Laserfiche WebLink
10 PRRIP — ED OFFICE DRAFT 6 04106/2010 <br />171 population is faring, but that can also reflect what is happening with the larger population <br />172 (Missouri River, Niobrara River, etc.). Kowalski said he thought the meeting went very well, <br />173 provided a great opportunity for horizontal communication, and is a session that should continue <br />174 in the future. <br />175 <br />176 AMP Monitoring Protocols <br />177 Smith provided a brief summary of how changes were made to the tern and plover and water <br />178 duality monitorma protocols. Czaplewski moved to approve the tern and plover monitoring <br />179 protocol; Urie seconded. Approved. <br />180 <br />181 Purcell moved to approve the water quality monitoring protocol; Heaston seconded. <br />182 Approved. <br />183 <br />184 FY 2010 Program Budget and Contract <br />185 Kenny provided an update on the Program budget, with graphics showing Program budgets and <br />186 expenditures over time, as well as breakdowns of annual expenditures by administration, land, <br />187 water, and adaptive management. Kenny discussed the Program's current financial status report, <br />188 which included a final tally for FY 2009 expenditures. Purcell asked what qualifies for <br />189 Unliquidated Obligations (UO). Kenny said those are contract commitments. Lawson asked if <br />190 UO becomes a liability for the following year. Kenny said that is correct. Barels asked why <br />191 $2.1 million was budgeted for IMRP activities in 2009, but only $1.9 million was spent. Kenny <br />. <br />192 said it was the result of several items: No money was spent on monitoring a Short- Duration <br />193 High Flow (SDHF); reduced spending from IMRP -2 on research activities; no money was spent <br />194 on tern and plover monitoring; the wet meadows information review stalled until 2010; etc. <br />195 Monitoring was accomplished, but there was a budget savings as Program staff and Program <br />196 cooperators performed some of the work. Kraus asked about the status of the Database <br />197 Management System. Farnsworth said the contractor is completing the content management <br />198 portion, which will mean that for the next GC meeting, GC members will be able to access <br />199 meeting documents through the web site. The scientific data repository piece is still in <br />200 development. <br />201 <br />202 Sediment Augmentation Feasibility Analysis contract amendment <br />203 Kenny discussed the need for amending the Sediment Augmentation contract to allow for an <br />204 extension of the model being developed under that contract. The amount of $10,000 would be <br />205 shifted from PD -12 to PD -13. Purcell moved approval; Thabault seconded. Budget shift <br />206 approved. <br />207 <br />208 Purcell asked about the status of shifting funds in the budget for the purposes of developing the <br />209 geomorphology /in- channel vegetation monitoring atlas. Kenny said the ED Office is not yet <br />210 comfortable moving money in the budget for this project and will continue to assess the <br />211 possibility throughout the year. <br />212 <br />213 <br />This document is a draft based on one person's notes of the meeting. The official meeting minutes may be different if corrections are <br />made by the Governance Committee before approval. <br />PRRIP GC Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 11 <br />