Indicators included in the M&E Plan were scored against each of the factors discussed above (Table 11). All of these factors were taken into account to provide an overall priority score for each indicator (high, medium and lower priority). Table 11. Summary of priority ranks (H=High, M=Medium, L=Low) for the proposed indicators for the Edward-Wakool Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. Indicator of 5 money Selected over Selected response lines adaptive evaluation values to detecting adaptive to for Category approach Area Area zone score term years scale contribution multiple (H,M,L) response per 5 value modelling management management High Overall Basin- Contribute Area Contributes Area Cost over Community Confidence Selected evaluation evidence Short-term Longer years Selected Indicator Inkind Cat I and II Indicators Ecosystem type I L H Tree stand condition I M L Fish (river) I M partly partly H Fish (larvae) I M partly partly H River hydrology I H L Stream metabolism I H M Fish movement II H M Cat III indicators Fish (larvae) III H M Fish recruitment III H M Fish (river) III H L III Microinvertebrates L M Shrimp III L L Frogs III L M Hydraulic modelling III H L Riverbank and III H L aquatic vegetation Carbon and WQ during adverse WQ III H L events Summary of hydrological and indicators selected for the M&E Plan Table 12 provides a summary of the hydrological zones and indicators selected for the M&E Plan for the LTIM Project. The indicators included in the M&E Plan are: Ecosystem type River hydrology Hydraulic modelling Stream metabolism Carbon and water quality Riverbank and aquatic vegetation Fish movement on silver perch and golden perch – fish larvae to evaluate the success of spawning – fish recruitment focus on young-of-year and 1+ Murray cod, golden perch and silver perch – Fish annual survey of fish community –
Indicators included in the M&E Plan were scored against each of the factors discussed above (Table 11). All of these factors were taken into account to provide an overall priority score for each indicator (high, medium and lower priority). Table 11. Summary of priority ranks (H=High, M=Medium, L=Low) for the proposed indicators for the Edward-Wakool Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. Indicator Indicator Category Basin- scale evaluation Selected Area evaluation Contribute to Selected Area response modelling Contributes to Selected Area multiple lines of evidence approach Short-term adaptive management Longer term adaptive management Cost per zone over 5 years (H,M,L) Inkind contribution over 5 years High value for money Community values Confidence detecting Selected Area response Overall score Cat I and II Indicators Ecosystem type I L H Tree stand condition I M L Fish (river) I partly partly H M Fish (larvae) I partly partly H M River hydrology I L H Stream metabolism I M H Fish movement II M H Cat III indicators Fish (larvae) III M H Fish recruitment III M H Fish (river) III L H Microinvertebrates III L M Shrimp III L L Frogs III L M Hydraulic modelling III L H Riverbank and aquatic vegetation III L H Carbon and WQ during adverse WQ events III L H Summary of hydrological and indicators selected for the M&E Plan Table 12 provides a summary of the hydrological zones and indicators selected for the M&E Plan for the LTIM Project. The indicators included in the M&E Plan are: Ecosystem type River hydrology Hydraulic modelling Stream metabolism Carbon and water quality Riverbank and aquatic vegetation Fish movement – on silver perch and golden perch fish larvae – to evaluate the success of spawning fish recruitment – focus on young-of-year and 1+ Murray cod, golden perch and silver perch Fish – annual survey of fish community
edward-wakool-me-plan.docx