DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper Colorado River Commission

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper Colorado River Commission SIXTY-FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE Upper Colorado River Commission SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 N G IDA H 0 -- UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN RAO 0 R I V(R UPPERC~~I.~I SSION . UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION 355 South 400 East • Salt Lake City • Utah 84111 • 801 -531 -1150 • FAX 801-531-9705 April 1, 2010 President Barack H. Obama The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear President Obama: The Sixty-First Annual Report of the Upper Colorado River Commission, as required by Article Vlll(d)(13) of the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, is enclosed. The budget of the Commission for fiscal year 2010 (July 1, 2009- June 30, 201 0) is included in th is report as Appendix B. This report has also been transmitted to the Governor of each State signatory to the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, which includes Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming and Arizona. Respectfully yours, ;{}r1'lo. ~ Don A. Ostler, P.E. Executive Director Enclosure iii (This page has been intentionally left blank.) iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Letter of Transmittal ........... ... ... .... ..... .. ....................... ..... .. .. ............... .... ..... .... .. ..... iii Preface ....... .. ............. ... .... ....... .. .... .. .... ... .... ........ .... ........ .. .... .. ....... ... ... ..... ............... 2 Commission ... .............. .. .... ... ..... ................................................................ .. .. ......... 2 Alternate Commissioners ... ............... ..... .... ........ ..... ................... ... ................... ... ... 3 Officers of the Commission ..... .............. .... ...... .... .... .......... ........................... .... ..... 3 Staff ............... .. .............................................. ... .. ............ ... .... .............. ... ... .... ........... 3 Committees .. ... ... .. ... ...... .. .. .... ...... ...... ............ .. .. .... ....... ... ...... ... ................ .............. .4 Advisors to Commissioners .. ...... .. ...... .. .... .. ................. ...... .................. ... .... ... ........ .4 Meetings of the Commission ...................................... .......... .. .. .... .. ........................ 5 Activities of the Commission ... .................................. .. .. ........... .. ..... .. ... ................... 5 A. Engineering-Hydrology ..... ...... .. ..... ...... .. .. .. .. .... .... .............. ................ .. ... .. .... 7 1. Stream Flow and Hydrology Summary ...................... ................ .. .. ......... 7 2. Summary of Reservoir Levels and Contents .......... .. .. .... ........................ 8 3. Flows of Colorado River .............................. .... .. .... .. .......... .............. .. ... 20 4. Colorado River Salinity Program ... .... .................... ........ ....................... 27 B. Legal .. .... ..... .... ...... ..... ........................... ..... ... .............................. .. ..... ... .. ..... 28 1. Water Newsletter .. ........ .. .......................... ...................... ....................... 28 2. Court Cases .................................. .................................................... ..... 28 3. Legislation ....................... ................... .. .. .. .. .. ... .... .... .. ...... .. ..................... 29 Colorado River Storage Project and Participating Projects .................. ............. 30 A. Authorized Storage Units ........................................................ ...... ..... .. 30 1. Glen Canyon Storage Unit ........................ .... ........................................ 30 a. Adaptive Management.. ... ................................ .. .... ........................... 32 b. Glen Canyon Dam Operations During 2008 and 2009 ............ ....... 33 c. Environmental Impact Statement for the Adoption of a Long-term Experimental Plan for the Future Operation of Glen Canyon Dam.33 d. Colorado River Lower Basin Shortage Guidelines and Coordinated Management Strategies for the Operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead .................................... ........ ............ 34 e. Lake Powell Pipeline Project.. .......................................................... 34 f. Recreational Use .............................................................................. 35 2. Flaming Gorge Unit.. ...... .......................................................... ..... ......... 36 a. Recreational Use ............ ........................ ................ .. .. ......... ............. 36 b. Regional Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. 37 3. Navajo Storage Unit. ................... ... .. .... .................................... ..... .. .. .. ... 37 a. Recreational Use .............................................................................. 37 4. Wayne N. Aspinall Storage Unit.. .......................................................... 40 a. Recreational Use ...... .................................. .. ................... ................. 42 B. Storage Units Fishery Information ............................................................. 42 C. Transmission Division ............. ....... .. ................ ... ... .. ................... ................ 43 D. Authorized Participating Projects ............................................................... 44 1. Colorado ................................................................................................. 4 7 a. Bostwick Park Project.. ..................................................................... 47 b. Dallas Creek Project.. .............................................................. ......... 47 c. Dolores Project .......................... ....................................................... 48 d. Florida Project ................................................................................... 49 e. Fruitland Mesa Project.. .................................................................... 49 f. Fryingpan-Arkansas Project ............................................................. 49 v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page g. Paonia Project. ......................................... ...... .... ...... ..... .... ... ..... ....... .49 h. San Miguel Project .............. ..... ........................ ... .... .......................... 51 i. Silt Project ..... ... ........... ... .... ........ ...... ..... ... .. .... ..... .............................. 51 j. Smith Fork ..................................................................................... .... 51 k. West Divide Project ..... ................ ...................... .. ................ ............. 52 2. New Mexico ..................... ............... ..................... ...... .... ........... .. .................52 a. Hammond Project ... ...... ................................................ ... ... ....... ....... 52 b. Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project.. .................. ............... .... ........ 52 c. Navajo Indian Irrigation Project... ................................. ... ..... .. .... .. .... 53 3. Utah .. ... .. .. ... ....................................................... .. .......... ...... ..... .. ............ 53 a. Central Utah Project .... ...... ..... .... .. ... ... .......... .. ..... .... .. ... ...... .. ............ 53 (i) Bonneville Unit. ..... ................... .. ... ....... ................. .. .............. .. 55 (ii) Jensen Unit .... ... ....... ......... .. ......... ... ..... .... .. .... ................ .........58 (iii) Uintah and Upalco Units .... ......................... ....... .... ...... ... ... .... 58 (iv) Ute Indian Unit... .... ...... ...... ... ... ........... ..... .... ... .................. .. ... .59 (v) Vernal Unit .. ..... .. .................................... ... ... ....... ... ..... ............ 59 b. Emery County Project ........................ ...... ... ..... ............... ................. 59 4. Wyoming ....................... ........... ...... .............. .................. ....... ... .... .. ........ 60 a. Eden Project. .......... .. ................ ............................................ ... .... .. ...60 b. La Barge Project ............ ........................... ........................ .. ........ ...... 60 c. Seedskadee Project ..... ... ..... ........... .......... ............ .. ....................... ..60 5. Colorado and New Mexico ..................................... .. .. .................. .. ....... 62 a. Animas-La Plata Project ........................ .. .............. ............... .. .. ... .... 62 b. Pine River Extension Project ..... .. ................. ... ... .... .. .... ................... 64 c. San Juan-Chama Project.. .... ... .... .................... .............. ........... ... .... 64 6. Wyoming and Utah ............. .. ........................... .. ...... ...... .................... .... 65 a. Lyman Project ...... .... .. .... .... ..... .................. .................... .. ..................65 7. Colorado and Wyoming ...... ....................... .. ... ... ................... .... ..... .. ... .65 a. Savery-Pot Hook Project ...... ..... ... .. ........ .... ... ..................... .. .. ..... .... 65 E. Recreational Use at Reservoirs .... ...... ........... ..... .... ...... ...... ........ .. ... .. ... .....66 F. Status of Other Bureau of Reclamation Projects in the Upper Colorado River Basin ...... .... ..... ... .. ..... .... .............. .... ........ ... ...... ... .. ..... .......... .. .. .. .. .....67 1 . Colorado
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • TO: Colorado Water Conservation Board Members FROM: Alexander
    1313 Sherman Street Jared Polis, Governor Denver, CO 80203 Dan Gibbs, DNR Executive Director P (303) 866-3441 F (303) 866-4474 Rebecca Mitchell, CWCB Director TO: Colorado Water Conservation Board Members FROM: Alexander Funk, Agricultural Water Resources Specialist Interstate, Federal, and Water Information Section DATE: May 1, 2019 AGENDA ITEM: 9. Paonia Dam Outlet Works Modification MOA Reallocation Request Background: In 2011, the Upper Colorado River Division States (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico), the United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the United States Department of Energy Western Area Power Administration, and the Colorado River Energy Distributors Association (CREDA) signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) authorizing the use of the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund (Basin Fund) to further the purposes of the 1956 Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) Act (Public Law 485). The MOA created a mechanism for the Upper Division States to access excess hydropower revenues for operations, maintenance and replacement costs (OM&R) for congressionally authorized CRSP Participating Projects (herein “Participating Projects”) and to reduce the impact on the CRSP firm power rate by eliminating the collection of power revenues beyond that amount needed to repay the costs of the existing projects through Fiscal Year (FY) 2025. The Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) represents Colorado in the implementation of the MOA and is responsible for ongoing project evaluation and prioritization. At the March 2019 Board Meeting, the Board approved the CRSP MOA Project Budget Adjustment Guidance (attached). This document outlines the process for CWCB staff to apply when considering project budget adjustment requests moving forward. When a Participating Project has an approved project budget that requires additional CRSP MOA funds, Reclamation must obtain Colorado’s approval.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado River District's Annual Water Seminar Set for Friday, September
    Board of Directors Meeting Summary Page 1 July 2017 Every July quarterly Board meeting, the Colorado River District honors Directors who have rotated off the Board. At left, General Manager Eric Kuhn and current Board President Tom Alvey of Delta County present citations to for- mer Board President Jon Stavney of Eagle County. At right, President Alvey honors John Justman of Mesa County for his service. The annual honors are accorded during an after-meeting picnic on the grounds of the Colorado River District offices along the Colorado River in Glenwood Springs. Colorado River District’s Annual Water Seminar set for Friday, September 15th The Colorado River District’s popular one-day Annual contingency planning to reduce Lower Basin water use. Water Seminar is scheduled for Friday, Sept. 15th from Bill Hasencamp, Manager of Colorado River Resources 9:00 am to 3:30 pm at Two Rivers Convention Center, 159 for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Main Street, Grand Junction, Colorado. will bring the California and Lower Basin perspective to The theme is: “Points of No Return.” The cost, which the knot of issues, such as the Salton Sea, that bedevil includes buffet lunch, is $30 if pre-registered by Friday, how the Lower Basin will address declining water levels at Sept. 8th; $40 at the door. Cost for students is $10. The Lake Mead. cost is kept low in order to encourage as much public Yet another “Point of No Return” to be examined is the participation as possible for the District’s signature water concept of filling Lake Mead first at the expense of Lake education event.
    [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]
  • 107 Part 208—Flood Control Regulations
    Corps of Engineers, Dept. of the Army, DoD § 208.10 PART 208—FLOOD CONTROL sponsible for the efficient operation REGULATIONS and maintenance of all of the struc- tures and facilities during flood periods Sec. and for continuous inspection and 208.10 Local flood protection works; mainte- maintenance of the project works dur- nance and operation of structures and fa- ing periods of low water, all without cilities. cost to the United States. 208.11 Regulations for use of storage allo- (3) A reserve supply of materials cated for flood control or navigation and/ or project operation at reservoirs subject needed during a flood emergency shall to prescription of rules and regulations be kept on hand at all times. by the Secretary of the Army in the in- (4) No encroachment or trespass terest of flood control and navigation. which will adversely affect the effi- 208.19 Marshall Ford Dam and Reservoir cient operation or maintenance of the (Mansfield Dam and Lake Travis), Colo- project works shall be permitted upon rado River, Tex. 208.22 Twin Buttes Dam and Reservoir, Mid- the rights-of-way for the protective fa- dle and South Concho Rivers, Tex. cilities. 208.25 Pensacola Dam and Reservoir, Grand (5) No improvement shall be passed (Neosho) River, Okla. over, under, or through the walls, lev- 208.26 Altus Dam and Reservoir, North Fork ees, improved channels or floodways, Red River, Okla. nor shall any excavation or construc- 208.27 Fort Cobb Dam and Reservoir, Pond (Cobb) Creek, Oklahoma. tion be permitted within the limits of 208.28 Foss Dam and Reservoir, Washita the project right-of-way, nor shall any River, Oklahoma.
    [Show full text]
  • UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION 355 South Fourth East Street Salt Lake City 11, Utah October 30, 1962 MEMORANDUM TO
    UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION 355 South Fourth East Street Salt Lake City 11, Utah October 30, 1962 MEMORANDUM TO: Upper Colorado River Commissioners and Advisers FROM: Ival V. Goslin, Executive Director SUBJECT: Construction and Advance Planning Program of the Bureau of Reclamation for the Colorado River Storage Project and participating projects, et al 1 for fiscal year 1963. Note: this tabulation represents the distribution of all funds available including newly appropriated money 1 carry-overs, savings and slippage, etc. According to an announcement from the office of the Secretary of the Interior the details of the Bureau of Reclamation • s program of construction and advance planning for Fiscal Year 1963 include the items on the following pages of particular interest to the Upper Colorado River Basin. The Bureau of Reclamation• s Advance Planning program in the Upper Basin States includes two major projects--the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project in Colorado estimated to cost $170 million and the San Juan-Chama Project in New Mexico estimated to cost $8 6 million. The three "new start" construction reclamation projects for which Congress appropriated funds for fiscall963 are: 1. Glen Elder Unit, Missouri River Basin Project, Kansas 2. Oake Unit, James Section, Missouri River Basin Project, South Dakota 3. Morrow Point facilities I Curecanti Unit, CRSP, Colorado STORAGE UNITS: Glen Canyon Storage Unit $4514021191 --to continue placement of concrete in Glen Canyon Dam and to continue construction of the powerplant and switch­ yard; to continue progress payments on the turbines 1 generators I governors I and other materials and equipment furnished .by the government.
    [Show full text]
  • Cogjm.Crsp Prog Rpt April 1960.Pdf (1.729Mb)
    ""C C'"':) ""C C;") :::io :::io c::, ::ic:-, --1 c::, :::io :::ic, r-- ""C ~ c::, c::, c:.c- ""C ~ c::, ::ic:-, :::ic, CD :::io c:::: c::, :::io :::io c::, -~ ::- ~ ::ic:-, r-- :::ic, ~ C'"':) ~ :::io c::, --1 C;") --1 ~ C;") c::, Construction of the Colorado River Storage Under the a~thor~zing le~islation four great TH f CQ L Q R A O Q RI Vf R Project is well under way. Men and their giant earth water storage umts will be built, as well as many moving machines are working under full steam to "participating pr?jects" in Colorado, New Mexico, SJ Q RA G f pR Q J f CJ tame the mighty Colorado River and its tributary Utah, and Wyommg. streams and to reshape the destiny of a vast basin Water and power from the project will provide in the arid west. opportunity for industrial expansion, agricultural Great strides have been made in building the development, growth of cities, and will create new four-state project since President Eisenhower in jobs for thousands of Americans. The project will 1956 pressed the golden telegraph key in Washing­ create new markets, stimulate trade, broaden the ton, D. C., that triggered the start of this huge tax base, and bolster national economy. reclamation development. The Colorado River Storage Project is a multi­ Appropriations by the Congress have enabled purpose development. Storage units will regulate construction to proceed - and at costs less than stream flows, create hydroelectric power, and make engineers' estimates. much-needed water available for agricultural, in­ Construction of Glen Canyon, Flaming Gorge and dustrial and municipal use.
    [Show full text]
  • THE GUNNISON RIVER BASIN a HANDBOOK for INHABITANTS from the Gunnison Basin Roundtable 2013-14
    THE GUNNISON RIVER BASIN A HANDBOOK FOR INHABITANTS from the Gunnison Basin Roundtable 2013-14 hen someone says ‘water problems,’ do you tend to say, ‘Oh, that’s too complicated; I’ll leave that to the experts’? Members of the Gunnison Basin WRoundtable - citizens like you - say you can no longer afford that excuse. Colorado is launching into a multi-generational water planning process; this is a challenge with many technical aspects, but the heart of it is a ‘problem in democracy’: given the primacy of water to all life, will we help shape our own future? Those of us who love our Gunnison River Basin - the river that runs through us all - need to give this our attention. Please read on.... Photo by Luke Reschke 1 -- George Sibley, Handbook Editor People are going to continue to move to Colorado - demographers project between 3 and 5 million new people by 2050, a 60 to 100 percent increase over today’s population. They will all need water, in a state whose water resources are already stressed. So the governor this year has asked for a State Water Plan. Virtually all of the new people will move into existing urban and suburban Projected Growth areas and adjacent new developments - by River Basins and four-fifths of them are expected to <DPSDYampa-White %DVLQ Basin move to the “Front Range” metropolis Southwest Basin now stretching almost unbroken from 6RXWKZHVW %DVLQ South Platte Basin Fort Collins through the Denver region 6RXWK 3ODWWH %DVLQ Rio Grande Basin to Pueblo, along the base of the moun- 5LR *UDQGH %DVLQ tains.
    [Show 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......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pioneers, Prospectors and Trout a Historic Context for La Plata County, Colorado
    Pioneers, Prospectors and Trout A Historic Context For La Plata County, Colorado By Jill Seyfarth And Ruth Lambert, Ph.D. January, 2010 Pioneers, Prospectors and Trout A Historic Context For La Plata County, Colorado Prepared for the La Plata County Planning Department State Historical Fund Project Number 2008-01-012 Deliverable No. 7 Prepared by: Jill Seyfarth Cultural Resource Planning PO Box 295 Durango, Colorado 81302 (970) 247-5893 And Ruth Lambert, PhD. San Juan Mountains Association PO Box 2261 Durango, Colorado 81302 January, 2010 This context document is sponsored by La Plata County and is partially funded by a grant from the Colorado State Historical Fund (Project Number 2008-01-012). The opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of the staff of the Colorado State Historical Fund. Cover photographs: Top-Pine River Stage Station. Photo Source: La Plata County Historical Society-Animas Museum Photo Archives. Left side-Gold King Mill in La Plata Canyon taken in about1936. Photo Source Plate 21, in U.S.Geological Survey Professional paper 219. 1949 Right side-Local Fred Klatt’s big catch. Photo Source La Plata County Historical Society- Animas Museum Photo Archives. Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 New Frontiers................................................................................................................ 3 Initial Exploration ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • File Names and Descriptions
    Appendix D-3 Gunnison Basin Mapping Results Gunnison Basin Environmental and Recreational Nonconsumptive Focus Mapping Background: In 2005, Colorado's legislature established the Water for the 21st Century Act. This act established an Interbasin Compact Process that provides a permanent forum for broad-based water discussions in the state. It creates two new structures: 1) the Interbasin Compact Committee (IBCC), and 2) the Basin Roundtables. There are nine Basin Roundtables based on Colorado’s eight major river basins and the Denver metro area (Figure 1-1). As part of the IBCC, the Basin Roundtables are required to complete basinwide needs assessments. The needs assessments are to include: An assessment of consumptive water needs (municipal, industrial, and agricultural); An assessment of non- consumptive water needs (environmental and recreational); An assessment of available Figure 1-1 Colorado's Nine Basin Roundtables water supplies (surface and groundwater) and an analysis of any unappropriated waters; and Proposed projects or methods to meet any identified water needs and achieve water supply sustainability over time. The focus area mapping presented here within is part of the Gunnison Basin Roundtable’s assessment of nonconsumptive water needs. The development of the focus mapping for environmental and recreational features in the Gunnison Basin was heavily dependent on Basin Roundtable NCNA subcommittee member participation. The following are members of the Gunnison Basin NCNA subcommittee: Tyler Martineau (chair) Marc Catlin
    [Show full text]
  • North Fork of the Gunnison River Watershed Plan Update
    NORTH FORK OF THE GUNNISON RIVER WATERSHED PLAN UPDATE NORTH FORK RIVER IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION (NFRIA) June 30, 2010 North Fork of the Gunnison downstream of Somerset. Photograph by Mike Maxwell WWW.NFRIA.ORG North Fork River Watershed Plan 2010 Update ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This watershed plan updates the North Fork Watershed Restoration Action Strategy completed by the North Fork River Improvement Association (NFRIA) in November, 2000. It was supported by a Severance Tax Grant used by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) to augment the Colorado Healthy Rivers Fund. Chris Sturm acted as project coordinator for CWCB. David Stiller, Executive Director, was the project coordinator for NFRIA. Sarah Sauter, as a consultant to NFRIA, was this document’s primary author. Others contributed materially to the success and completion of this update. Grady Harper and Sean Barna, OSM/VISTAs working for NFRIA, coordinated and planned public meetings where NFRIA received important public input. Our thanks go also to the following individuals who rendered valuable advice to NFRIA and commented on draft versions of this plan: Barbara Galloway, ERO Resources Corporation Bonie Pate, Water Quality Control Division, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Chris Sturm, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Colorado Department of Natural Resources Dan Kowalski, Division of Wildlife, Colorado Department of Natural Resources David Kanzer, Colorado River Water Conservation District Jeff Crane, Colorado Watershed Assembly John G. Elliott, U.S. Geological Survey Peter Kearl, United Companies Rebecca Anthony, Water Quality Control Division, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Additionally, we wish to thank the NFRIA directors, members and supporters who provided the organization and North Fork community with the necessary energy and encouragement to engage in this planning process.
    [Show full text]