DOCSLIB.ORG

Sixty-Seventh Annual Report of the Upper Colorado River Commission Has Been Compiled Pursuant to the Above Directives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sixty-Seventh Annual Report of the Upper Colorado River Commission Has Been Compiled Pursuant to the Above Directives SIXTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE Upper Colorado River Commission SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 33 II III iii (This page has been intentionally left blank.) IV TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Letter of Transmittal ....................................................................................................................iii Preface ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Commission ................................................................................................................................ 2 Alternate Commissioners ........................................................................................................... 3 Officers of the Commission ........................................................................................................ 3 Staff ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Committees ................................................................................................................................ 4 General Advisors to Commissioners .......................................................................................... 4 Meetings of the Commission ...................................................................................................... 5 Activities of the Commission....................................................................................................... 5 General Activities ...................................................................................................................... 5 SpecificActivities ...................................................................................................................... 5 Oversight and Administration of Implementation of the Interim Guidelines For Lower Basin Shortages and Coordinated Operations for Lake Powell And Lake Mead: ................................................................................................................. 5 Negotiations with Mexico Regarding Shortage Management and Augmentation of the Supply ................................................................................................................................. 6 Implementation of the Colorado River Basin Fund MOA .................................................... 6 Lees Ferry Stream Gage on the Colorado River ................................................................ 7 Upper Division States Drought Contingency Planning ........................................................ 7 Colorado River Basin Supply and Demand Study .............................................................. 7 System Water Conservation Pilot Program ......................................................................... 7 A. ENGINEERING-HYDROLOGY ........................................................................................... 8 1. Stream Flow and Hydrology Summary .............................................................................. 8 2. Summary of Reservoir Levels and Contents ..................................................................... 9 3 . Flows of Colorado River .................................................................................................. 21 4. Colorado River Salinity Program ..................................................................................... 23 B. Legal .................................................................................................................................. 29 1. Water Newsletter ......................................................................................................... 29 2. Legislation .................................................................................................................... 29 Colorado River Storage Project and Participating Projects ...................................................... 31 A. AUTHORIZED STORAGE UNITS .................................................................................... 31 1. Glen Canyon Unit ............................................................................................................ 31 a. Glen Canyon Dam Operations During 2015 ................................................................. 33 b. Adaptive Management .................................................................................................. 33 c. Colorado River Interim Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages and the Coordinated Operations for Lake Powell and Lake Mead ................................................................. 34 d. Experimental Releases from Glen Canyon Dam .......................................................... 34 (i). High-Flow Experiments ............................................................................................... 35 (ii). Steady-Flow Experiments .......................................................................................... 35 (iii). Environmental Compliance for Experimental Releases ............................................ 35 e. Environmental Assessment (EA) for an Experimental Protocol for High-Flow Releases from Glen Canyon Dam (Protocol) ............................................................... 35 f . Environmental Assessment for Non-Native Fish Control in the Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam ......................................................................................................... 36 g. Environmental Impact Statement for a Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan for Glen Canyon Dam ............................................................................................ 37 h. Lake Powell Pipeline Project ......................................................................................... 38 i. Drought Contingency Planning ..................................................................................... 38 j. Recreational Use ........................................................................................................... 38 (i). Invasive Mussel Control .......................................................................................... 39 2. Flaming Gorge Unit ....................................................................................................... 41 V a. Flaming Gorge Dam Operations During 2015 ............................................................... 41 b. Recreational Use ........................................................................................................... 42 (i). Invasive Mussel Control ........................................................................................ 42 3. Navajo Unit ........................................................................................................................ 42 a. Navajo Dam Operations During 2015 .......................................................................... 44 b. Recreational Use .......................................................................................................... 44 (i). Invasive Mussel Control .......................................................................................... 44 4. Wayne N. Aspinall Unit ...................................................................................................... 44 a. Aspinall Unit Operations During 2015 .......................................................................... 46 b. Recreational Use .......................................................................................................... 46 (i). Invasive Mussel Control .......................................................................................... 47 B. STORAGE UNITS FISHERY INFORMATION .................................................................. 47 C. TRANSMISSION DIVISION .............................................................................................. 48 D. AUTHORIZED PARTICIPATING PROJECTS ................................................................... 49 1. Colorado ........................................................................................................................... 52 a. Bostwick Park Project ................................................................................................... 52 b. Dallas Creek Project ..................................................................................................... 52 c. Dolores Project ............................................................................................................. 53 d. Florida Project ............................................................................................................... 54 e. Fruitland Mesa Project .................................................................................................. 55 f. Paonia Project .............................................................................................................. 55 g. San Juan Miguel Project ............................................................................................... 55 h. Silt Project ..................................................................................................................... 55 i. Smith Fork Project ........................................................................................................ 56 j. West Divide Project....................................................................................................... 56 2. New Mexico .....................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Blue Mesa Reservoir
    BLUE MESA RESERVOIR General Information Located in Western Colorado near the town of Gunnison, Blue Mesa Reservoir is Colorado's largest body of water. Blue Mesa Dam was built in 1966 and was the first and largest of the three Aspinall Unit dams intended to store and control spring flows on the Gunnison River. Blue Mesa Reservoir is 20 miles long and is the largest Lake Trout and Kokanee salmon fishery in the United States. It lies within the Curecanti National Recreation Area. Curecanti National Recreation Area 102 Elk Creek Gunnison, CO 81230 (970) 641-2337 www.nps.gov/cure Activities Boating, fishing, boat-in, developed, and primitive camping, hiking, horseback riding, hunting, and wildlife viewing. Facilities Visitor center at Elk Creek, campgrounds (8), marinas (2), boat ramps, day use / picnic areas, hiking trails, and Pappy’s Restaurant. Elk Creek Complex (970) 641-0707 The Elk Creek complex is the major facility of Blue Mesa Reservoir. It features a visitor center, the main marina, Pappy's Restaurant, campground and RV dump station. Campground consists of four loops with 160 campsites, water, electric hookups (Loop D), flush and vault restrooms, and showers also available. The marina offers in and out boat launching, a store, fish tackle, gasoline, boat rentals, kayaks, canoes, SUP's and boat slips. The marina and the restaurant are only open in the summer, while the visitor center and campground are open year- round. www.nps.gov/cure/planyourvisit/camp_elk_creek.htm www.thebluemesa.com Lake Fork Marina (970) 641-3048 The marina offers in and out boat launching, a store and tackle shop, gasoline, boat rentals, boat slips and guided fishing.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Dolores Project Drought Contingency Plan
    DOLORES PROJECT DOLORES DROUGHT WATER CONSERVANCY CONTINGENCY DISTRICT PLAN A plan to reduce the impacts of drought for users of the Dolores Project by implementing mitigation and response actions to decreases theses impacts 0 Table of Contents TABLES AND FIGURES .............................................................................................................. 3 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................ 4 ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................... 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 6 DISTRICT BOARD RESOLUTION TO ADOPT PLAN ............................................................. 9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... 10 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Purpose of the Drought Contingency Plan ..................................................................... 11 1.2 Planning Area ................................................................................................................. 11 1.3 History of Dolores Project.............................................................................................. 18 1.4 Dolores Project Drought Background ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • UCRC Annual Report for Water Year 2019
    SEVENTY-SECOND ANNUAL REPORT OF THE UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH SEPTEMBER 30, 2020 2 UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION 355 South 400 East • Salt Lake City, UT 84111 • 801-531-1150 • www.ucrcommission.com June 1, 2021 President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear President Biden: The Seventy-Second Annual Report of the Upper Colorado River Commission, as required by Article VIII(d)(13) of the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948 (“Compact”), is enclosed. The report also has been transmitted to the Governors of each state signatory to the Compact, which include Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming and Arizona. The budget of the Commission for Fiscal Year 2021 (July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021) is included in this report as Appendix B. Respectfully yours, Amy I. Haas Executive Director and Secretary Enclosure 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE .................................................................................................. 8 COMMISSIONERS .................................................................................... 9 ALTERNATE COMMISSIONERS ........................................................... 10 OFFICERS OF THE COMMISSION ....................................................... 10 COMMISSION STAFF ............................................................................. 10 COMMITTEES ......................................................................................... 11 LEGAL COMMITTEE ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion Paper Is/Has Been Under Review for the Journal Biogeosciences (BG)
    Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Biogeosciences Discuss., 12, 6081–6114, 2015 www.biogeosciences-discuss.net/12/6081/2015/ doi:10.5194/bgd-12-6081-2015 BGD © Author(s) 2015. CC Attribution 3.0 License. 12, 6081–6114, 2015 This discussion paper is/has been under review for the journal Biogeosciences (BG). Dam tailwaters Please refer to the corresponding final paper in BG if available. compound the effects of reservoirs Dam tailwaters compound the effects of A. J. Ulseth and reservoirs on the longitudinal transport of R. O. Hall Jr. organic carbon in an arid river Title Page 1,2,* 2 A. J. Ulseth and R. O. Hall Jr. Abstract Introduction 1Program in Ecology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, USA Conclusions References 2Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, USA Tables Figures *now at: École Polytechniqe Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland Received: 3 April 2015 – Accepted: 7 April 2015 – Published: 24 April 2015 J I Correspondence to: A. J. Ulseth ([email protected]) J I Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. Back Close Full Screen / Esc Printer-friendly Version Interactive Discussion 6081 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Abstract BGD Reservoirs on rivers can disrupt organic carbon (OC) transport and transformation, but less is known how downstream river reaches directly below dams contribute to OC pro- 12, 6081–6114, 2015 cessing than reservoirs alone. We compared how reservoirs and their associated tail- 5 waters affected OC quantity and quality by calculating particulate (P) OC and dissolved Dam tailwaters (D) OC fluxes, and measuring composition and bioavailability of DOC.
    [Show full text]
  • Coldwater Lake and Reservoir Research Projects
    Coldwater Lake and Reservoir Research Projects Adam G. Hansen, Ph.D. Aquatic Research Scientist Annual Report Colorado Parks & Wildlife Aquatic Research Section 317 West Prospect Road Fort Collins, Colorado May 2018 STATE OF COLORADO John W. Hickenlooper, Governor COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Bob Randall, Executive Director COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE Bob Broscheid, Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION John V. Howard, Vice-Chair Marvin McDaniel Michelle Zimmerman, Secretary Robert “Dean” Wingfield Robert W. Bray James Vigil Marie Haskett Dale E. Pizel Carrie Hauser Jim Spehar Alexander Zipp Ex Officio/Non-Voting Members: Don Brown, Bob Randall and Bob Broscheid AQUATIC RESEARCH STAFF George J. Schisler, Aquatic Research Leader Kelly Carlson, Aquatic Research Program Assistant Peter Cadmus, Aquatic Research Scientist/Toxicologist, Water Pollution Studies Eric R. Fetherman, Aquatic Research Scientist, Salmonid Disease Studies Ryan Fitzpatrick, Aquatic Research Scientist, Eastern Plains Native Fishes Eric E. Richer, Aquatic Research Scientist/Hydrologist, Stream Habitat Restoration Matthew C. Kondratieff, Aquatic Research Scientist, Stream Habitat Restoration Dan Kowalski, Aquatic Research Scientist, Stream & River Ecology Adam G. Hansen, Aquatic Research Scientist, Coldwater Lakes and Reservoirs Kevin B. Rogers, Aquatic Research Scientist, Colorado Cutthroat Studies Kevin G. Thompson, Aquatic Research Scientist, 3-Species and Boreal Toad Studies Andrew J. Treble, Aquatic Research Scientist, Aquatic Data Management and Analysis Brad Neuschwanger, Hatchery Manager, Fish Research Hatchery Tracy Davis, Hatchery Technician, Fish Research Hatchery David Karr, Hatchery Technician, Fish Research Hatchery Jim Guthrie, Federal Aid Coordinator Alexandria Austermann, Librarian 2 Table of Contents I. Limnology, Zooplankton and Mysis Project A. Physical limnology, zooplankton and Mysis collections from Blue Mesa Reservoir, Lake Granby, and Taylor Park Reservoir (2016-2017)….…………..............................
    [Show full text]
  • A Partici Municipal
    COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD 102 Columbine Building 1845 Sherman Street Denver Colorado 80203 March 1975 DOLORES PROJECT The Dolores project is located in Dolores and Montezuma counties in southwestern Colorado Most of the project area lies outside of the present Dolores River basin Geologists believe that the Dolores River once flowed across the Montezuma Valley towards the southwest but was subsequently blocked and turned to the northwest by slowly rising mountains The project was authorized by the Congress in 1968 as a partici pating project of the Colorado River Storage Project The Dolores Water Conservancy District was organized in 1961 as the sponsoring and con tractual agency for the project The district includes portions of Dolores and Montezuma counties The Ute Mountain Ute Indian tribe is also a project sponsor Plan of Development The Dolores project would develop and manage water from the Dolores River for irrigation municipal and industrial use recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement It would also provide flood control improve summer and fall river flows downstream and aid in the economic redevelop ment of the area Supplemental irrigation supplies would be delivered to the Montezuma Valley area located in the central portion of the proj ect area Full irrigation water supplies would be provided to the Dove Creek area in the northwest and the Towaoc area in the south Municipal and industrial water would be furnished to Cortez Dove Creek and the Ute Mountain Ute Indian tribe at Towaoc Primary regulation of the Dolores
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Mead and Lake Powell
    Colorado River Water Supply Report Agenda Number 12. Total System Contents: 27.507 MAF 68% 8/26/13 Reservoir Capacities (MAF) Reservoir Current Change Maximum 76% Lake Mead 12.25 + 0.02 25.90 Lake Powell 10.84 - 0.55 24.30 Flaming Gorge Reservoir 2.84 - 0.05 3.75 Navajo Reservoir 0.86 - 0.05 1.70 Blue Mesa Reservoir 0.37 - 0.03 0.83 Fontenelle Reservoir 0.23 - 0.01 0.34 Morrow Point Reservoir 0.11 0.00 0.12 44% Lake Powell 3,700’ 97% 45%, 10.839 MAF 3,590’ 51% Lake Mead 1,220’ 47%, 12.248 MAF 1,106’ 1,075’ 3,680 1,130 Lake Powell Elevations (2013 August 24-Month Study) Lake Mead Elevations (2013 August 24-Month Study) 3,660 1,120 3,640 1,110 3,620 1,100 3,600 1,090 3,580 1,080 Historical 3,560 1,070 Historical Maximum Probable Forecast Maximum Probable Forecast Most Probable Forecast Most Probable Forecast 3,540 1,060 Minimum Probable Forecast Minimum Probable Forecast Shortage 3,520 1,050 The August 2013 24-Month study projected that with an annual release of 8.23 MAF (as was consistent in water year Based on a 2013), the January 1st elevation of Lake Powell would be potential shortage 3,574 ft, which is less than 3,575 ft and places Lake Powell in 2016, impacts to in the mid-elevation release tier. Since Lake Mead is not CAP projected below 1,025 ft, according to the 2007 Interim Guidelines, demand in 2016 under this operational tier annual releases from Lake would include a 320 Powell to Lake Mead will be reduced to 7.48 MAF (for water KAF reduction to year 2014).
    [Show full text]
  • Green River Basin Water Planning Process
    FINAL REPORT Green River Basin Water Planning Process February, 2001 Prepared for: Wyoming Water Development Commission Basin Planning Program States West Water Resources Corporation Acknowledgements The States West team would like to acknowledge the assistance of the many individuals, groups, and agencies that contributed to the compilation of this document. At the risk of possible omission, these include: The Green River Basin Advisory Group (facilitated by Mr. Joe Lord) The Wyoming Water Development Office River Basin Planning Staff The Wyoming Water Resources Data System The Wyoming State Engineer’s Office The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality The Wyoming State Geological Survey The University of Wyoming Spatial Data and Visualization Center The Wyoming Game and Fish Department Dr. Larry Pochop, University of Wyoming The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (Bridger-Teton, Wasatch-Cache, Ashley, and Medicine Bow National Forests) The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management The U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey Wyoming Department of State Parks and Cultural Resources Cover: Millich Ditch, East Fork Smiths Fork Prepared in association with: Boyle Engineering Corporation Purcell Consulting, P.C. Water Right Services, L.L.C. Watts and Associates, Inc. CHAPTER CONTENTS (Individual Chapters have page number listings) ACRONYM LIST I. INTRODUCTION A. Introduction B. Description C. Water-Related History of the Basin D. Wyoming Water Law E. Interstate Compacts II. BASIN WATER USE AND WATER QUALITY PROFILE A. Overview B. Agricultural Water Use C.
    [Show full text]
  • River Flow Advisory Bureau of ·Reclamation Upper Colorado Region Salt Lake City, Utah Vol 17 No
    - River Flow Advisory Bureau of ·Reclamation Upper Colorado Region Salt Lake City, Utah Vol 17 No. 5 July 1987 The snowmelt runoff has been greater than previously forecasted. Inflow into Lake Powell for April-July period will be 98 percent of average, rather than 88 percent as forecasted in June. Colorado River at Westwater Canyon The flow of the Colorado is 4.700 cubic feet per second (cfs). It will continue to recede slowly. Cataract Canyon including the Green River The flow of the Colorado River through the canyon is 9,000 cfs, and receding slowly. lake Powell Lake Powell is at elevation 3,698 feet. The peak elevation of 3,698.47 feet, 1.53 feet below full. was reached on June 25 this year. Colorado River through Grand Canyon The July rP.lease fran Glen Canyon is expected to average 18,000 cfs. Releases are expected to rise to 21,000 cfs in August, and drop to 18,000 cfs in September. Flows wi 11 fluctuate from 3 ,000 cfs at night to 31,000 cfs during the day. Upper Green River - Fontenelle Reservoir Fontenelle Reservoir is at elevation 6,442. Present releases of 1.200 cfs will decreasP. as inflow into the reservoir decreases. The flow will be bypassed through the dam, and the reservoir's water level will remain low while work on the diaphragm wall continues. Green River Flows below Flaming Gorge Dam Flaming Gorge is at elevation 6,034 feet. 6 feet below full. It is not expected to rise beyond this point this year.
    [Show full text]
  • Cogjm.Larson Letter Crsp 02-08-1951
    , UNITED STATES DEPAkTYEhT O~'THE INfERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION REGION 4 Post Office Box 360 Salt Lake City 10, Utah February 8, 1951 To the Editor: The enclosed press release, ma..!7&, and physical data on the potential Colorado River Storage Project and Participating Projects may prove valuable as source material in future reporting of the Upper Colorado River Basin development. Although the project report has been approved by the Secretary of the Interior there will not be enough copies for general distri- bution until and if the report is printed as a Senate Document. The accompanying fact sheets should give you sufficient data, however, until reports are available upon request. As you know the report is now being reviewed by federal agencies and the governors of the basin states. Under the Flood Control Act of 1944, they have approximately until May 1, 1951, to submit their comments to the Secretary of the Interior for subsequent submission with the report to the President and the Congress. E. O. Larson Regional Director DEPARTM:!::HTOF THE INTl::RIOR ~r:tEAU OF !t&CLA";:ATIO~T News release for Wednesday, Jan. 31, 1951 - 10 AI', KST UPPER COLORltDO RIVER DEVELOPMENT REPO:lT ft.PPROVEDBY SECRETARY CHft.PMAN A plan for development of the water and power resources of the Upper Colorado River Basin, which drains portions of five Rocky Mountain States, has been approved by Secretary of the Interior Oscar L. Chapman and sent to the Colorado River Basin States (Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and California) for comment. The plan is in the fo~ of a Bureau of Reclamation Planning Report entitled "The Colorado River Storage Project and Participating Projects, Upper Colorado River Basin." The Report, which also goes to other Federal Agencies for review and comment, envisions the eventual construction by the Bureau of Reclamation of 10 dams and reservoirs with storage capacity of 48.5 million acre-feet of water and 1,622,000 kilowatts of hydroelectric cape.city and nume rous partici- pating irrigation projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Water Science Center
    U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Utah Water Science Center Upper Colorado River Streamflow and Reservoir Contents Provisional Data for: WATER YEAR 2019 All data contained in this report is provisional and subject to revision. Available online at usgs.gov/centers/ut-water PROVISIONAL DATA U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY SUBJECT TO REVISION UTAH WATER SCIENCE CENTER STREAMFLOW AND RESERVOIR CONTENTS IN UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN DAYS IN contact 435-259-4430 or [email protected] MONTH October 2018 31 MONTHLY DISCHARGE (a) MAXIMUM DAILY MINIMUM DAILY (A)MEDIAN PERCENT TOTAL 3 3 3 3 3 STREAM ft /s MEAN ft /s 30 YEAR ft /s ACRE ft /s DATE ft /s DATE (1981-2010) THIS MONTH MEDIAN DAYS FEET COLORADO RIVER NR CISCO, UTAH 4,355 3,202 74% 99,433 196,878 5,090 8-Oct 1,990 1-Oct ADJUSTED (B) 2,638 61% 81,764 162,178 GREEN RIVER AT GREEN RIVER , UT 2,945 2,743 93% 85,031 168,362 3,430 6-Oct 2,030 1-Oct ADJUSTED (C) 1,889 64% 58,564 116,162 SAN JUAN RIVER NEAR BLUFF, UT 1,232 649 53% 20,164 39,924 1,010 7-Oct 429 6-Oct ADJUSTED (D) 391 32% 12,112 24,024 DOLORES RIVER NR CISCO, UTAH 237 123 52% 3,565 7,058 493 8-Oct 22 1-Oct ADJUSTED (E) 141 60% 4,373 8,673 (A) MEDIAN OF MEAN DISCHARGES FOR THE MONTH FOR 30-YR PERIOD 1981-2010 (B) ADJUSTED FOR CHANGE IN STORAGE IN BLUE MESA RESERVOIR.
    [Show full text]
  • Changes to the Seedskadee Ecosystem
    CHANGES TO THE SEEDSKADEE ECOSYSTEM This study obtained information on contem- warmer than in earlier times and large prey (horse, porary: 1) physical features, 2) land use and man- camel, mammoth, bison) became extinct or smaller agement, 3) hydrology, 4) vegetation communities, and native people shifted to hunt smaller animals and 5) fish and wildlife populations of Seedskadee (Thompson and Pastor 1995). They also probably NWR. These data chronicle the history of land and made greater use of vegetable foods that apparently ecosystem changes at and near the refuge from the occurred during this period; summers may have Presettlement period and provide perspective on been spent in mountains and winters were spent when, how, and why alterations have occurred to eco- in foothills and valleys. Early Archaic subsistence logical processes in the NWR and surrounding lands. centered around pronghorn, rabbits, and other small Data on chronological changes in physical features animals including fish and birds obtained in the and land use/management of the region are most Green River Valley. available and complete (e.g., from NWR annual nar- By about 2,000 BP, human populations in ratives, USDA data and records, sequential aerial southwest Wyoming increased and apparently many photographs, hydrology data from the Green River, small villages were established; evidence of early agri- etc.) while data documenting changes in fish and culture is found along some waterways. The Shoshone wildlife populations generally are limited. people spread into the Seedskadee region around 700 BP. They were a nomadic tribe that traveled widely and created multiple trails between the Green SETTLEMENT AND EARLY LAND USE River floodplain and nearby mountains (USFWS CHANGES 2002).
    [Show full text]