METHODS - Water Year 2019 (October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019)
Study location
Flooding for the Pilot Action experiment took place in the Colusa
Basin on 5,435 acres owned by Reclamation District 108 (RD 108)
near Knights Landing, CA. Sampling was conducted in the RD108
canal system immediately before canal water was pumped into the
Sacramento River at the Rough and Ready pumping facility
(approximately river mile 100), and in the River up- and
downstream of the pump discharge location (Fig.1).
Figure 1: Study location in western Sacramento Valley just north
of Knights Landing; The 5,435 acres of Reclamation District 108
and River Garden Farms fields inundated and drained as part of the
experiment are shaded in blue, water drains via gravity from
fields through canals to the Rough and Ready pumping station
(yellow star) where it is pumped into the Sacramento River
(flowing from north to south). Sample locations within the river
where juvenile Chinook salmon were caged are labeled “upstream”,
“outfall”, and “one-mile downstream”. See Figure 1 here:
https://cvpia-data-stewardship.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/figures-for-edi/fig_1.png
Water management
Starting on December 15, 2018, 7,175 acre-feet of water was used
to flood the 5,435 participating managed floodplain acres.
Flood-up was completed by January 15, 2019. Drainage began
February 8, 2019 and ended March 8, 2019. Approximately
one-quarter of the flooded acreage was drained each week. The
Rough and Ready pumping facility can operate over a broad range of
export discharge rates between 80-955cfs. For baseline conditions,
a single 80cfs pump can be used. For higher discharge rates the
facility has five 175cfs pumps which can be run individually or
together in various combinations.
Sampling dates and locations
Weekly sampling to assess conditions before and after the Pilot
Action in the Sacramento River began November 13, 2018 and
continued through April 8, 2019. Sampling for the experimental
flood/drain cycle began February 5, 2019 and continued weekly
through March 10, 2019.
Site locations (Fig. 1, Table 1) included the drainage canal at
the export pumps (RRCAN), in the Sacramento River upstream of the
pump discharge (RRSAC1), two locations in the Sacramento River at
the pump outfall (RRSAC2A and RRSAC2B), in the Sacramento River a
half mile downstream of the export pumps (RRSAC3), and in the
Sacramento River one mile downstream of the pumps (RRSAC4). Two
cage locations were selected at the pump outfall site in the
Sacramento River in order to protect against damaged or lost cages
at a location that 1) is a popular public fishing spot where
potential vandalism was a concern, 2) is located on an outside
bend in the river prone to debris accumulation, and 3) where a
turbulent upstream eddy forms when the pumps are discharging
making tethering cages particularly challenging. The second
location (RRSAC2B), immediately upstream of the export pumps and
within the upstream eddy and protected from view and from debris
by riparian vegetation, was added to create redundancy and
alleviate some of these concerns.
Table 1: Sample location codes and descriptions. See Table 1 here:
https://cvpia-data-stewardship.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/figures-for-edi/table_1.png
Water quality and zooplankton sampling
At each sample location, water quality data was collected with a
YSI Exo2 multi-parameter sonde. Water quality parameters collected
were: temperature (degrees C), dissolved oxygen (mg/L), turbidity
(NTU), chlorophyl-a fluorescence (µg/L), blue-green algae
fluorescence (µg/L), electrical conductivity (µg/cm), salinity
(PSU), and pH. Onset HOBO dissolved oxygen and temperature data
loggers were deployed at all locations collecting continuous data
at 15-minute intervals.
All sites were sampled for zooplankton diversity and abundance
using net tows. In the river, a 30-cm diameter x 150 µm mesh
zooplankton net fitted with a flowmeter was thrown five meters and
retrived through the water column four times orthogonal to water
flow, accounting for drift. Flow meter data was recorded to
quantify the volume of water sampled. In the canal site where
water stage fluctuations occasionally limit the use of a larger
net, a 15-cm diameter x 150 µm mesh zooplankton net was thrown
five meters and retrieved through the water column four times.
Shallow-water nets cannot be fitted with a flowmeter and the
volume of water sampled can be determined by the area of the mouth
of the net multiplied by the distance towed
(π*.0752*20 ~
0.35m3). All zooplankton samples were
preserved in 95% ethanol. Zooplankton were identified to the
lowest taxonomic level possible and counted using a dissecting
microscope at 8x magnification. Dry carbon biomass conversions
either taken from the literature (Dumont 1975) or measured
empirically by the Kimmerer Laboratory at San Francisco State’s
Romber Tiburon Center were applied to zooplankton species counts
to estimate zooplaknton biomass.
Fish growth
Two or three enclosures were deployed at each site (two each at
RRSAC2A and RRSAC2B and three everywhere else), each containing 10
PIT-tagged Feather River hatchery-origin juvenile Chinook salmon.
Fish enclosures were built with 1-inch PVC, measured 4-feet wide
by 4-feet long by 2-feet deep, and encased in ¼-inch black plastic
square mesh with a re-sealable access door on the top panel. Fish
enclosures were equipped with four bullet-shaped crab floats and
tethered to shore. Each week, fish were caught out of their
enclosures, scanned for PIT identification, measured for fork
length in millimeters, and weighed for mass in grams on an OHAUS
Scout Pro portable electronic balance with 0.01g precision. If
there was fish mortality, “placebo fish” were added to an
enclosure to maintain fish density at 10 fish per enclosure.
placebo fish were of identical origin to enclosure fish and were
maintained at the UC Davis Center for Aquatic Biology and
Aquaculture for the duration of the Pilot Action.
Fish growth data was analyzed in rate of change metrics for fork
length, weight, and Fulton’s condition factor. Rate of change
(i.e., growth rate) was used to eliminate magnitude of change
differences from smaller or larger starting points. Fork length is
the most commonly used metric for salmonid size and is useful for
comparing to other data. Weight is an important indicator,
particularly for floodplain growth, because fish typically put on
more mass relative to length in high-food density environments.
And Fulton’s condition factor (K = [weight (g) * 100,000]/[fork
length3]) is useful for integrating
both length and weight metrics into a single unit.
METHODS - Water Year 2021 (October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2021)
Study location
Flooding for the Pilot Action experiment took place in the Colusa
Basin on 8,775 acres owned by Reclamation District 108 (RD 108)
near Knights Landing, CA. Sampling was conducted in the RD108
canal system immediately before canal water was pumped into the
Sacramento River at the Rough and Ready pumping facility
(approximately river mile 100), and in the River up- and
downstream of the pump discharge location (Figs.2,3).
Figure 2: The 8,775 acres of Reclamation District 108 and River
Garden Farms fields inundated and drained as part of the
experiment are shaded in blue, water drains via gravity from
fields through canals to the Rough and Ready pumping station
(yellow star) where it is pumped into the Sacramento River
(flowing from north to south). See Figure 2 here:
https://cvpia-data-stewardship.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/figures-for-edi/fig_2.png
Figure 3: River monitoring sites with site codes, and approximate
RD 108 acreage with distributary canals. See Figure 3 here:
https://cvpia-data-stewardship.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/figures-for-edi/fig_3.png
Water management
Starting on October 23, 2020, 14,836 acre-feet of water was used
to flood the 8,775 participating managed floodplain acres, and
2,164 of those acres flooded and drained twice during the
management period. That twice-drained subset completed the first
drain by January 5, 2021 and was reflooded by January 25, 2021.
The complete drainage of participating acres February 15 and ended
March 8, 2021. Approximately one-quarter of the flooded acreage
was drained each week. The Rough and Ready pumping facility can
operate over a broad range of export discharge rates between
80-955cfs. For baseline conditions, a single 80cfs pump can be
used. For higher discharge rates the facility has five 175cfs
pumps which can be run individually or together in various
combinations.
Sampling dates and locations
Weekly sampling to assess conditions before and after the Fish
Food Management Action in the Sacramento River began November 9,
2020 and continued through March 29, 2021. Sampling for the
experimental flood/drain cycles began January 5, 2021 and
continued weekly through March 8, 2021.
Site locations (Fig. 3, Table 2) included the drainage canal at
the export pumps (RRCAN), in the Sacramento River upstream of the
pump discharge (RRSAC1), two locations in the Sacramento River at
the pump outfall (RRSAC2A and RRSAC2C), in the Sacramento River
one mile downstream of the export pumps (RRSAC4), in the
Sacramento River two miles downstream of the pumps (RRSAC5), in
the Sacramento River three miles downstream of the pumps (RRSAC6),
in the Sacramento River four miles downstream of the pumps
(RRSAC7), and in the Sacramento River six miles downstream of the
pumps (RRSAC8). Two cage locations were selected at the pump
outfall site in the Sacramento River in order to protect against
damaged or lost cages at a location that 1) is a popular public
fishing spot where potential vandalism was a concern, 2) is
located on an outside bend in the river prone to debris
accumulation, and 3) where a turbulent upstream eddy forms when
the pumps are discharging making tethering cages particularly
challenging. The second location (RRSAC2C), immediately downstream
of the export pumps and within the outflow plume from the pumping
station, was added to create redundancy and alleviate some of
these concerns.
Table 2: Sample location codes and descriptions. Site codes with
an * next to the code are identical to those sampled in the 2019
Pilot Action.
See Table 2 here:
https://cvpia-data-stewardship.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/figures-for-edi/table_2.png
Water quality and Zooplankton sampling
At each sample location, water quality data was collected with a
YSI Exo2 multi-parameter sonde. Water quality parameters collected
were: temperature (degrees C), dissolved oxygen (mg/L), turbidity
(NTU), chlorophyl-a fluorescence (µg/L), blue-green algae
fluorescence (µg/L), electrical conductivity (µg/cm), salinity
(PSU), and pH. Onset HOBO dissolved oxygen and temperature data
loggers were deployed at all locations collecting continuous data
at 15-minute intervals.
All sites were sampled for zooplankton diversity and abundance
using net tows. In the river, a 30-cm diameter x 150 µm mesh
zooplankton net fitted with a flowmeter was thrown five meters and
retrived through the water column four times orthogonal to water
flow, accounting for drift. Flow meter data was recorded to
quantify the volume of water sampled. In the canal site where
water stage fluctuations occasionally limit the use of a larger
net, a 15-cm diameter x 150 µm mesh zooplankton net was thrown
five meters and retrieved through the water column four times.
Shallow-water nets cannot be fitted with a flowmeter and the
volume of water sampled can be determined by the area of the mouth
of the net multiplied by the distance towed
(π*.0752*20 ~
0.35m3). All zooplankton samples were
preserved in 95% ethanol. Zooplankton were identified to the
lowest taxonomic level possible and counted using a dissecting
microscope at 8x magnification. Dry carbon biomass conversions
either taken from the literature (Dumont 1975) or measured
empirically by the Kimmerer Laboratory at San Francisco State’s
Romber Tiburon Center were applied to zooplankton species counts
to estimate zooplaknton biomass.
Fish growth
Three enclosures were deployed at each site, each containing 5
PIT-tagged Coleman Hatchery-origin juvenile Chinook salmon. Fish
enclosures were built with 1-inch PVC, measured 2-feet wide by
4-feet long by 2-feet deep, and encased in ¼-inch black plastic
square mesh with a re-sealable access door on the top panel. Fish
enclosures were equipped with four bullet-shaped crab floats and
tethered to shore. Each week, fish were caught out of their
enclosures, scanned for PIT identification, measured for fork
length in millimeters, and weighed for mass in grams on an OHAUS
Scout Pro portable electronic balance with 0.01g precision. If
there was fish mortality, “placebo fish” were added to an
enclosure to maintain fish density at 10 fish per enclosure.
placebo fish were of identical origin to enclosure fish and were
maintained at the UC Davis Center for Aquatic Biology and
Aquaculture for the duration of the Pilot Action.
Fish growth data was analyzed in rate of change metrics for fork
length, weight, and Fulton’s condition factor. Rate of change
(i.e., growth rate) was used to eliminate magnitude of change
differences from smaller or larger starting points. Fork length is
the most commonly used metric for salmonid size and is useful for
comparing to other data. Weight is an important indicator,
particularly for floodplain growth, because fish typically put on
more mass relative to length in high-food density environments.
And Fulton’s condition factor (K = [weight (g) * 100,000]/[fork
length3]) is useful for integrating
both length and weight metrics into a single unit.
METHODS - Water Year 2022 (October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2022)
Study location
Flooding for the fish growth experiment took place in the Colusa
Basin on 9,943 acres owned by Reclamation District 108 (RD 108)
near Knights Landing, CA. Sampling was conducted in the RD108
canal system and in the Sacramento River at the Rough and Ready
pumping facility (approximately river mile 100), and in the River
up- and downstream of the pump discharge location (Fig.4).
Figure 4: Study location in western Sacramento Valley just north
of Knights Landing; The 9,943 acres of Reclamation District 108
and participating farm fields inundated and drained as part of the
experiment are shaded in blue, water drains via gravity from
fields through canals to the Rough and Ready pumping station (blue
star), where it is pumped into the Sacramento River (flowing from
north to south). Yellow circles denote zooplankton sample sites.
Yellow triangles denote fish cage with zooplankton sample site.
Water icons denote agricultural drain/tributary confluences with
the river system that were monitored. See Figure 4 here:
https://cvpia-data-stewardship.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/figures-for-edi/fig_4.png
Water management – two flood/drain cycles
Starting on November 8, 2021, 12,059 acre-feet of water was used
to flood the 9,943 participating managed floodplain acres.
Resource managers achieved multiple flood/drain cycles on most of
the acreage enrolled in the Fish Food program this year. After
fields were drained they were immediately refilled and remained
inundated for at least an additional 3 weeks to allow invertebrate
food webs to rapidly return to pre-drain densities before being
drained again. 8,784 acres was drained starting January 3, 2022
and re-flooded by January 31, 2022. The second, complete drainage
began February 7, 2027 and ended March 7, 2022. Approximately
one-quarter of the flooded acreage was drained each week. The
Rough and Ready pumping facility can operate over a range of
export discharge rates between 80-955 cubic feet per second (cfs).
For baseline conditions, a single 80cfs pump can be used. For
higher discharge rates the facility has five 175cfs pumps that can
be run individually or together in various combinations.
Sampling dates and locations
Weekly sampling at all sites in the Rough and Ready canal and
Sacramento River began November 8, 2021 and continued through
March 28, 2022.
Site locations (Fig. 4, Table 3) include: the drainage canal at
the export pumps (RRCAN), Sacramento River upstream of the pump
discharge (RRSAC1), Sacramento River upstream at Tyndall Landing
(TLSAC), Sacramento River upstream at the Wilkins Slough CDEC
station (WLKSAC), two Sacramento River locations at the pump
outfall (RRSAC2A and RRSAC2C), Sacramento River one mile
downstream of the pumps (RRSAC4), Sacramento River two miles
downstream of the pumps (RRSAC5), Sacramento River three miles
downstream of the pumps (RRSAC6), Sacramento River four miles
downstream of the pumps (RRSAC7), and Sacramento River six miles
downstream of the pumps (RRSAC8). Two cage locations were selected
at the pump outfall site in the Sacramento River in order to
protect against damaged or lost cages at a location that 1) is a
popular public fishing spot where potential vandalism was a
concern, 2) is located on an outside bend in the river prone to
debris accumulation, and 3) where a turbulent upstream eddy forms
when the pumps are discharging, making tethering cages
particularly challenging. The second location selected this year
was different than in 2019 because the dramatic difference in
river flow changed the dynamics in the eddy. The second location
(RRSAC2C), immediately downstream of the export pumps and within
the tail of the eddy, was added to create redundancy and alleviate
some of these concerns.
Table 3: Sample location codes and descriptions. Site codes with
an * next to the code are identical to those sampled in the 2019
Fish Food program. Site codes with an x
next to the code are identical to those sampled in the 2021 Fish
Food program.
See Table 3 here:
https://cvpia-data-stewardship.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/figures-for-edi/table_3.png
Water quality and zooplankton sampling
At each sample location, water quality data was collected with a
YSI Exo2 multi-parameter sonde. Water quality parameters collected
were: temperature (degrees C), dissolved oxygen (mg/L), turbidity
(NTU), chlorophyl-a fluorescence (µg/L), electrical conductivity
(µg/cm), salinity (PSU), and pH. Onset HOBO dissolved oxygen and
temperature data loggers were deployed at all locations collecting
continuous data at 15-minute intervals. Two oxygen loggers had
battery failures during the experiment and their data could not be
retrieved, from sites RRSAC1 and RRSAC4.
All sites were sampled for zooplankton diversity and abundance
using net tows. A 30-cm diameter x 150 µm mesh zooplankton net
fitted with a flowmeter was thrown five meters and retrieved
through the water column four times orthogonal to water flow,
accounting for drift. Flow meter data was recorded to quantify the
volume of water sampled. All zooplankton samples were preserved in
95% ethanol. Zooplankton were identified to the lowest taxonomic
level possible and counted using a dissecting microscope at 8x
magnification. Dry carbon biomass conversions either taken from
the literature (Dumont 1975) or measured empirically by the
Kimmerer Laboratory at San Francisco State’s Romber Tiburon Center
were applied to zooplankton species counts to estimate zooplankton
biomass.
Fish growth
Three fish growth enclosures were deployed at each site, each
containing 5 PIT-tagged Coleman Hatchery-origin juvenile Chinook
salmon. Fish enclosures were built with 1-inch PVC, measured
2-feet wide by 4-feet long by 2-feet deep, and encased in ¼-inch
black plastic square mesh with a re-sealable access door on the
top panel. Fish enclosures were equipped with three bullet-shaped
crab floats and tethered to shore. Each week, fish were caught out
of their enclosures, scanned for PIT identification, measured for
fork length in millimeters, and weighed for mass in grams on an
OHAUS Scout Pro portable electronic balance with 0.01g precision.
If there was fish mortality, “placebo fish” were added to an
enclosure to maintain fish density at 5 fish per enclosure.
Placebo fish were of identical origin to enclosure fish and were
maintained at the UC Davis Center for Aquatic Biology and
Aquaculture for the duration of the experiment.
Fish growth data was analyzed in rate of change metrics for fork
length and weight. Rate of change (i.e., growth rate) was used to
eliminate magnitude of change differences from smaller or larger
starting points. Only fish that were originally placed in cages
and survived the duration of the experiment, i.e. not placebo
fish, were used for growth metric data.
Data analysis
Water quality and zooplankton sampling occurred throughout the
multiple cycles however fish from the hatchery only became large
enough to tag in early February and were therefore only placed in
cages during the second drain cycle. For this reason, analysis of
zooplankton and fish data are grouped differently with respect to
drainage timing. The fish data were grouped into distinct
"before", "during", and "after"
drainage event bins. The zooplankton data bins were also named
with respect to their coincidence with drainage events, but in
only two bins: "during" and "before/after" -
including all samples collected before the first drain event
started, after the second drain event ended, and between the end
of the first event and the start of the second event.
Fork length is the most commonly used metric for salmonid size and
is useful for comparing to other data. However, high food-density
environments fish typically put on more mass relative to length.
Weight metrics are also bi-directional, e.g. in contrast to
length, weight can record negative growth in response to poor
foraging conditions. Overall, we feel that weight is a more
descriptive bioenergetic metric of fish growth and performance in
response to biophysical habitat conditions. For these reasons,
while we will report both fork length and weight data, we will
primarily focus on weight as the response variable in our food web
and bioenergetic analyses.
Raw data for temperature, oxygen, zooplankton biomass, and fish
growth were plotted over time for a visual assessment of ecosystem
effects throughout the experiment. Statistical significance of
zooplankton biomass and fish growth results was determined by
pairwise ANOVA and Tukey multiple comparison of means testing.
Because only one integrated zooplankton sample was collected at
each site per week, statistical tests on zooplankton data was done
comparing sites during periods of export (n=9) with periods of no
export (i.e., “before/after”; n=13) over the entire season in a
single test. Because the primary question of this study is focused
on effects on in-river fish and ecosystem response as a result of
the management action, data from the canal site are displayed on
data visualizations but not included in statistical analyses to
avoid extraneous sources of variability for both fish and
zooplankton analyses.
