1 DR. TEAL: I think we should put it in the definition of 



2 canyon—characteristics of a canyon. 



3 DR. VALENTINE: That is where it is going to go, but where is this 



4 thing going to go? 



5 DR. GRASSLE: No, in the new thing you will write that we 



6 highlight this point — let's do that. 



7 (Simultaneous discussion.) 



8 DR. KRAEUTER: We have not decided where all of this stuff we are 



9 editing right now is going to go. 



10 DR. MACIOLEK: Well I thought we were leaving it in the front 



11 section. 



12 Now, remember where these--now they are questions--but where they 



13 originally came from. Brad presented them as a series of summary 



14 statements to be considered for consensus opinion, and then we are 



15 showing whether or not data supported his statements as they were at the 



16 time. 



17 We have changed them into questions. We are probably getting away 



18 from--his original intent, I think, was to summarize what we knew. 



19 (Simultaneous discussion.) 



20 DR. GRASSLE: It clearly goes where we talk about a typical 



21 canyon--it also should be said that there isn't such a thing. 



22 DR. MACIOLEK: Well, I was just thinking of Mike saying, "Let's 



23 toss the whole thing out." The group agrees to toss it out? 



24 DR. GRASSLE: Yes, but it should go in the beginning where we 



25 define what we are talking about. 



26 DR. MACIOLEK: It seems to me that those tables that deal with the 



27 geology ought to be followed by similar presentations on the biology. 



28 DR. TEAL: There is one. 



29 DR. MACIOLEK: Before we get to it we encounter on page 9 the list 



30 of data categories on which limitations exist, so I was going to suggest 



31 that some of that is either repeated in the needs section in Part II, or 



32 it can be moved to that section, rather than occurring at this place. 



33 DR. BOTHNER: Sure. It would go behind the biology, at the end of 



34 the needs. 



368 



