Stuart et al. Chowilla Within-channel Discusses operational Conceptual model Utilise operational strategies to disadvantage (2011) Floodplain, stable flows (e.g. timing, duration of Carp life history Carp spawning/recruitment while Murray River, (7000 ML/day and of flooding), within the maintaining/enhancing the South entitlement flow physical (e.g. barriers, Chowilla habitat/hydrological conditions for native fish: Australia to South Australia) drying, traps) and Floodplain reduce frequency of managed inundations (e.g. daughterless (~17,700 ha Natural (e.g. Potential risks and (1 in 10 years rather than 1 in 2 or 1 in 4) Carp) including 30,000 ML/day) benefits for native to reduce opportunities for Carp spawning control/eradication anabranch and flora and fauna and recruitment Managed methods and associated floodplain inundation (>75% Broader take advantage of any natural flooding at costs systems) flowing water catchment scale the river reach scale to flood Chowilla, to retained) impacts associated optimise benefits for native fish species with localised Carp considered at risk Managed recruitment inundation (<25% for a managed inundation, operate the flowing water Carp spawning Chowilla environmental regulator to retained) hotspots within prioritise winter inundation the system plan for managed recessions before water temperature reaches ~15oC adopt a managed operating regime that maximises flowing water habitat et al. 2011). Physical interventions are not recommended until baseline knowledge gaps regarding basic Carp biology are filled. If future monitoring indicates physical control is applicable, then it is recommended to exclusion techniques, desiccation, and tracking Judas Carp to determine exploitable behaviours. The application of any physical control techniques should be applied in a monitored adaptive management framework.
Stuart et al. (2011) Chowilla Floodplain, Murray River, South Australia (~17,700 ha including anabranch and floodplain systems) Within-channel stable flows (7000 ML/day entitlement flow to South Australia) Natural (e.g. 30,000 ML/day) Managed inundation (>75% flowing water retained) Managed inundation (<25% flowing water retained) Discusses operational (e.g. timing, duration and of flooding), physical (e.g. barriers, drying, traps) and (e.g. daughterless Carp) control/eradication methods and associated costs Conceptual model of Carp life history within the Chowilla Floodplain Potential risks and benefits for native flora and fauna Broader catchment scale impacts associated with localised Carp recruitment Carp spawning hotspots within the system Utilise operational strategies to disadvantage Carp spawning/recruitment while maintaining/enhancing the habitat/hydrological conditions for native fish: reduce frequency of managed inundations (1 in 10 years rather than 1 in 2 or 1 in 4) to reduce opportunities for Carp spawning and recruitment take advantage of any natural flooding at the river reach scale to flood Chowilla, to optimise benefits for native fish species considered at risk for a managed inundation, operate the Chowilla environmental regulator to prioritise winter inundation plan for managed recessions before water temperature reaches ~15oC adopt a managed operating regime that maximises flowing water habitat et al. 2011). Physical interventions are not recommended until baseline knowledge gaps regarding basic Carp biology are filled. If future monitoring indicates physical control is applicable, then it is recommended to exclusion techniques, desiccation, and tracking Judas Carp to determine exploitable behaviours. The application of any physical control techniques should be applied in a monitored adaptive management framework.
ARI-Technical-Report-255-Managing-flows-and-carp.docx