Technical Work Group Meetings 2009

Home Browse Search

' Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Page 7 Minutes of July 16 -17, 2008, Meeting ' FY09 Budget and Workplan. Kurt said the group dealt with issues on the LSSF, nearshore ecology, and fall steady flows. The issue of the tribal liaison position has been dealt with and is no longer an issue for the TWG. Even though the TWG supports having an AMP Effectiveness Workshop in FY09 that issue ' has been turned over to the Department for further direction /action. Kurt asked if the sediment transport study was still an issue and if further discussion with GCMRC is needed. Don said he thought the TWG talked about the questions the managers had and what the modelers are doing. Because the high flows are expensive and modeling is cheaper, he wants to make sure the questions are consistent with what the modelers are doing. John Hamill said he would arrange a meeting with the modelers and other people to make sure they're doing the work that people want. Kurt said that issue for discussion dealt with conservation measures. He asked if his concerns were adequately addressed with what Dennis said yesterday. Norm said they were but that they need to be included in a workplan. He said there are other potential management actions and AMP activities being ' done. John Hamill will set up a meeting with GCMRC modeling staff and interested TWG ' members to ensure the correct things are being modeled. Line 73 Mainstem Coldwater Fish Control — New Initiative. Kurt said the next several issues would be ' more difficult to deal with particularly the concern with removing rainbow trout from the LCR. Mark Steffen said he wrote a minority report (Attachment 7) because he's very unhappy about how the program is killing non - native fish especially trout because it is a desirable sport fish. He said he wrote the report because he wants to be very clear in his opposition. He would like to have an individual vote on that line item. Amy asked if the Hualapai are still taking the trout remains and if the issue has been brought up in the POAHG. Matthew said he would check with Loretta to find out if the Hualapai are still interested in the fish. Mike said the issue has been brought up in the POAHG meetings. ' Line 15 TWG Chair Reimbursement. Kurt said the issue of the TWG using a facilitator has been brought up in lieu of the TWG chair not seeking reimbursement. The issue has a lot of ramifications for the TW and suggested they look at a way to accommodate both a TWG Chair and a facilitator, determine what ' the interaction would be, who would report actions to the AMWG, and finally look at the cost of having a facilitator. He wondered if the decision would be easier handled by an ad hoc group and asked if there was interest in forming one. ' Concerns: • We're in a transition period. It's a logical time to flesh out ideas as to how this committee operates. It should be done before the next AMWG meeting so a recommendation can be made. This doesn't need to wait a whole year. (Hamill) • If we had a facilitator, it might be more attractive for someone to serve as a TWG Chair. (Barger) ' • Let's not let this drag on. I propose having a vote for establishing an ad hoc group or a facilitator. (Heuslein) I'm concerned about the overall overhead for the facilitator. (Ostler) • A facilitator would probably charge around $130 1hour so the budget would be impacted. (Kubly) ' Kurt asked who would like to be part of an hoc group to discuss this further. The following members volunteered: Jan Balsom, Kerry Christensen, Bill Davis, and Bill Persons. ' The charge for the TWG /Facilitator AHG will be: To evaluate the benefits and costs of either maintaining the TWG chair or bringing in a facilitator, and if the facilitator is brought in, what are the costs, and how do you change the Operating Procedures? The ad hoc group is weighing the benefits, staying status quo or their analysis.