Laserfiche WebLink
<br />II <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />II <br />;1 <br />il <br />II <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />,I <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />II <br /> <br />Western States Water Council <br />Water Res,ources Committee Minutes <br /> <br />San Antonio, Texas <br />October 20, 2005 <br /> <br />taking the lead role for this meeting. It will serve as a "2-way conversation" between USGS and <br />cooperators. "I hope WSWC members will be there." Glenn Patterson is the point of contact for <br />USGS. PXease let us know what topics should be addressed and put any comments you may have in <br />writing. USGS will address three topics. First, the costs of streamgaging. USGS will be putting <br />together a side-by-side comparison of state and federal costs. We need your collaboration. For <br />example, Colorado operates a large number of gages on its own. We need to know if there are real <br />differences in product, measurements, labor, efficiency, accounting, rent, vehicles, capital <br />expenditures, management and administration (costs and accounting). Second, we will address ways to <br />collaborate, with states doing part of the work. We want to document our work with other <br />organizations, states, and tribes, for example, working with Texas river authorities - say we publish <br />the data, and share the work. We want to explain and explore the complexities and options. Finally, <br />on the "study side," there are instances in which we share our work "off rights" to state agencies. <br />Staff are familiar with sharing work in interpretive programs. <br /> <br />Overall, the streamgaging program's aggregate numbers are not declining. However, the <br />issue of instability and holes in data are of concern as cooperators withdraw due to a lack of funding. <br />Some stat(~s are losing dozens of gages and many long term gages. This instability concerns us. The <br />recent letter to Secretary Norton and Joshua Bolton, Director of the Office of Management and Budget <br />(OMB) requesting increased support for the CWP and NSIP is helpful, but "I'm far from sure what will <br />happen given federal budget pressures." <br /> <br />Questioru: and Answers <br /> <br />Rod Kuharich raised the issue of "core USGS functions and priorities," stressing the <br />importance of basic data gathering. Bob responded that every year OMB asks us to put every program <br />on the cutting block. Every program has its constituents. Biological interests are frequent visitors to <br />OMB, the Director and the Hill. He noted that in the Arctic, USGS is looking at birds and Asian bird <br />flu in flyways. Mark Limbaugh, the new Assistant Secretary of Interior for Water and Science is <br />interested in hearing your priorities. He is interested to know what programs should grow and which <br />should shrink. <br /> <br />THE U.S. DESALINATION COALITION <br /> <br />Mike Slayton, spoke on behalf of the Desalination Coalition. He is with the St. John's Water <br />Management District in Florida, which covers 21 % of the state and serves four million folks. The <br />coalition is an alternative water supply advocate. There is a Senate hearing today on legislation to <br />make ince:ntive payments to owners and operators of qualified desalination facilities to partially offset <br />the cost of required electrical energy. S. 1016, introduced by Senator Mel Martinez (D-FL), and <br />cosponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), would result in about a $200/acre-foot subsidy. <br />Companion legislation in the House, H.R. 1071, has been introduced by Rep. Jim Davis (D-FL) and <br />Rep. Jim Gibbons (R-NV). It should be marked up over the next week or two, and reported out of the <br />House Resources Committee no later than the end of the year. Mr. Slayton noted that construction <br /> <br />5 <br />