WSP06393

• File Number: 8220.101.10.B
• Description: Colorado River-Water Projects-Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell-Glen Canyon Adaptive Management-TWG
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 2/17/2005
• Title: Budget Ad Hoc Group-GCMRC FY06 Budget and Work Plan Development Question and Response Table
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

TWG Budget Ad hoc Group
GCMRC FY 06 Non-Experimental Budget and Work Plan Development
QuestioWResponse Table

funding for this project. The budget table (Excel spreadsheet) provides an indication .
of how the $460,000 is a1\ocated, including - $215,000 to outside researches
identified through the RFP process (project components may include drift sampling
methods, stable isotope techniques to identify utilized food resources by fish and
methods to quantify primary productivity), logistics (approximately 4 trips/year),
and the uatic biolo ' st sal
B3, line 89, change from CM to RES. Narrative mentions "remaining funds"
for long term monitoring program. Clarify costs related to this and other
aspects. There seems to be two components to this: one for monitoring on the
river and one for develo in a monitorin ro ram. Please show costs for each.
The downstream fish project includes a CM component which is HBC in the LCR.
So this is a hybrid project of sorts. Costs for HBC in the LCR include approximately
$350,000 for outsourced labor and logistics, Mainstem monitoring, though not part
of the FY06 CMF include mainstem salmonid monitoring, This monitoring supports
the mechanical removal effort to help track system wide trends associated with
Salmonids below the Paria River, The cost for this work is approximately $100,000
with additional costs for logistics for 2 trips/year, one of which takes out at South
Cove to cover the below Diamond Creek stretch of river,
The remaining budget would be associated with testing monitoring methods like
using an undelWater camera, alternative capture gear or radio tag scanners. In the
budget there is a line item of $20,000 which is for net replacement, PIT tag
purchases ($3,OO/tag) and equipment repair associated with electro fishing gear. .
Included in this budget overaU are salaries for a fisheries biologist and technician,
The technician ensures that e ui ment is in ood r air and read for aU fish tri s.
B4, in tight budget years, such as 06, can this be reduced?

24
(W AP A)

GCMRC's
Response to
Comment
#24

2S
(WAPA)

GCMRC's
Response to
Comment
#25

26
(BAHG)

GCMRC's
Response to
Comment
#26
27

10

B4 is a core monitoring project in FY06. The budget allocated in FY06 is already
reduced to a value less than what GCMRC recommends for this project to be whole
for core monitoring, The current budget does not include snorkel survey work, and
there is no specific salary for oversight by GCMRC for this project. Reducing the
project costs more would eliminate the utility of having a monitoring project
associated with the Lees Fe Trout fishe ,
Line 94 (Temperatures and Habitat Use Monitoring)- This project, which is not
proposed for funding in FY 06 is listed as experimental, yet its title indicates
that it is monitoring. Also, our understanding is that the work done in this
project is to collect data to be used in the TCD evaluation. Why is it being
dropped, and how does it differ from what is being done under downstream
water uali monitorin?
These funds are Section 8 funds under the discretion of the Bureau of Reclamation,
We have discussed this line with the HBC ad hoc group and their recommendation is
that this be kept below the line of AMP do1\ars to reduce confusion, These funds are
associated with the TCD ro'ect.
Line 99 echanical removal - The work Ian s ecities that "the need .

Documen. Reference: FY06 Master Draft AMP Budget - BOR GCMRC OVI7105 II :05 AM