Methods for evaluating freshwater ecosystem services in support of decision making David Yates (RAP), Claudia Tebaldi (CGD), Kathleen Miller (ESIG), Susi Moser (ESIG) Other Collaborators: David Purkey, Natural Heritage Institute, Sacramento California Hector Galbraith, University of Colorado, Boulder Annette Huber-Lee, SEI/Tellus, MIT Boston Others.. (University of California Davis and Stanford University) Physical Hydrology Watershed Management Decisions: Integrated •Sykes Reservoir Climate & Decision •FERC Relicensing Climate Change Support •Conjunctive Use •System Operations credibility relevancy Socio-Economics legitimacy Decision-Makers Ecosystem •CALFED Services •State Assembly •California Water Dept •Others Integrating framework placed in the context of a “Trade-off” landscape Water for nature Water for agriculture Water quantity Water quality Seasonality of flow Domestic water Regulation Water for recreation Water for industry Physical Hydrology and Water Management Seamlessly integrating watershed hydrologic processes with water resources management. Ecosystem services H2O Ecosystem Ecosystem Service Quantity Quality •components Goods and Services Seasonality •processes Evaluation Governance Ecosystem services H2O Ecosystem Ecosystem Service Quantity Quality •components Goods and Services Seasonality •processes Evaluation Governance Flood/Drought Wetland – water flow slowed by: Seasonal flooding •Low gradient 1st Order Decay •Hydrophilic soils Biodiversity/Rec Channelization •Channel morphology •Plant roots and leaves •Land use planning Water purification Ecosystem services in the SFBW Extractable; Direct Use; Indirect Use Har- Water Recre- Trans Power Regen. Nutr. Flood/ Water Ero- Habitat vest. for ag., ation, -port gener. of soil cycl- drought purifi- sion / biota urban, aesth. fertility ing mitig. cation con- biodi- indust. beauty trol versity Upper Rivers Lower Rivers Delta Bay Climate and climate change Bayesian model gives WNA regional distributions of seasonal changes But what is needed are high resolution time series for the entire watershed The Inter-Disciplinary Framework Ecosystem Service Scenario S Prioritization and Development: t Selection Climate, Land, Pop a k e Ecosystem Service h Assessment Properties ol A (ESAPs) d D e A r P Ecosystem Service Water Resources T P Indicators/Params Modeling A r (ESIPs) T o I c ESIP/model estimate O e variance N s s Translation Functions (Models) Change in Eco Service Stylized schematic of Sacramento (garnering credibility) McCloud N. Pit Clear Shasta Trinity Whiskey Pit town Pit Virt Res Upper Pit Cotton- Cow Wood Battle Thomes Almanor Chico Tehema Black Butte Butte Upper Clear Feather Colusa Feather Sutter Bypass Oroville Bullards Bar Yuba Bear Cache Coon Upper American Sacramento River Basin: Putah Sacramento Weir Folsom Lower American • 50+ watersheds • Reservoirs Yolo Bypass Groundwater Sacramento River • Central Valley Groundwater Irrigated Agriculture Rivers and Tributaries Inter-Basin Transfer Reservoir • Canals and Diversions M&I Water Delta San Joaquin Demand Instream Flow Requirement Demands: Inflows • Ag. & Urban Atm. • Municipal and Industrial • Reserves, Instream • Regional Diversions WEAP Schematic of Sacramento Watershed WEAP Schematic of Sacramento Watershed Calibration and Validation Model Evaluation (1961-1999): 1. Flows Along Mainstem and Tributaries 2. Reservoir Storage and Release 3. Trinity Diversion 4. Agricultural Water Demand 5. Groundwater Storage Trends 6. Yolo Bypass Flood Inundation 7. Sacramento River Water Temperature Streamflow reproduction for select watershed Reservoir Storage Reproduction FOLSOM Reservoir Old Operating Rule 1.E+06 1.E+06 8.E+05 6.E+05 4.E+05 Obs Model 2.E+05 88 Rule Rev 0.E+00 Oct-56 Oct-58 Oct-60 Oct-62 Oct-64 Oct-66 Oct-68 Oct-70 Oct-72 Oct-74 Oct-76 Oct-78 Oct-80 Oct-82 Oct-84 Oct-86 Oct-88 Oct-90 Oct-92 Oct-94 Oct-96 Oct-98 New Operating Rule Presently, difficult to determine densities of hydrologic variables Probabilities of Probabilities of change Decisions on Climate Change in Adaptation Planning Hydrological Variables (e.g. new storage infrastructure) “Joint” scenarios flow Presently, difficult to determine densities of hydrologic variables Probabilities of Probabilities of change Decisions on Climate Change in Adaptation Planning Hydrological Variables (e.g. new storage infrastructure) P flow T ? Western North America Climate Scenarios What is the joint probability? CSIRO and CCC heavily weighted in determining the winter distributions Western North America Climate Scenarios But not consistent- These same models are given less weight for the summer distributions A stage along the way to getting at probabilities… Stylized Scenarios using K-nn WmDry WmDryT2 WtWnt WtWntT2 WtWntT4 VWtWntr VWtWntrT3 (Yates et al. 2002) Scenarios of Monthly Avg. Tmp (55 Stn, ~40 yrs) 35 Stylized Sacramento Climate Scenarios 30 Scenarios of Monthly Avg. Tmp (55 Stn, ~40 yrs) 35 hist 25 30 WrmDry (+1.9C) WrmDryT2 (+3.9C) 20 25 WtWnt (+0.9C) 20 WtWntT2 (+3.2C) C 15 15 WtWntT4 (+5.2C) 10 10 VWtrWnt (+3.2) 5 VWtWntT3 (+6.2) 0 5 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Scenarios of Monthly Avg. Precip. (55 Stn., ~40 yrs) 300 0 Oct Nov Dec 250 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 200 mm 150 100 50 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep McCloud N. Pit Trinity Clear Whiskey Shasta Pit River Flow town Pit Virt Res 35 Upper Pit Assumed No Irrigation or Storage Scenarios of Monthly Avg. Tmp (55 Stn, ~40 yrs) Cotton- Cow Avg. Monthly River flows below Yolo and Sacramento Wood 30 Battle 8 Thomes Almanor hist Chico 25 7 WrmDry (+1.9C) Tehema Black Butte Butte WrmDryT2 (+3.9C) Upper 6 Clear Feather 20 WtWnt (+0.9C) acre-feet x 1e6 Feather Colusa Sutter Bypass C 5 WtWntT2 (+3.2C) 15 Oroville Bullards 4 WtWntT4 (+5.2C) Bar Yuba VWtrWnt (+3.2) 10 3 VWtWntT3 (+6.2) Bear 2 5 Cache Coon Upper American 1 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan 0 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Putah Sacramento Lower American Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Folsom Weir Yolo Bypass Sacramento River Irrigation w/ all Available Storage Avg. Monthly River Flows below Yolo and Sacramento 8 Delta 7 San Joaquin Inflows 6 acre-feet x 1E6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep McCloud N. Pit Trinity Clear Whiskey Shasta Pit Water Temperature town Pit Virt Res Upper Pit Assumed No Irrigation or Storage Cow Sacramento @ Butte Avg. Water Temps. Cotton- Wood Battle 28 Thomes Almanor Chico 24 Tehema Black Butte Butte Upper Feather 20 Clear Feather threshold Colusa Sutter Bypass C 16 Oroville Bullards Bar Yuba 12 Bear 8 Cache Coon Upper American 4 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep ~40 yrs) ios of Monthly Avg. Tmp (55 Stn, Sacramento Putah Lower American Folsom Weir Yolo Bypass Sacramento River Irrigation w/ all Available Storage hist Sacramento @ Butte Avg. Water Temps. WrmDry (+1.9C) 28 Delta WrmDryT2 (+3.9C) San Joaquin 24 Inflows WtWnt (+0.9C) WtWntT2 (+3.2C) 20 threshold WtWntT4 (+5.2C) C 16 VWtrWnt (+3.2) 12 VWtWntT3 (+6.2) 8 4 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Plans for „05 1. Refine Water Resources Model to able to address relevant issues • FERC Re-licensing of the Yuba, American Bear • Sykes Reservoir Analysis • Others.. 2. Regional Scenarios Develop complete probabilistic approach w/ Bivariate Bayesian Model 3. Refine Ecosystem service evaluation by placing into an uncertainty construct 4. Legitimacy: Continue to engage relevant stakeholders in model development and application process, especially utility of probabilistic results!