GOALS AND 

OBJECTIVES 

OF

ANNUAL 

REPORT PEER 

REVIEW

(PICK 1 OF 2)

• REVIEW EACH PROJECT IN THE 2020 GCMRC ANNUAL REPORT

• INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS

RELATED TO MONITORING OF RESOURCES AFFECTED BY GLEN

CANYON DAM OPERATIONS

• FEEDBACK ON WHETHER THE QUESTIONS STUDIED PROVIDE

GCDAMP WITH ANSWERS TO CARRY OUT ITS MISSION

• FEEDBACK ON WHETHER THE PROGRAMS ADVANCE

UNDERSTANDING OF THE GRAND CANYON ECOSYSTEM AND

CONTRIBUTE TO ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT OF DAM OPERATIONS
PEER REVIEW PROCESS

• REVIEWER SELECTION:

• SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS, RELEVANT EXPERTISE, EXPERIENCE WITH SIMILAR REVIEWS, 

AND INDEPENDENCE FROM GCDAMP

• PANEL COMPOSITION: HYDROGEOMORPHOLOGY, SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, FISHERIES, AQUATIC 

MACROINVERTEBRATES, STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT, LARGE RIVER MANAGEMENT, 

SOCIOECONOMICS OF RIVER USE

• MATERIALS PROVIDED:

• 2020 GCMRC ANNUAL REPORT, INCLUDING APPENDICES

• WEBEX RECORDING OF THE ANNUAL REPORT MEETING

• INDIVIDUAL REVIEWS: EACH REVIEWER SELECTED PROJECTS TO REVIEW, BASED ON 

THEIR EXPERTISE AND EXPERIENCE, INDEPENDENTLY OF OTHER REVIEWERS

• SUMMARY REPORT: KEY POINTS FROM EACH INDIVIDUAL REVIEW FOR EACH 

GCDAMP PROJECT
REVIEWERS

• MICHAEL E. COLVIN, PHD - MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY –

EXPERTISE WITH BIG RIVER FISHERIES, SALMONIDS, AND ARID

ECOSYSTEMS

• STEFANIE A. KROLL, PHD - DREXEL UNIVERSITY – EXPERTISE

WITH FOOD WEBS, AQUATIC MACROINVERTEBRATES, AND

COMMUNITY SCIENCE

• LYNNE Y. LEWIS, PHD - BATES COLLEGE – EXPERTISE IN

ECONOMICS, HYDROPOWER, AND COMMUNITY SCIENCE

• BEN LIVNEH, PHD - UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO – BOULDER –

EXPERTISE IN SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, HYDROGEOMORPHOLOGY, 

AND ARID ECOSYSTEMS

• JOHN C. STELLA, PHD - STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK –

EXPERTISE IN RIPARIAN VEGETATION ECOLOGY
PROJECT A:

STREAMFLOW, 

WATER QUALITY, 

AND SEDIMENT

TRANSPORT AND

BUDGETING IN THE

COLORADO RIVER

ECOSYSTEM

• IT IS DIFFICULT TO BALANCE THE GOAL OF SUPPLYING SUFFICIENT

SEDIMENT TO MAINTAIN SANDY BANKS AND SAND BARS FOR

RECREATIONAL AND TRIBAL ACTIVITIES, WHILE COMPETING WITH

THE PROBLEMS OF TURBIDITY FOR BIOTA.

• THE NEGATIVE FEEDBACK BETWEEN WATER DISCHARGE AND

SAND SUPPLY PROVIDE CLEAR SIDEBOARDS FOR MANAGEMENT

FOR DAM RELEASES AND HIGHLIGHT THE NARROWNESS OF THE

DECISION SPACE FOR DAM MANAGEMENT. 

• CONTINUOUS MONITORING OF SAND WOULD BE MORE

INFORMATIVE, ESPECIALLY RELATED TO CURRENT AND FUTURE

SAND RESOURCES AND CRITICAL CONNECTIONS BETWEEN SAND

CONCENTRATIONS AND HIGH FLOWS. 

• LONG-TERM PRECIPITATION GAGE DATA COULD IMPROVE

REGRESSIONS AND UNDERSTANDING OF VARIABILITY, 

RELATIONSHIPS, AND UNCERTAINTY.
PROJECT B:

SANDBAR AND

SEDIMENT

STORAGE

MONITORING

AND RESEARCH

• PROJECT B NEEDS TO BE MORE CLEARLY TIED TO LTEMP 

OBJECTIVES.

• THE RESULT OF HIGH FLOW EXPERIMENTS, IN PARTICULAR, 

SHOULD BE MONITORED IN TERMS OF THE OBJECTIVES

OF PROJECTS E, F, AND OTHERS TO ENSURE THAT SUPPORTING

ONE OBJECTIVE DOES NOT END UP DETRACTING FROM ANOTHER

OBJECTIVE.

• SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE WORK AND ANALYSIS ARE PROVIDED, 

PARTICULARLY AROUND RECREATIONAL EXPERIENCE, 

CAMPING, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND REMOTE SENSING.
PROJECT C:

RIPARIAN

VEGETATION

MONITORING

AND RESEARCH

• THE MONITORING DATA AND METHODS THAT CONNECT VEGETATION

WITH FLOW, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES, AND MANAGEMENT ARE

USEFUL.

• IT WAS NOT CLEAR WHAT THE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES WERE OR HOW THEY

INFORM MANAGEMENT ACTIONS?

• HOW DO THE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN PLANTS AND THE FLUVIAL SYSTEM

EITHER SUPPORT OR UNDERMINE THE MULTIPLE LTEMP GOALS? WHAT

ARE THE MOST LIKELY RESTORATION ACTIONS AND HOW DO THEY

SUPPORT THE LTEMP GOALS?

• HOW WERE LONG-TERM CHANGES EVALUATED AND WITH WHAT

METRIC(S)?

• HOW WELL DID THE MODEL PERFORM?

• ADDITIONAL DATA SHOULD BE REPORTED/COLLECTED TO HELP INFORM

MANAGEMENT OF CAMPSITES AND OTHER RECREATIONAL AREAS.

• A SUMMARY RELATED TO CAMPING AREA, LANDSCAPE BEAUTY, AND

SHADE SHOULD BE INCLUDED AND TIED TO PROJECT J.
PROJECT D: 

GEOMORPHIC

EFFECTS OF DAM

OPERATIONS AND

VEGETATION

MANAGEMENT FOR

ARCHAEOLOGICAL

SITES

• AN EVALUATION OF HOW FLOW AND NON-FLOW ACTIONS

AFFECT CULTURAL RESOURCES, PRESERVATION OF RESOURCES, 

VEGETATION, AND SEDIMENT DYNAMICS SHOULD BE COMPLETED. 

• CLARIFICATIONS ON METRICS, HOW THEY ARE ESTIMATED, AND

HOW THOSE METRICS FIT WITH THE LTEMP RESOURCE GOALS

AND OVERALL MONITORING OBJECTIVES WOULD BE HELPFUL. 

• CLARIFICATION IS NEEDED ON HOW WEATHER DATA IS USED TO

ACHIEVE MONITORING OBJECTIVES.

• METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING AND DATA COLLECTION IS

EXTREMELY VALUABLE AND SHOULD BE CONTINUED.

• SPACEBORNE REMOTE SENSING COULD COMPLEMENT EXISTING

AERIAL IMAGERY.
PROJECT E:

NUTRIENTS AND

TEMPERATURE AS

ECOSYSTEM DRIVERS

• METRICS MONITORED MAY NOT DIRECTLY RELATE TO LTEMP 

RESOURCE GOALS BUT ARE A NECESSARY PRECONDITION TO

ACHIEVING LTEMP RESOURCE GOALS RELATED TO BIOTA

(HUMPBACK CHUB, RAINBOW TROUT, OTHER NATIVE FISH).

• THE APPROACH TO MONITORING AND STUDYING P DYNAMICS IS

WELL DESIGNED.

• THE STUDIES BEFORE AND AFTER FIRE ARE SOUND, AND THE

SHIFT TO STUDYING GROSS PRIMARY PRODUCTION WILL HELP

UNDERSTAND THE DYNAMICS OF NUTRIENTS IN THE SYSTEM, 

ESPECIALLY FOR THE FOOD WEB.

• CLEARER JUSTIFICATION OF THE WATER TEMPERATURES CHOSEN

SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN THE CONTEXT OF EXISTING POOL

TEMPERATURES AND TEMPERATURES RELEVANT FOR OTHER

PROJECT COMPONENTS.
PROJECT F: 

AQUATIC

INVERTEBRATE

ECOLOGY

• GOOD INTERACTION WITH OTHER PROJECTS TO SUPPORT

INFERENCE AND PROVIDE AUXILIARY INFORMATION TO EXPLAIN

AMONG YEAR DIFFERENCES IN HIGHER TROPHIC LEVELS, LIKE

NATIVE FISH AND TROUT.

• WEEKEND “BREAKS” ARE AN EXCELLENT IDEA FOR EGG SURVIVAL

AND OTHER POSSIBLE MECHANISMS FOR MACROINVERTEBRATE

SUCCESS AND INCREASING DIVERSITY. 

• ONCE THIS EXPERIMENT IS COMPLETE, WILL THERE BE ANOTHER

STUDY ON HOW WEEKEND FLOWS CAN BE BEST DESIGNED AS

ECOLOGICAL FLOWS FOR MACROINVERTEBRATES?

• THE COMMUNITY SCIENCE INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT WAS A

GREAT COMPONENT, BUT SOME SUGGESTIONS PROVIDED FOR

EXPANDING OR STRENGTHENING THIS COMPONENT.
PROJECT G: 

HUMPBACK CHUB

POPULATION

DYNAMICS

THROUGHOUT

THE CRE

• THE PROJECT PROVIDES ADVANCED APPROACHES TO ESTIMATE

POPULATION DYNAMICS AND PROJECT RESULTS HAVE THE

POTENTIAL TO INFORM DECISIONS. 

• HOW IS THE POPULATION TREND BEING EVALUATED?

• WILL TRANSLOCATION DECISIONS BE INFORMED BY MONITORING

RESULTS?
PROJECT H: 

SALMONID

RESEARCH AND

MONITORING

• THIS IS VALUABLE RESEARCH. HOW WILL THE LONG

TERM DATASETS BE USED TO EVALUATE EXPERIMENTAL FLOWS?

• THE ECONOMIC VALUE DATA IS FROM 2016. HAS MORE RECENT

DATA BEEN COLLECTED AND HOW DOES IT COMPARE? 

• THERE IS LITTLE ECONOMIC INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOUT THE

RECREATIONAL FISHERY OR HOW OPERATIONS IMPACT THE

ECONOMIC VALUE. RESULTS OR AN UPDATE RELATED TO THE

INCENTIVE PROGRAM ARE VALUABLE AND SHOULD BE INCLUDED.
PROJECT I: 

WARM-WATER

NATIVE AND

NONNATIVE

FISH RESEARCH

AND

MONITORING

• HOW ARE TRENDS CALCULATED FROM MONITORING DATA? THIS

IS LIKELY IMPORTANT FOR INFORMING ADAPTIVE OPERATIONS OF

GLEN CANYON DAM AND WHETHER OPERATIONS CAN ACHIEVE

MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES.

• WHY IS ASIAN TAPEWORM MONITORING IMPORTANT AND

HOW DOES THIS SUPPORT GCDAMP AND LTEMP?

• HOW DOES THIS SAMPLING INFORM A) SAMPLING EFFORTS

NEEDED AT A LARGER SCALE TO DETECT WARM-WATER INVASIVE

FISH AND B) IF WARM-WATER INVASIVES ARE EXPANDING IN

RANGE?

• HOW IS THE EDNA PERSISTENCE FROM UPSTREAM FACTORED

INTO THE EDNA ANALYSIS COMPLETED?
PROJECT J: 

SOCIOECONOMIC

RESEARCH IN

THE COLORADO

RIVER

ECOSYSTEM

• IMPORTANT COMPONENT THAT ALLOWS FOR BROAD

ASSESSMENT OF THE CONNECTIONS OF ONGOING ACTIVITIES

WITH NEEDS AND ECONOMICS DOWNSTREAM.

• A NUMBER OF REVIEWERS COMMENTED ON DIFFICULTY LINKING

THIS PROJECT WITH THE LTEMP OBJECTIVES AND MANAGEMENT

ACTIONS.

• HOW WILL SURVEY INFORMATION FROM THE TRIBES BE USED TO

INFORM DECISION MAKING AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT?

• THE DELIVERABLES BASED ON USGS SCIENCE FOR USE BY TRIBAL

COMMUNITIES IS VALUABLE. ARE THERE OTHER WAYS TO

ENGAGE TRIBAL COLLABORATORS BESIDES WORKSHOPS?

• THE MODEL SELECTED FOR WILLINGNESS TO PAY DATA IS NOT

NEUTRAL AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS IS IMPORTANT.

• THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE ON-GOING SEVERE DROUGHT OR

CLIMATE CHANGE. 
PROJECT K: 

GEOSPATIAL

SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY

• IT WAS UNCLEAR WHAT THE GCDAMP AND LTEMP NEEDS ARE

RELATIVE TO GEOSPATIAL SCIENCE AND DATA TECHNOLOGY. OR

HOW THESE SYSTEMS SUPPORT DECISION-MAKING.

• THERE HAS BEEN AN IMPRESSIVE SET OF TOOLS DEVELOPED. 

• THE MIGRATION OF DATA INTO DATABASES AND

CLOUD COMPUTING RESOURCES IS AN IMPORTANT INNOVATION

WITH PAYOFFS OVER THE LONG TERM. 

• ARCGIS MAY NOT BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOL DUE TO THE

SIZE OF DATA SETS. OTHER MORE POWERFUL AND EFFICIENT

TOOLS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR THESE LARGER DATASETS

AND ANALYSES.
PROJECT L: 

OVERFLIGHT

REMOTE SENSING

IN SUPPORT OF

GCDAMP AND

LTEMP

• THE EXPECTED OUTCOMES OF THIS EFFORT ARE UNCLEAR. HOW

WILL THE RESULTS SUPPORT THE GCDAMP OR INTEGRATE WITH

THE LTEMP? A TABLE THAT SHOWS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN

EXPECTED PRODUCTS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS IN PROJECTS

WOULD BE HELPFUL.

• THE DETAILS OF THE OVERFLIGHT ARE NOT CLEARLY

ARTICULATED, ALTHOUGH THERE IS VALUE IN ADDITIONAL

REMOTE SENSING.

• EVALUATING OPPORTUNITIES TO INTEGRATE REMOTE SENSING

IMAGERY WITH PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SPACEBORNE IMAGERY

COULD PROVIDE COST-EFFECTIVE BENEFITS.
PROJECT N: 

HYDROPOWER

MONITORING

AND RESEARCH

• CONTINUE TO COORDINATE WITH PARTNERS TO IDENTIFY

OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE HYDROPOWER AND ENERGY

RESOURCES, WITH EXAMPLES PROVIDED. 

• GOALS AND OBJECTIVES COULD BE CLEARER. 

• PROJECT N NEEDS MORE DETAIL AND IS LACKING INFORMATION

ABOUT THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF HYDROPOWER. 

• SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING THE PRESENTATION AND

QUESTIONS RELATIVE TO CLARIFYING METHODS AND

ASSUMPTIONS WERE INCLUDED.
OVERALL COMMENTS

• SUGGESTIONS ACROSS MULTIPLE PROJECTS TO

IMPROVE DATA PRESENTATION

• SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE ANALYSIS OR

DIFFERENT WAYS TO ANALYZE DATA IN A FEW

PROJECTS

• SEVERAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO HOW

TECHNICAL RESULTS EITHER COULD OR DO

ALREADY INFORM MANAGEMENT

GENERAL THEMES

• CLEARLY CONNECT EACH PROJECT TO LTEMP 

OBJECTIVES AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS

• COMBINE (OR AT LEAST MORE CLEARLY

CONNECT) EFFORTS BETWEEN PROGRAMS

• DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND HOW PROJECT

RESULTS IMPACTED SOCIOECONOMICS

TECHNICAL THEMES