CWA sections numbered 3xx • Ecology covers this class of interests!

7. IMPACT OF EMAP and RELATED ACTIVITIES • The Perspectives and Approaches of EMAP Have Had a Major Impact in: • EPA’s Offices of Water and Air • State Water Quality Agencies • See poster!

8. See the Poster EMAP Monitoring Design & Design Team

9. IMPACT OF EMAP and RELATED ACTIVITIES • The Perspectives and Approaches of EMAP Have Had a Major Impact in: • EPA’s Offices of Water and Air • State Water Quality Agencies – See poster! • National Park Service • Forest Service • Sub-state authorities, such as the San Francisco Estuary Institute • Near Coastal cooperative efforts • Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center

10. APPLYING EMAP SITE SELECTION IN THE GRAND CANYON - BACKGROUND • Glen Canyon Dam • Impounds Lake Powell • Impacts the Colorado River in Grand Canyon National Park • Water flow into the Grand Canyon – major • Temperature of water entering Grand Canyon • Sediment entering the Grand Canyon • In the past, the diurnal variation in flow • Led to an Adaptive Management Plan to moderate these effects

11. MAKING THE ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN WORK • Management Panel is Supported by • Technical Work Group (TWG) • Most needed info supplied by the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center • A USGS organization • Past studies used “hand picked” sites • Whole canyon riparian area inferences needed • Peer review panel suggested redesigning near-river terrestrial studies • Using EMAP site selection process • NSU invited to assist, and to help lay out transects

12. VIEW DOWN TRANSECT AT MILE 12.3

13. CLIFF AT MILE 135.2(PARTIAL HEIGHT) NO VEGETATION TRANSECT NEEDED HERE! EMAP SITE SELECTION PROTOCOL ACCOMMODATES THIS, WHEREAS TRADITIONAL METHODS DON’T.

14. QUESTION ASKED AT TWG MEETING • Can “Whole Canyon” estimates of vegetation be obtained from these results and sampling plan? • RESPONSE: YES – with some qualifications: • For some, but not all, of the responses evaluated. • For the whole Canyon below the 60 kcfs level • and by geologic reach • More accurate estimates would require quite a bit of GIS work

15. SO WHAT? • A member of TWG had been responsible for • The environmental impact statement (EIS) • For a high flow release in 19 • He said that at that time the EIS work group recognized that • They needed such an estimate, but • Available data would not support such an estimate.

16. IMPACT OF EMAP and RELATED ACTIVITIES(continued) • The Perspectives and Approaches of EMAP Have Had a Major Impact in: • … • Academic settings • Originally, ecologists vigorously opposed the EMAP approaches because they weren’t the way they were used to doing business. • More recently many ecologists have embraced the kinds of large-area data previously unavailable • Example: Zooplankton ecologist

17. ACADEMICS and EPA-RELEVANT RESEARCH • EPA is a Mission-Oriented Agency • It should support research which advances its missions • Aquatic resources and related landscape matters are a part of that mission (in my view) • There is a great distance between much academic research and EPA’s needs.

18. ACADEMICS and PERFORMANCE EVALUATION • How Academics are Evaluated? • Frequently by their performance in their respective disciplines. • Because academics frequently have no “clientele,” they can’t be evaluated relative to their contributions to their clientele. • Academic research (not applied) often is very important. • Secondary, but increasingly important, is outside $ brought into the institution.

19. IMPORTANCE OF WELL-FOCUSED “REQUESTS FOR APPLICATIONS” • How can EPA change academics’ priorities? • By advertising for assistance using well- focused RFAs • Research requirements of an RFA need to reflect EPA’s needs. • Give academics a little room to “do their own thing,” as a way to encourage them to actively participate • Using cooperative agreements • Make sure PIs and directors understand what cooperation means! • Centers can have a valuable role

20. CONCLUDING THOUGHT • The Activities at EPA Identified as Ecology Have Made Contributions! • Much Work Remains. • Where Should EPA’s Research Needs be Met? • In the EPA Labs, and • In academia, using focused RFAs. • Cooperation between these two kinds of organizations needs to be fostered.

21. END OF PLANNED PRESENTATION Questions Welcome.