California Rapid Assessment Method CRAM

1
California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM)
Core Development Team Meeting January 16, 2003
2
Todays Agenda

• Goals of CRAM program
• Roles of Teams
• Need and Intended Uses
• Summary of Science of Rapid Assessment
• Conceptual Model
• Development Process and Schedule
• Global/Programmatic Issues
• Next Steps

3
Goals of the CRAM Program

• Develop a method for assessing wetland condition
  that can be routinely used for evaluation and
  monitoring purposes
• relatively rapid
• scientifically defensible
• understandable to a broad range of expertise
• usable across wetland types/classes
• applicable to wetlands and streams throughout the
  state of California
• has a regional perspective

4
Why Develop a CRAM?

• Identified need by Federal and State agencies
• Strategies for regional wetland management (e.g
  WRPs)
• Scientifically-based, quantifiable regional
  recovery objectives
• Monitoring to assess regional extent/condition of
  wetland resources and recovery progress
• Decision support for prioritizing recovery
  efforts
• EPAs national program on development of wetland
  assessment methods
• Lack of adequate, cost-effective tools to assess
  regional wetland condition
• National Wetlands Mitigation Action Plan and Corp
  Regulatory Guidance Letter 02-02 (Dec 2002)

5
Components of Comprehensive Wetlands Monitoring
Program
Field-based Methods
Level III Intensive diagnosis (Site
specific-scale)
rapid assessment is a Level II method
Increasing coverage of systems
Decreasing data resolution, accuracy, and
cost/unit area
Level II Broad-scale survey (Regional-scale)
Landscape Methods
Level I Resource Inventory (Regional-scale)
6
Level I Landscape Assessment

• Create landscape profiles
• Bedford, 1996, 1999
• Gwin, Kentula, and Shaffer, 1999
• GIS-based, using HGM or similar
• Watershed classification systems for ecological
  risk assessment
• Detenbeck et al. 2001

7
Level I - Synoptic Approach
8
Level II Rapid Assessment

• Measures condition and stressors affecting
  condition, e.g.,
• Hydrologic modifications (ditches, channelized
  streams, levees)
• Vegetation alteration (invasive exotics)
• Sedimentation and microtopography
• Contaminants and eutrophication
• Mowing, grazing, and farming
• Thermal alteration, salinity changes

CRAM is Level 2 - - - - more to follow
9
Level III - Intensive Site Assessment

• Calibrates or validates methods and findings from
  Levels 1 2
• Used as diagnostic tool to evaluate causes of
  wetland degradation
• Used to develop performance standards for wetland
  restoration or creation
• Can use to determine if beneficial uses are being
  met

10
Summary of 3 Tiers of Assessment
Product Application
11
CRAM Development

•    Method development
•    Field testing/calibration
•    Method refinement
•   Field validation
• (level III studies)
•   Peer review
• Education and outreach

Phasing

• Initial development
• for coastal regions.
• Later phases will
• provide regional
• modification for inland
• watersheds

12
CRAM Development Teams
Core Development
Regional Review

• SCCWRP
• SFEI
• USEPA
• ACOE
• CDFG
• SWRCB
• SCC
• UCLA
• SFSU

• CDFG
• USFWS
• Water Boards (Regions 4, 8, 9)
• CNPS
• CCC
• Private Consultants (3)
• WRP Science Panel and Managers Group
• WRP County Task Forces

Responsible for development and initial testing
of CRAM and coordination of overall process
Responsible for developing regional context/modif
ication, technical review, more intensive
regional testing, and facilitating application at
the local level (i.e. outreach)