GEOSS Great Lakes Testbed connection to Adaptive

Management

Wendy Leger, Environment CanadaCanadian Co-Chair,

International Great Lakes-St. Lawrence RiverAdaptive Management Task Team

GEOSS GL Testbed MeetingWindsor, ONFeb 6, 2013

IUGLS Adaptive Management Strategy 2

Challenges Affecting Water Level Risk

Extreme Water LevelsBigger more frequent stormsGlacial isostatic adjustmentLess ice coverChanges in conveyanceErosion and depositionChanges in demographicsActions taken along the shore

2/9/2012

Why Adaptive Management?Coordination is key to solutionsMonitoring is the only way to know how things are changing

Getting the right information to those who need it is critical to solving problems

Modern Coordinated

Data

Coastal Manage

rs

Interests

Conflicting messages

Outdated Data

Decision

Makers

State of the art forecast model

data

Uncoordinated data

Consistent Messages

IUGLS

Timeline (years)

End of

Study

Why Adaptive Management?Coordination is key to solutionsMonitoring is the only way to know how things are changing

Getting the right information to those who need it is critical to solving problemsAdjust and realign as it is determined what is working

Bursts of effort through intermittent studies does not lead to the most effective use of resources

Adaptive Mgmnt

Data, models & tools

Link Water Quality and Water Quantity into all Elements

Elements of the proposed GLSLR AM Plan

I. Coordinated Hydroclimate Monitoring and Modelling

II. Tracking of Key Performance Indicators and On-going Risk Assessment

III. Evaluation and Decision Tools

IV. Information Management and Distribution

V. Outreach and Engagement

VI. Collaborative Regional Adaptive Management Pilots

Bi-National Hydroclimatic

monitoring and modelling

1

Performance indicators and risk

assessment

2

Evaluation and Decision Tools

3

Information Management

and Distribution

4Outreach and Engagement

5

Collaborative Regional

Pilots

6

Also requires tracking and communicating success of the AM Plan

6

IJC – International Joint CommissionCCGLHHD – Coordinating Committee on Great Lakes Basic Hydraulic and Hydrologic DataLOSLR – Lake Ontario – St. Lawrence RiverOAG – Operational Advisory Group

GLSLRLevels

Advisory Board

LOSLR Board

SuperiorBoard

Niagara Board

OAG Reg. Reps.

Vertical Control

Hydraulics

CCGLHHD

Hydrology

Task Team Proposed Model

Networks

Bi-National Hydroclimatic

monitoring and modelling

1

Performance indicators and risk

assessment

2

Plan Evaluation and Decision

Tools

3

Information Management

and Distribution

4Outreach and Engagement

5

Collaborative Regional

Pilots

6LOSLR AM Committee

7

Network ConceptGLSLRLevels

Advisory Board

Networks

Hydroclimatic

1

Indicators & Risk

Assessment

2

Evaluation and Decision

Tools

3

Information Management

4Outreach

5

Regional Collaboratives

(Pilots)

6

Networks are flexible associations of technical experts unlike a standing committee

Network participation may change over time

As different expertise is required

As agency/organization programs change

As new science questions/challenges emerge

Networks may draw from existing, overlapping organizations

Networks are linked through the Levels Advisory Board

8

USACE

USGS

EC

DFO

Province of

Quebec

Universities

Pacific Climate Impacts

Consortium

NOAA

States and

Provinces

EC

NOAA

NOAA

NRCan

EC

CCGLHHD

OURANOS

GLERL

IPCC

Climate Change Annex

(GLWQA)

OCCAIR

HydroclimateNetwork

HYDROCLIMATE NETWORK– Improved Monitoring and Modeling of Water Balance

Trilateral Partnersh

ip

Universities

Province of

Ontario

Example of Network – not intended to be inclusive

9

Information Management and DistributionPurpose:

Establish information management architecture, protocols and governance for managing, vetting and distributing hydroclimate, performance indicators, and risk assessment data and information to those who need it for decision-making

Network Includes:Key data usersIM specialistsExisting Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River data

management networks (e.g. GLOS, GLIN, NOAA, GEOSS GLTestbed, WRIP etc.)

GLSLRLevels

Advisory Board

GEOSS GLTestbedCan/should the Great Lakes Testbed be the hub for

information management for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River?

Can the Testbed be the start of the IM Network? Could the Testbed look to seek funds for supporting

binational IM effort?Can this serve more than one purpose? e.g. AM, GLWQA,

Regional BodyHow do we see the GL Testbed involved and its relationship

to other networks (GLIN, WRIP, agency sites etc.)