Technical Work Group Meetings 2009

Home Browse Search

' Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Page 21 DRAFT Minutes of March 16 -17, 2009, Meeting ii ii Budget Discussion (cont.) 10. Diamond Creek NASQAN Station. Shane asked the TWG how they wanted to deal with this issue since hearing Dr. Hart's presentation. Jay said in his dealings with other organizations, they've addressed USGS' cutbacks and the need for the USGS to focus on its primary responsibility of basic data collection which seems to be the first thing they ignore. He feels some recommendation needs to come out of AMWG to the Secretary of the Interior to focus on needs of basic data collection. Dennis asked John what he thought the cost would be for picking up the trips. Shane said it would be about seven trips per year at approximately $47K for the year. Status -> Remove from the list. The TWG needs to talk more about the data being collected before it can send anything to the AMWG. Shane will bring up the TWG's concerns to the AMWG. John passed out copies of the "Final Report of the Protocol Evaluation Panel for the GCMRC Integrated Water Quality Program" (Attachment 11). 16. Cultural Program (cont.) Shane said they had two more items to discuss. He said rather than implementing the money for the check dam program, the preservation treatments, and new tribal 106 support, he would make the AMWG aware of the issues and the TWG would do more work this summer to figure out and explain why they can't fund with the current funding and that they need more money. Status 4 Shane will report to the AMWG. 17. General Core Monitoring. Shane suggested dropping #7 and accepting #17 because it's better written. Status 4 TWG Chair has the discretion to drop #7 and /or combine 7and 17. Norm asked how he thought the best way would be present the TWG's concerns to the AMWG. Shane said he drafted the following statement: "TWG recommends that the issues of concern be resolved and either incorporated into the budget or documented in writing why such is not appropriate. TWG requests either AMWG concurrence with the TWG recommendations on the issues of concern or further direction. High priority or controversial issues have specific recommendations included." TWG Meeting Schedule. Shane said he would like to have a meeting toward the end of June and again in October. He said there are a lot of things to do which may also require some conference calls. John Hamill and Dennis Kubly said they both wouldn't be available on June 29 -30 as Shane had proposed, so it was decided to hold the meeting on June 22 -23. AIF: River Stage and Archaeological Sites (Attachment 12a). Mary passed out several documents: Attachment 12b: An Evaluation of Selected Erosion Factors on Grand Canyon Archaeological Sites Attachment 12c): Hoda's Sondossi's "Potential of Glen Canyon Releases to Inundate Cultural Sites in Grand Canyon National Park: A GIS Analysis Using Modeled Virtual Shorelines, and Canyon -Wide Topographic Data" PPT Attachment 12d: CRAHG recommendations for 2010 -11 Attachment 12e: The Cultural Resources Ad Hoc Group's Report to the Technical Work Group Regarding the Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC -RAS) Model's Applicability to Archaeological Sites Attachment 12f. Geoarchaeological investigations and an archaeological treatment plan for 151 sites in Grand Canyon, Arizona. Treatment plan implementation, including checkdam installation and maintenance at the recommended sites. Attachment 12g: Expanding the Tribal Monitoring Role for the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program Mary reminded the TWG that at the last AMWG meeting there was a motion for the TWG to review the flow levels as indicated by the currently available shorelines of the HEC -RAS model associated with each of the 158 archaeological sites that were identified for monitoring and /or mitigation of impacts and to report the information and any recommendations with regard to how the data would fit into the process of making