WSP09753 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

" PROGRESS REVIEW -IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GLEN CANYON DAM OPERATIONS BIOLOGICAL OPINION December 5, 1997 The followin9 summary of progress made in implementation of the Glen Canyon Dam Biological Opinion was originally prepared on November 27, 1996, concluding progress to that date had been sufficient. You responded on April 3, 1997 in disagreement with that conclusion. The summary has been updated to reflect the current status of elements of the biological opinion. Of the 7 elements of the biological opinion, 3 have been completed, 3 are currently on going, 1 has had a preliminary work initiated. 1 - Adaptive Management Program (AMP) The Record of Decision on the Environmental Impact Statement on the Operations of Glen Canyon Dam was signed on October 9, 1996, formally sanctioning the preferred altemative, including the AMP and the Grand Canyon Research and Monitoring Center. Through the efforts of the Transition Work Group, which was organized in the interim to continue work on the AMP, a charter was developed and put into place establishing the AMWG as a Federal Advisory Committee. Steve Magnussen has been appointed as the Secretary's designee, Committee members have been designated for the 25 participants, and the first Adaptive Management Work Group meeting was held on September 10 and 11, 1997, The AMWG establish a Technical Work Group, which has been meeting regularly. This element of the biological opinion has been completed. 1.A - A Program of Experimental Flows The RPA recommends that a program of experimental flows be carried out, including: high steady flows in the spring, and low steady flows in summer. A beach/habitat building flow of 45,000 cfs, including appropriate up and down ramps, was conducted in March, 1996. Prior to conducting this flow, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, in the form of an environmental assessment (Reclamation, February, 1996); and, Endangered Species Act consultation through preparation of a biological assessment (BOR, November 1995) and a biological opinion (FWS, November, 1995) were required because the ROD had not been signed. A full research program to evaluate this experimental flow accompanied the release. These compliance and research activities required substantial staff time and effort" as well as financial resources. The final reports analyzing the effects of the habitat/beach building flow, including peer review, were completed December 31, 1996. Final analysis and integration of the data will require approximately one additional year and should be available in late 1997. A symposium was held April 2-3, 1997 by the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center to report preliminary results of the test flow. In addition, a 48-hour short duration high release test flow was conducted November 3 through November 5, 1997, in response to unusually high inflow of sediment from the Paria River. This action was designed to conserve sediment resources as identified in the EIS and the BO, However, the test flow recommended by the AMWG was outside the parameters originally consulted on under the Endangered Species Act, and to which the National Environmental Policy Act had been applied. Due to the take of endangered humpback chub and Kanab ambersnail, biological assessment (BOR, November 1997) and a Biological Opinion (FWS, November 1997), as well as the required NEPA evaluation in the form of a categorical exclusion checklist was completed.