7424 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

riparian corridor downstream through the Grand Canyon. Some changes are documented directly. Others are predictions of effects based on the committee's understanding of system function for which data are unavailable. The latter remain as untested hypotheses that could be pursued as part of an impact analysis. The committee's advice on the process for ranking operational alternatives includes criticism of the GCES studies and advice .for future study of this and other rivers. The committee's recommendations call for planning and execution of future studies to test predicted outcomes of releases by management. Details of the testing can vary for different elements of the ecosystem as they are judged to be of greater or lesser value to the users of the Colorado River. The committee's study included a review of the performance and results of approximately 30 studies conducted by GCES investigators from the Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service, -Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona Game and Fish Department, U.S. Geological Survey, and other private contractors over the study period (see Appendix C); a review of the Bureau of Reclamation's planning and management of this project; the integration of the GCES into a decision-making report to the Bureau of Reclamation; and, the utility of the GCES results for management of the Colorado-River, the Grand Canyon, and the operation of Glen Canyon Dam. The committee received most of the draft research reports between November 1986 and February 1987. The final. document reviewed by the committee was the July 1987 draft of the GCES integrated report. All reports reviewed by the committee were drafts in progress. Three meetings were arranged over the 18-month study period for the committee to meet with all GCES research investigators, liaison representatives, and personnel from the Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service, Fish and xii