My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AMWG Stakeholders' Priorities and Comments FY 11-12 Budget
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
AMWG Stakeholders' Priorities and Comments FY 11-12 Budget
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2012 3:54:29 PM
Creation date
7/25/2012 2:23:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
AMWG Stakeholders' Priorities and Comments FY 11-12 Budget April 27 2010
State
CO
Date
4/27/2010
Title
AMWG Stakeholders' Priorities and Comments FY 11-12 Budget
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Stakeholders Budget Comments and Priorities, continued <br />Amy Heuslein, BIA: Line #160 New Evaluation of Trout Movement Natal Origins and Alternatives <br />(one of six top priorities for discussion) <br />Dennis Strong, State of Utah: This is one of top five priority items to discuss during the webinar. <br />. li tc: 8.. ; lZe:cot rzae nd that 1 �C l and 1.. O1 ? rnec:t �e°it.h ds.e tI, )es to dise:tzss including CPI .increase <br />liar uril:x 1. participation to those miles that utilize their allocation; con ultatiorl, and tribal nionitoring <br />tribal erttti.ty nlay participate; .in ll ^x'11. and additional funding may be necessarv. (no <br />abjection) <br />Tai .t t t a ; issii tai cl.xt e rz .r ai t° ¢ aaAycs tli ��irC <br />1 ` �.I` � Gi recognize s that It does riot have a formal process for evaluating aiid .idcritifri g a propose .>d <br />hy drog.raph to# the \,IWG, intends to undertake that de elopr-nent in this budget 0 cle, and requests <br />ie edback froin A.MWG can. how to proceed. (8J �';1` <br />Nikolai Lash, GCT: Regarding Item 2b top fzve prioritierJ, we have one priority we've identified and that is <br />number 17 addressing the development of the 2011 hydrograph. (We are putting all five of our <br />red stickers on this priority!) <br />Steve Martin, NPS: Discussion of process to develop hydrograph for FY11 — Item 17 - AMWG should <br />provide clear direction to TWG for it to develop a hydrograph development process for 2011 and <br />bring a 2011 recommendation to the AMWG for its August meeting. Following is a TWG budget <br />item that was voted on and not passed that we believe need to be brought forward to the AMWG <br />for further discussion and consideration. <br />GCT Motion #3. The TWG recommends to the AMWG that if sediment inputs exceed <br />the current BHBF trigger before March 2011, then dam operations will immediately <br />switch to equalized monthly volumes and steady flows (if this is not already the operating <br />scenario), and a BHBF will be implemented in March 2011. <br />lic jb c -ir�g- iss ,5 dry ra t .it r r c r e r A l c a <br />1. (.littc 'o)) l)e clop tra.e:thodc. l< >gic,. tc� inte. ;sa-c triba petrspect.ives into the ire;atin nt: j�lan, (no t> }jeotiort; <br />Amy Heuslein, BIA: Line #29 Canyon Treatment Plan and Implementation (one of six top priorities <br />for discussion) <br />1 , 'l lie b .rdgc t spreadsheet and,, %,orkphn should irac:lude; other projects being undertaken by c(xiperators <br />using g ti. rtc:ls o��ats de o >f the GC DA\11' funding. <br />The lbjlotvir issue Tf as foroarded to.AM1VG lbr information, of AV C it ,)rz; <br />6. Although GC NIRC: has designated projects 11.1 the spreadsheet as core mor lt:ratjt tg (£;C.i1Z), TWG has <br />o; fil.y provis.ionally approvre;d the sedinAe;t:tt related program -is at this ti.t-a..te an %i l.lae consiclerirag tl�.c.: other: <br />proar?ra las (we r the next few rears. i nc) objection"'I <br />PRIORITIES AND COMMENTS ,ANIONCx EFERREI3 A.t .. UNFUNDE D ITEMS <br />Jennifer Gimbel, State of Colorado: The expanded ecosystem modeling should not be deferred (line <br />187) as this work is directly related to compliance. <br />Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.