Difference between revisions of "2019 Knowledge Assessment"
Cellsworth (Talk | contribs) |
Cellsworth (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 185: | Line 185: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | ! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Final Knowledge Assessment Summary Tables for | + | ! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Final Knowledge Assessment Summary Tables for Resources Evaluated in 2019-20 </h2> |
|- | |- | ||
|style="color:#000;"| | |style="color:#000;"| | ||
| − | |||
*[[Media:20200107 GCDAMP 2019-20 KA Tables v2 aquatic food base.xlsx| Aquatic food base]] | *[[Media:20200107 GCDAMP 2019-20 KA Tables v2 aquatic food base.xlsx| Aquatic food base]] | ||
*[[Media:20200109 GCDAMP 2019-20 KA Tables v2 hydropower.xlsx| Hydropower]] | *[[Media:20200109 GCDAMP 2019-20 KA Tables v2 hydropower.xlsx| Hydropower]] | ||
| − | |||
*[[Media:20200106 GCDAMP 2019-20 KA Tables v2 other native fish.xlsx| Other native fish]] | *[[Media:20200106 GCDAMP 2019-20 KA Tables v2 other native fish.xlsx| Other native fish]] | ||
| + | *[[Media:20200109 GCDAMP 2019-20 KA Tables v2 recreational experience.xlsx| Recreational experience]] | ||
| + | *[[Media:20200107 GCDAMP 2019-20 KA Tables v2 water quality.xlsx| Water quality]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Other resources were not evaluated due to time and personnel constraints | ||
|- | |- | ||
Revision as of 14:54, 3 February 2020
  |
2019-20 Knowledge Assessment (KA)The GCDAMP periodically undertakes a review of the knowledge on which it bases its advice to the Secretary. This knowledge and advice crucially help inform the decisions of the Secretary concerning adaptive management of dam operations and their impacts. The review – here termed a ‘knowledge assessment’ – assesses the knowledge, and the reliability or certainty of the knowledge, for three broad objectives, to: (1) summarize what is known; (2) assess ongoing needs for monitoring to sustain crucial knowledge; and (3) identify crucial gaps and weaknesses in this knowledge that require attention. This KA is intended as a planning tool to help the TWG with developing a recommendation to the Adaptive Management Work Group for the FY21-23 Budget and Work Plan. It is a part of a broader process of information gathering and assessment used for the GCDAMP that also includes but is not limited to formal consultations (e.g., tribal government to federal government consultations), Annual Reporting meetings, TWG meetings, and TWG ad hoc group meetings. For example, the outcomes of this KA are intended to be used by the Budget Ad Hoc Group to help organize discussions of potential work activities to be considered for the FY21-23 Budget and Work Plan. Because this document describes only a western scientific knowledge assessment approach and not a traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) assessment approach, the product from this effort is only a part of a broader assessment of knowledge. A TEK assessment approach is expected to be piloted this year so it is important to again note that this western scientific knowledge assessment is only part of a broader assessment of knowledge. [1] |
| -- |
-- |
-- |
|---|
Upcoming callsAquatic Food Base: Ted Kennedy (Team Lead)
Summary [1]The present Knowledge Assessment seeks to answer three sets of questions for each of the ten selected resource topics, from a scientific perspective: Status and Trend
Drivers and Constraints
Effects of Management Actions
The last of these three sets of questions may focus on the following actions, identified in the LTEMP FEIS as components of the Selected Alternative and in other agency decision documents (Note, a lesson learned from the 2017 Knowledge Assessment was that not all management actions need to be evaluated every year.):
Through its answers to the three core questions presented above, the present Knowledge Assessment seeks to:
|
|
