Effectiveness Monitoring. The Implementing Entity shall accomplish effectiveness monitoring of the HCP/NCCP by implementing all elements of the integrated monitoring and adaptive management program described in Chapter 7.0 of the HCP/NCCP.
Effectiveness Monitoring. Effectiveness monitoring includes population and habitat surveys to assess the long-term success of the reintroduction and habitat management actions. The type, frequency, and approximate timing of property visits, as well as any notice requirements, will be agreed upon in coordination with the landowner and stipulated in the Landowner Agreement or Neighboring Landowner Agreement. Monitoring may be performed at some or all enrolled properties. Alligator snapping turtles may be collected using baited hoop traps, typically set between 1:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. and checked the following morning. Covered fish species may be captured using standard fisheries sampling techniques (i.e., electrofishing, trapping, and seining). For the covered mussel species, tactile surveys will be conducted by surveyors wading the stream while sweeping the surface of the substrate with their hands to detect mussels. Depending on the population size and goals of reintroduction, surveys may involve qualitative or quantitative methodology.9 For all covered species, captured individuals will be inspected to assess presence of an identifying mark, and any untagged individuals found may be tagged or marked as well. Additional actions could include measuring specimens to assess growth rates. For covered mussel species, the shell valves may be gently pried apart to assess breeding status of females by examining the gills. Captured mussels can be kept in mesh bags in the water and held out of water only as long as needed for counting and measuring, then replaced in the substrate.
Effectiveness Monitoring. The purpose of the Effectiveness Monitoring Measures is to track the success of the Operating Conservation Program in relation to the Plan’s biological goals and objectives and provide the basis for the Adaptive Management Measures. Four categories of projects will be implemented: Rapid Response Monitoring, Response Monitoring, Long- term Trend Monitoring/Research, and Experimental Watersheds Program.
Effectiveness Monitoring. Effectiveness monitoring, relative to project objectives, answers the question, “Were treatment and restoration projects effective?” This question could be answered on either a regional or a project-level scale. Invasive plant infestations require pre-project inventories to determine how, when, and where treatments are to be applied, and post- treatment monitoring to assess the effectiveness (treatment) in meeting project objectives (e.g. restoring structure and composition of native vegetation). A goal of the Effectiveness Monitoring component in the Regional Invasive Plant Program is to answer the following questions: Have the number of new invasive plant infestations increased or decreased in the Region or at the project level? What changes in distribution, amount and proportion of invasive plant infestations have resulted due to treatment activities in the region or at the project level? Has the infestation size for a targeted invasive plant species been reduced regionally or at the project level? Which treatment methods, separate or in combination, are most successful for specific invasive species? Which treatment methods have not been successful for specific invasive species? The nation-wide NRIS/Terra database, and the upcoming FACTS database, provide common reporting formats to input information and provide a mechanism for addressing the above questions. In addition, current long-term ecological monitoring networks will assist the FS in determining trends of invasive plant infestations at the Regional level. The NRIS/Terra database could be sorted to answer the above questions because it tracks size and species of infestations as well as treatment methods. The Forest Inventory and Analysis Network (FIA) or the Forest Health Monitoring plots associated with the FIA network could be used to follow invasion trends. Such networks could be used to track trends in the spread or reduction in spread of the more dominant invasive plants in the region. Monitoring programs developed at the Forest level would answer more project specific questions. Listed Species - Monitoring that addresses the effectiveness of various measures designed to reduce potential adverse effects from the project, including standards in the EIS, “project design criteria”, “design features”, and “protection measures” may also need to be conducted. This type of monitoring will only be required for a representative sample of invasive plant treatment projects that pose a “high risk” to fe...
Effectiveness Monitoring. Past bedload transport calculations at RM 219.9 suggested that flows of 1,800 cfs could initiate transport of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm) rocks, and flows above 2,200 to 3,900 cfs could move 1 to 3 inch (25.4 to 76.2 mm) rocks, respectively, at this site (PacifiCorp 2004, 2005). Gravel added in 2014 was within the 1 to 3 inch size range. Flows in the peaking reach where the RM 219.9 and RM 216.8 sites are located (just downstream of the powerhouse) ranged from 321-3,020 cfs during the monitoring period (October 2014-October 2015). The gravel placed at the RM 219.9 site in 2013 was transported downstream, so it was expected that the gravel added in 2014 would also be transported away from the sites.
3.3.1 Turnoff Downstream of Spring Island Boat Launch, RM 219.9 Figure 3.3-1. Photo of placed gravel at RM 219.9, October 2014 (just after placement). Figure 3.3-2. Photo of placed gravel at RM 219.9, October 2015 (post-flows).
Effectiveness Monitoring. Effectiveness monitoring methods were designed to determine whether placed gravel distributed and sorted as intended given the flow regime experienced during the monitoring period. During previous monitoring periods, a combination of surveyed cross sections, scour monitors, and visual/photo observations were used to determine if placed gravel moved or not. Based on previous years’ monitoring, it was determined that scour monitors (Xxxxxx- Xxxxx et al. 1999) and visual/photo observations were sufficient to determine if placed gravel had moved at the 2013 placement sites.
Effectiveness Monitoring. The Fisheries Monitoring Plan will include effectiveness monitoring in order to assess the performance of restoration actions at both site-specific and broader scales. The results of the effectiveness monitoring will assist identification of restoration priorities and other adaptive management actions for subsequent planning phases as described in Section 10.2.2.
Effectiveness Monitoring. The purpose of the well effectiveness monitoring is to create and maintain an adequate database on the hydrogeologic situation in the Northwest Plume and to enable changes to be made in extraction/injection that will optimize remediation and containment (DOE 1993). This section describes hydraulic and chemical monitoring intended to support an evaluation of the performance of the NWPGS. Data collection and analysis will be conducted in the context of the remedial action objectives of the ROD, as stated above. The goals of the effectiveness monitoring are to determine trends for TCE concentrations, primarily downgradient of pumping xxxxx, determine mass removal rates, provide data for model recalibration, if necessary, and confirm capture zone development in accordance with model predictions. Evaluation of TCE Trends in MW460 (DOE 2019) concluded that the Northwest Plume was likely bypassing the EW232/EW233 well field within the lower RGA. The general approach to hydraulic and chemical monitoring and analysis will follow methods described in “A Systematic Approach for Evaluating Capture Zones at Pump and Treat Systems” (EPA 2008).
Effectiveness Monitoring. The purpose of the well effectiveness monitoring is to create and maintain an adequate database on the hydrogeologic situation in the Northwest Plume and to enable changes to be made in extraction/injection that will optimize remediation and containment (DOE 1993). This section describes hydraulic and chemical monitoring intended to support an evaluation of the performance of the NWPGS. Data collection and analysis will be conducted in the context of the remedial action objectives of the ROD, as stated above. The goals of the effectiveness monitoring are to determine trends for TCE concentrations, primarily downgradient of pumping xxxxx, determine mass removal rates, provide data for model recalibration, if necessary, and confirm capture zone development in accordance with model predictions. The general approach to hydraulic and chemical monitoring and analysis will follow methods described in “A Systematic Approach for Evaluating Capture Zones at Pump and Treat Systems” (EPA 2008).
Effectiveness Monitoring. Effectiveness monitoring methods were designed to determine whether placed gravel was distributed and sorted as intended given the flow regime experienced during the monitoring period. During previous monitoring periods, a combination of surveyed cross sections, scour monitors, and visual/photo observations were used to determine if placed gravel moved or not. Based on previous years’ monitoring, it was determined that visual/photo observations were sufficient to determine if placed gravel had moved at the 2015 placement sites since gravel had been placed at both these sites in previous years and previous monitoring determined that the majority of gravel had moved downstream. Gravel was placed at two new sites in October 2016; scour monitors and visual observations will be used to monitor these sites with results to be reported in next year’s monitoring report. Since 2011, approximately 500 cubic yards of gravel was placed in the Klamath River below the X.X. Xxxxx dam each year (Table 3.1-1, Figure 3.1-1). This monitoring report considers only the 250 cubic yards that were placed at each of the sites at RM 219.9 and 216.8 in October 2015. 224.5 - 225 - - - - 223.8 - 105 - - - - 220.45 - - - - - 300 220.2 - - 250 - - - 219.9 - 250 250 250 250 - 217.7 - - - - - 100 217.3 250 - - - - - 216.8 - - - 250 250 100 216.3 250 - - - - - * Note: Due to safety concerns with muddy road conditions, only 100 cubic yards of gravel could be placed at RM 217.7 in October 2016; the remaining gravel intended for 217.7 was placed at RM 220.45 and 216.8 since these had gravel access roads and were not affected by rainy conditions.
3.1 POST-PLACEMENT FLOWS
3.1.1 Peaking Reach Flows (RM 220.2 to RM 216.3) Figure 3.1-1. Gravel placement locations.
