• BillDunn
  • Registered Member
  • Email
  • Posts 9
  • Reputation 0
  • Member Since
  • Last Active
    This user has not added any photos yet.
All Posts Topics Started Likes
Typo from Bill-- SWFWMD not SJRWMD
Sorry for the typo in my message posting the report form peer panel.
0 0
Revised Draft Report from Bill, Jerry and Barbara
Here is revised report. It includes:
1) changes made during the net-meeting (additions to Sam's table 1)
2) revised conclusions by Dr. Ray Walton,
3) new summary paragraph in discussion section written by Bill and Barbara.

Sam & Ray---please review and either: approve, or make revisions as track changes on file. If you approve then send a one-way email confirming that to Jerry Salsano. If  you need to rewrite, then post the tracked change file on the web board, and then send a one-way email message to Jerry with that message.

Please, do this ASAP, or at the very latest by noon on Wednesday the 30th.
Jerry will make sure that the final document is sent to Doug.

Thanks again for your hard work, under tight deadlines.
0 0
Panel's draft final report
Fellow Panelists (Sam & Ray), Doug and other staff, and others

Attached file is draft of final report, assembled and distilled by me with a great deal of assistance from my two partners, Barbara Vergara and Jerry Salsano. Please review before our final net-meeting tomorrow afternoon. Format of report is simple and straight forward. For Sam and Ray please give particular focus to the summary section. For that I used the text submitted by Sam, my own summary, and a synopsis of Ray's findings that I wrote. So Ray, please edit/revise as needed.

My primary goal for tomorrow afternoon's net-meeting is for we the panel to make final changes to this draft. To that end, if you panelists have comments or feedback to share before the net-meeting then by all means do that.

My two partners, Barbara and Jerry, will participate in tomorrow's net-meeting to facilitate making the final revisions, and making sure that the report gets delivered/posted to Doug Leeper by close of business on Wednesday the 30th, our target due date.  As you are aware, I have my hip surgery on Tuesday, so I will be little to no help after Monday evening.

A request--Ray and Sam please forward your respective firm's logo, so we can add those to the title page.

Finally, it has been a pleasure working with this team. I look forward or discussion tomorrow afternoon.

0 0
Report tables received from Ray & Sam
Thank you Ray and Sam. I am in progress on getting draft of a consolidated report.
Hope you and yours have a wonderful Thanksgiving Holiday.
I am shooting to get a draft of the report document posted by a week from today, next Sunday.
0 0
Questions for MFL Team on PHABSIM

Questions regarding PHABSIM analyses


  1. District’s MFL team have used PHABSIM for other MFLs. The use of PHABSIM as a best available aquatic habitat assessment tool has also been accepted by previous peer reviews. Was the PHABSIM application for the Pithlachascotee River done in standardized approach, comparable to how it has been applied to other river systems in the District? Were there any significant variations from the District’s standard PHABSIM data collection, or analysis?
  2. Have previous MFL peer reviews assessed the suite of embedded PHASIM tools (i.e., hydraulic model, TSLIB, etc.) ? If so, have the models been deemed appropriate for use with rivers in the District? Were any cautions or limitations highlighted by other peer reviewers?
  3. Was the PHABSIM data collection and analysis done by District staff?
  4. Overall results of the PHABSIM analyses are summarized in Table 5-1 (page 92) of the report. It is not clear how the summary in Table 5-1 are derived from the plots in Appendix 5B. Please provide a step wise description.
  5. Table 5-1 indicated and the supporting text in report say that the PHABSIM analyses were done separately for flow regime Blocks 1 & 2. I did not see comparative plots for Blocks I and 2 by taxon in Appendix 5. How can I verify the summary values for Blocks 1 & 2 in Table 5-1?
  6. For the critical values in Table 5-1---can the threshold be exceeded by a single month’s excursion. Please explain.
  7. I understand that maximum allowable percent flow reductions presented in Table 5-1 were calculated using mean monthly value for river flows for baseline versus incremental percent flow reductions. Mean monthly flow values were in turn used to estimate mean monthly habitat values, and percent change from baseline. The explanation for this analysis in Appendix 4C was unclear. Please provide a step-wise description as to how the final maximum allowable flow reductions values in Table 5-1 were calculated.
0 0
Agenda for November 1st
Here is my suggested Agenda Topics for Pithlachacotee River MFL Peer Review on November 1st.

1. Introduction--host Doug Leeper/SWFWMD, and Peer Review Panel Chair Bill Dunn
2. Revise/ammend agenda as needed-Peer Review Panel
3. Review Responses by District Staff to questions posed by Peer Review Panel
4. Open discussion of additional technical issues and concerns-Peer Review Panel
5. Review schedule for remaining peer review activities-Peer Review Panel
6. Develop agenda for next meeting, Monday October 14th-Peer Review Panel
7. Public Comment
0 0
Peer review document template
attached is my suggested document template for the three reviewers to use to record: 1) general and specific comments and recommended actions, and 2) respond to the District's overall assessment criteria. It is tabular, consisting of two tables with brief instructions at front. Ray, Sam, and Doug--please let me know if you have suggested changes.
0 0
count post selected

Add a Website Forum to your website.

Southwest Florida Water Management District home page

Home Page  •  Who We Are & What We Do  •  Search & Site Map  •  Contact Us  •  Privacy & Disclaimer  •  © Copyright  •  pdf Download PDF Reader