WSP04751 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . in the next iteration of the MSCP Conservation Plan. The Council was very supportive of the process, and formally moved to continue full participation in the development of the LCR MSCP. Additionally, the Tribe supported continuing the policy-level exchange of information, and continued coordination between technical representatives of the LCR MSCP participants, the technical contractors, and the Tribe. Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program A meeting of the Glen Canyon Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG) was held in Phoenix, Arizona on July 17-18,2002. Both, Mr. Harris and I attended the meetings. At the meeting the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) briefed the AMWG regarding the proposed reorganization of the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC) within the USGS Western Region. The reorganization, according to the USGS, will have the effect of bringing more of the USGS's resources to bear on the adaptive management of the Glen Canyon Dam and the Grand Canyon's natural resources. Reclamation provided an overview of the proposed Glen Canyon Dam experimental flow releases. Generally, the concept involves careful monitoring ofthe sediments resources and inputs into the Glen and Grand Canyon reaches of the Colorado River during the Summer and Fall months. If there is sufficient sediment supply in the mainstream, flows from Glen Canyon Dam would be reduced to approximately 8,000 cubic-feet-per-second (cfs) to conserve the sediment in the chaJmel. In January 2003, the flows would be significantly ramped up, to approximately 35,000 cfs or 40,000 cfs, and held at that rate for three days. This would, in theory, mobilize the collected sediment and deposit it in the side channel eddies and up on the beaches in the Grand Canyon. Implementation of the proposed experimental flows would alter the monthly release volumes from Glen Canyon Darn, but should not affect the overall annual release volume from Lakc Powell into Lake Mead. The AMWG reviewed and discussed the proposed Fiscal Year 2004 budget for the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center and the overall Adaptive Management Program. AMWG members requested additional information and clarification from representatives ofthe USGS, Reclamation, as well as the GCMRC associated with specific budget line items. The requested budget for the GCMRC and AMP was identified as $11,014,000 for FY-2004. The AMWG made a motion to recommend to the Secretary of the Interior that the budget be forwarded through the Department for inclusion in the President's budget. Reclamation discussed the proposed construction and utilization of a selective withdrawal structure on Glen Canyon Dam to warm the water released from Glen Canyon Dam. There was significant concern that warming the releases will negatively impact the existing trout population at Lees Ferry, cause non- native predator species to move up from Lake Mead and prey upon the small population of endangered humpback chub near the confluence of the Colorado River mainstream and the Little Colorado River. Additionally, there is concern that parasites, such as Asian tapeworm and the parasitic organism which causes "whirling disease" in trout could become more prevalent below Glen Canyon Dam. Reclamation and members of the Technical Work Group and AMWG will continue to evaluate the need for the selective withdrawal structure. Representatives of the Lower Division States urged Reclamation to more fully consult with representatives of the Nevada Division of Wildlife and the California Department of Fish and Game. 10