My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Nonconsumptive Meeting Notes and Presentations - 12-17-07
CWCB
>
IBCC Process Program Material
>
DayForward
>
Nonconsumptive Meeting Notes and Presentations - 12-17-07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2009 6:06:24 PM
Creation date
2/5/2008 5:03:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
IBCC Process Program Material
Title
Nonconsumptive meeting notes
Date
12/17/2007
IBCC - Doc Type
Needs Assessment & Technical Support
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
What about recreation? Answer: The DFA technique could be used for recreation. It <br />was noted by the technical team that there are fewer tools that evaluate recreational <br />flows than environmental flows. <br />Does PHABSIM work best for or versus large streams? Answer: PHASIM is model <br />for mid-size and larger streams. <br />~Uhat method is the least dif~cult or minimum about of information to use? Answer: <br />Bill recommended that LeRoy Poff and Brian Bledsoe give their presentation and to <br />save the question for the discussion after that information. <br />LeRoy Poff and Brian Bledsoe presented slides on a VUatershed Flow Evaluation Tool <br />(attached slides 42 - 53). <br />Questions and comments on LeRoy and Brian's presentation included: <br />~ Because this methodology is based on historic data is possible to account for future <br />changes such as those that might occur as a result of climate change? Answer: The <br />methodology focuses on more general description of flow characteristics and not <br />detailed flow recommendations. <br />^ The methodology describes that there is a threshold where the attribute may or may <br />not be maintained. How is this established? Answer: If there is a drastic change in <br />conditions, then the status of the attribute will be easier to define. If there is a gradual <br />change this is a harder situation and will need to include stakeholder input and is <br />more of a policy consideration. <br />^ For categorization is biology or hydrology used or a combination? Answer: The intent <br />is to classify streams of similar hydrology or geomorphology so that comparisons can <br />be made among streams of similar type. <br />~ Does methodology consider status of low flow on sediment loading issues, <br />channelization or less of riparian areas`? Answer: The methodology on reflects that <br />attribute you are considering. <br />^ One platform that should be considered is the use 30-m Digital Elevation Models <br />available from USGS. <br />Workin~ Lunch <br />Dialogue on the following topics occurred during a working lunch: <br />^ Discussion of Quantification Tools <br />^ Volunteers for Piloting of Approaches <br />^ Integration of Nonconsumptive and Consumptive Needs Assessments <br />^ Next Steps <br />Questions and comments included: <br />^ Regarding integration of nonconsumptive and consumptive needs, this will need to <br />start at the roundtable level and the legislation also requires consultation with other <br />affected water providers, local governments and other interested stakeholders when <br />completing needs assessments. The roundtables, IBCC and technical support team <br />will need to address this issue in more detail in the coming months. <br />^ Need to look at the science and describe what is best for the river system. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.