My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06048
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06048
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2009 10:17:14 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:24:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.140.20.A
Description
Colorado River - Colo River Basin - Orgs/Entities - CRBSF - California - Colo River Board of Calif
State
CA
Date
10/14/1997
Author
Gerald Zimmerman
Title
Executive Directors Monthly Report to the Colorado River Board of California
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
<br />01)2221 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />WESTERN WATER PLANNING <br /> <br />Glen C~on Environmental Studies <br /> <br />The first meeting of the Glen Canyon Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG) was <br />attended by Mr. Worthley on September 10-11, 1997. The most significant activity at the meeting <br />was that dealing with operating procedures for the AMWG under the Federal Advisory Committee <br />Act. Mr. Worthley has been nominated as an alternate in my absent and will also represent the <br />Board on the Technical Advisory Committee (f AC). The AMWG plans to meet semi-annually with <br />its next meeting scheduled for January 15-16, 1998. The T AC will be meeting on a monthly basis <br />for the next three months. <br /> <br />The AMWG will have an active role in reviewing Reclamation's program for Glen Canyon <br />and the activities of the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC). The AMWG <br />has directed the TAC to review and provide recommendations on such things as; the GCMRC <br />budget, report to congress on research and monitoring proposals, and proposed flow modifications. <br /> <br />Last month, I reported that Reclamation had submitted comments to the U.S. Fish and <br />Wildlife Service regarding Reasonable and Prudent Alternative 13a of the Biological Opinion t-?\ <br />concerning Reclamation's discretion in river operations. Included in the Board folder is a copy of & <br />a letter from Reclamation by which it is soliciting comments and additional information from <br />interested parties. Comments are due by November 10, 1997. The staff will work with Board <br />members and the agencies in preparing a coordinated response. <br /> <br />Also, at the AMWG meeting, the GCMRC initiated discussions concerning a 2-3 day test <br />flow release from Glen Canyon Dam in early October of this year to move beach sediment above <br />the expected high water line expected in the spring of 1998 as a result of the anticipated above <br />nonnal precipitation from EI Nino this winter. The AMWG concurred with the test if the flows were <br />within powerplant capacity, all administrative requirements were met, consultation with the U.S. <br />Fish and Wildlife Service was completed, and the "science" to monitor the effects of the flow could <br />be in-place. The test flow had been scheduled for October 6-7, 1997, however, possible endangered <br />species conflicts required a postponement for at least one week. The test flow has now been <br />scheduled for the period of October 22-23. Included in the Board folder is a notice from the <br />GCMRC announcing the delay of the test flow. <br /> <br />Included in the Board folder for your information are copies of the testimony presented <br />before the Subcommittees on National Parks and Public Lands and Water and Power of the <br />Resources Committee United States House of Representatives by Ms. Rita Pearson, Director of the <br />Arizona Department of Water Resources, and Mr. James Lochhead, Executive Director of the <br />Colorado Department of Natural Resources. They, along with a majority of those testifying, were <br />in opposition to the draining of Lake Powell. <br /> <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.