DOCSLIB.ORG

Water Quality Standards for Salinity, Colorado River System, October 2005 Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Water Quality Standards for Salinity, Colorado River System, October 2005 Review Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. 2005 REVIEW WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SALINITY COLORADO RIVER SYSTEM October 2005 Prepared by Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL FORUM MEMBERS ARIZONA Thomas G. Carr, Assistant Director, Statewide Conservation and Strategic Planning Department of Water Resources Karen L. Smith, Deputy Director Department of Water Resources Larry R. Dozier, Deputy General Manager Central Arizona Water Conservation District CALIFORNIA Gerald R. Zimmerman, Executive Director Colorado River Board of California Celeste Cantú, Executive Director State Water Resources Control Board Dennis B. Underwood, Chief Executive Officer/General Manager The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California COLORADO Rod Kuharich, Director Colorado Water Conservation Board Department of Natural Resources Mark T. Pifher, Deputy Director of Utilities for Water Resources City of Aurora Kent H. Holsinger, Attorney at Law NEVADA Phillip S. Lehr, Environmental Programs Manager Colorado River Commission of Nevada Allen Biaggi, Director Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Kay Brothers, Deputy General Manager Engineering/Operations Southern Nevada Water Authority NEW MEXICO John R. D’Antonio, Jr., P.E., State Engineer New Mexico State Engineer Office UTAH D. Larry Anderson, Director Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources Walt Baker, Director Division of Water Quality Department of Environmental Quality Randy Crozier, General Manager Duchesne County Water Conservancy District WYOMING Patrick T. Tyrrell, State Engineer State Engineer's Office John F. Wagner, Administrator Division of Water Quality Department of Environmental Quality Dan S. Budd, Interstate Stream Commissioner FORUM Jack A. Barnett, Executive Director Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum i ii TRANSMITTAL LETTERS The Federal Water Pollution Control Act requires that at least once every three years the Colorado River Basin states review water quality standards relating to the salinity of the waters of the Colorado River. The states collectively initiated this review under the auspices of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum, prepared a proposed Review; and after holding public meetings, the Forum prepared this final Review. Upon the Forum's adoption of the final Review, it is transmitted by letter to the governors of the individual states for their independent action. The following governors in each of the seven Colorado River Basin states shall receive this Review: Honorable Janet Napolitano Honorable Bill Richardson Governor of Arizona Governor of New Mexico State Capitol State Capitol Phoenix, AZ 85007 Santa Fe, NM 87503 Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger Honorable Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. Governor of California Governor of Utah State Capitol State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Honorable Bill F. Owens Honorable Dave Freudenthal Governor of Colorado Governor of Wyoming State Capitol State Capitol Denver, CO 80203 Cheyenne, WY 82002 Honorable Kenny Guinn Governor of Nevada State Capitol Carson City, NV 89701 iii SUMMARY This Review, the 2005 Review, Water Quality Standards for Salinity, Colorado River System (Review), is a review of the water quality standards for salinity for the Colorado River. It summarizes the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program (Program) and its proposed plan of implementation for continued salinity control. Economic damages due to elevated salinity levels have been significantly reduced through the Program at very modest costs. In Arizona, California and Nevada, economic damages have been reduced to about $300 million per year, accomplished at a funding level of about $24 million per year from federal sources and $10 million from Colorado River Basin state funds. The Program is a unique cooperative watershed effort between several federal agencies and seven states designated to meet national, international and state water quality objectives. Section 303 of the Clean Water Act requires that water quality standards be reviewed from time to time, but at least once during each three-year period. Accordingly, the seven-state Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum) has reviewed the existing state-adopted and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)-approved water quality standards for salinity consisting of numeric criteria and a plan of implementation for salinity control for the Colorado River System. Since the issuance of the 2002 Review, the United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has enhanced a new model to analyze the Colorado River System, including salinity. The model has been used to make new salinity projections for this Review. The Forum=s recommendations as found in this report will be submitted to each of the Colorado River Basin states for consideration as each state proceeds with its three-year water quality review process. The Forum recommends no change in the numeric salinity criteria at the three stations located on the lower main stem of the Colorado River. The numeric criteria at these stations will remain: Station Salinity in mg/L1 Below Hoover Dam 723 Below Parker Dam 747 At Imperial Dam 879 The plan of implementation as set forth in this Review is designed to meet the objective of maintaining the salinity concentrations at or below the numeric criteria while the Colorado River Basin states continue to develop their compact-apportioned waters. The Forum recommends that the plan of implementation described in this Review be carried out. The plan of implementation includes: 1 Flow-weighted average annual salinity. iv 1. Completion of Reclamation, United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) salinity control measures to the extent that each unit remains viable and appropriately cost-effective. 2. Implementation of the Forum's recommended and adopted policies for effluent limitations, principally under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program established by Section 402 of the Clean Water Act as amended. The implemented policies (included in Appendix A of this Review) are the following: Policy for Implementation of Colorado River Salinity Standards Through the NPDES Permit Program; NPDES Permit Program for Implementation of Colorado River Salinity Standards; Policy for Use of Brackish and/or Saline Waters for Industrial Purposes; Policy for Implementation of the Colorado River Salinity Standards Through the NPDES Permit Program for Intercepted Ground Water; and Policy for Implementation of the Colorado River Salinity Standards Through the NPDES Permit Program for Fish Hatcheries. 3. Implementation of nonpoint source management plans developed by the states and approved by USEPA. Item 1 of the plan listed above is to be implemented by federal agencies in conjunction with state, local, and private participants. The Forum works jointly with federal agencies on developing measures to be implemented. The Forum also urges the United States Congress (Congress) to ensure that the funds necessary to successfully fulfill this plan of implementation are appropriated as needed. Items 2 and 3 above are primarily implemented by each of the Colorado River Basin states. The probability of exceeding the numeric criteria is low as determined by Reclamation with the use of its computer model. The low probability of exceedance was an important factor in the Forum’s decision that the plan of implementation is acceptable and that the numeric criteria does not need to be changed. The plan of implementation is designed to control enough salt to maintain the numeric criteria under a long-term mean water supply of 15 million acre-feet per year. It is recognized that the river system is subject to highly variable flows. Consequently, salinity will vary from year to year and may temporarily exceed the adopted numeric criteria in some years and remain well below the criteria in others. v TABLE OF CONTENTS COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL FORUM MEMBERS............................................. i COLORADO RIVER BASIN MAP.............................................................................................................ii TRANSMITTAL LETTERS .......................................................................................................................iii SUMMARY................................................................................................................................................. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................................. vi CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1-1 Purpose of Review ........................................................................................................................1-1 History and Background ...............................................................................................................1-2 CHAPTER 2 – UNDERSTANDING THE SALINITY OF THE COLORADO RIVER .........................2-1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CO2 Sequestration ■ Mine Water Used for Irrigation, by the Supercritical State of CO in the Subsurface Has Fluid-Like Behavior, Thus Jeffrey C
    NONPROFIT ORG. A publication of SAHRA, an NSF Science and Technology Center Technology and Science NSF an SAHRA, of publication A Southwest Hydrology University of Arizona - SAHRA US POSTAGE P.O. Box 210158-B PAID Tucson, AZ TUCSON AZ Sequestration 85721-0158 PERMIT 541 2 CO Address Service Requested September/October 2009 September/October Volume 8/Number 5 8/Number Volume The Resource for Semi-Arid Hydrology Semi-Arid for Resource The Celebrating ten years and two new offices: Offering comprehensive hydrogeologic services in five integrated areas: Groundwater Supply: extensive experience in groundwater development and aquifer storage and recovery including well drilling technology, borehole evaluation, well design and installation oversight, well rehabilitation, plus an Arizona well driller's license. Groundwater Modeling: technical abilities combined with interpretive skill acquired through five decades of collective team experience in creating and interpreting models. Hydrogeologic Investigations: focused It’s an amazing time to be in business application of hydrogeological analyses to resolve groundwater issues, address In the last ten years we have witnessed seismic shifts—changes that have regulatory concerns and water rights affected our personal lives, our communities, and our professional pursuits. issues, and support water-resources Clear Creek Associates began in September 1999 as an Arizona planning. hydrological consulting company with a solid foundation of scientific and Environmental Services: sound relationships with regulators and professional experience. Over the last ten years, we have seen that experience demonstrated experience in developing grow with the emergence of new technology and new perspectives on water remediation strategies and resolving issues. As we mark our first decade in business, our staff, too, has grown by a environmental problems at complex sites in a cost-effective manner; factor of ten.
    [Show full text]
  • Figure 12B-01. Mountainous Volcanic Region
    108°W 106°W F Ancestral ron t Rang LARIMER Uinta Sand Upl e ift Little Snake River Wash Ba North Platte River MOFFAT s Yampa River in JACKSON Park-Gore Range Axial ROUTT Ba s in Up li h ft rc as A ek e Dougl Cr White River GRAND 40°N Whi EXPLANATION RIO BLANCO 40°N te Ri Neogene Volcanics ver Upli Neogene Sediments ft Paleogene Volcanics Eagle River Blue River Paleocene-Cretaceous Intrusives Piceance Basin Roaring ForkCentral River Colorado TroughEAGLE Cretaceous Seaway Sediment GARFIELD Eagle River Sawatch Range Aquifers SUMMIT Mesozoic Sediment Aquifers Ancestral Rockies Basins Colorado River Precambrian Basement PITKIN Arkansas River East Muddy Creek Mountainous Region MESA LAKE PARK Unc Mountainous Valleys ompa ghre Up Colorado Plateaus Region lif DELTA t Laramide Basin Outlines Laramide Uplift Axis Uncompaghre Uplift G un Taylor River CHAFFEE nison Laramide Basin Axis GUNNISON Upl Ancestral Rockies Uplift Axis Uncompahgre River South Arkansas River ift Ancestral Rockies Basin Axis Paradox Basin FREMONT MONTROSE San Lui CUSTER s OURAY Up San Miguel River li ft 38°N SAN MIGUEL SAGUACHE 38°N Animas River HINSDALE DOLORES SAN JUAN Rio Grande MINERAL ag Dolores River n S West Dolores River ua J RIO GRANDE ALAMOSA e San MONTEZUMA n Dom Jua Archuleta Anticlinorium San Los Pinos River LA PLATA COSTILLA San Juan Piedra River Basin CONEJOS Tusas Uplift COSTILLA ARCHULETA COSTILLA 108°W 106°W 0 10 20 30 40 50 Miles Geology modified from Tweto (1979); structural features from Hemborg (1996). 0 10 20 30 40 50 Kilometers Figure 12b-01.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments – Ngos APS IRP Docket
    BEFORE THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION Bob Burns, Chairman Boyd Dunn, Commissioner Sandra Kennedy, Commissioner Lea Marquez Peterson, Commissioner Justin Olson, Commissioner RE: APS 2020 RESOURCE PLANNING DOCKET NO. E-00000V-19-0034 AND PROCUREMENT Overview Diné CARE, Tó Nizhóni Ání and Black Mesa Trust (Navajo and Hopi nongovernmental community organizations or NGOs) respectfully submit the following joint comments for your review in response to the Arizona Corporation Commission’s (ACC) consideration of Arizona Public Service Company’s (APS) 2020 integrated resource plan and procurement process in the above-referenced docket. We submitted comments in a previous APS resource planning proceeding, Docket No. E-00000V-15-0094, in 2018, and after reviewing the current plans, we acknowledge the important steps APS has taken to improve on the last iteration of its resource planning. It is notable that in just two short years, the utility has transformed itself from a dramatic over-reliance on coal and natural gas to a commitment to de-carbonizing its generation portfolio over the coming years. That, in itself, is laudable. However, our review of APS’s 2020 IRP still leaves a number of critical issues unaddressed that we first identified in 2018 and which remain deficiencies in the current plan, especially as they relate to the long-term prosperity and wellbeing of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe and coal-impacted tribal communities. In light of the problems summarized below, we recommend that the Commission take steps to improve this resource plan in ways that provide advantages for both tribes – while still benefiting the utilities’ customers and shareholders.
    [Show full text]
  • ARIZONA WATER ATLAS Volume 1 Executive Summary ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
    Arizona Department of Water Resources September 2010 ARIZONA WATER ATLAS Volume 1 Executive Summary ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Director, Arizona Department of Water Resources Herbert Guenther Deputy Director, Arizona Department of Water Resources Karen Smith Assistant Director, Hydrology Frank Corkhill Assistant Director, Water Management Sandra Fabritz-Whitney Atlas Team (Current and Former ADWR staff) Linda Stitzer, Rich Burtell – Project Managers Kelly Mott Lacroix - Asst. Project Manager Phyllis Andrews Carol Birks Joe Stuart Major Contributors (Current and Former ADWR staff) Tom Carr John Fortune Leslie Graser William H. Remick Saeid Tadayon-USGS Other Contributors (Current and Former ADWR staff) Matt Beversdorf Patrick Brand Roberto Chavez Jenna Gillis Laura Grignano (Volume 8) Sharon Morris Pam Nagel (Volume 8) Mark Preszler Kenneth Seasholes (Volume 8) Jeff Tannler (Volume 8) Larri Tearman Dianne Yunker Climate Gregg Garfin - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Ben Crawford - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Casey Thornbrugh - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Michael Crimmins – Department of Soil, Water and Environmental Science, University of Arizona The Atlas is wide in scope and it is not possible to mention all those who helped at some time in its production, both inside and outside the Department. Our sincere thanks to those who willingly provided data and information, editorial review, production support and other help during this multi-year project. Arizona Water Atlas Volume 1 CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 Atlas Purpose and Scope 1 SECTION 1.1 Atlas
    [Show full text]
  • Pleistocene Drainage Changes in Uncompahgre Plateau-Grand
    New Mexico Geological Society Downloaded from: http://nmgs.nmt.edu/publications/guidebooks/32 Pleistocene drainage changes in Uncompahgre Plateau-Grand Valley region of western Colorado, including formation and abandonment of Unaweep Canyon: a hypothesis Scott Sinnock, 1981, pp. 127-136 in: Western Slope (Western Colorado), Epis, R. C.; Callender, J. F.; [eds.], New Mexico Geological Society 32nd Annual Fall Field Conference Guidebook, 337 p. This is one of many related papers that were included in the 1981 NMGS Fall Field Conference Guidebook. Annual NMGS Fall Field Conference Guidebooks Every fall since 1950, the New Mexico Geological Society (NMGS) has held an annual Fall Field Conference that explores some region of New Mexico (or surrounding states). Always well attended, these conferences provide a guidebook to participants. Besides detailed road logs, the guidebooks contain many well written, edited, and peer-reviewed geoscience papers. These books have set the national standard for geologic guidebooks and are an essential geologic reference for anyone working in or around New Mexico. Free Downloads NMGS has decided to make peer-reviewed papers from our Fall Field Conference guidebooks available for free download. Non-members will have access to guidebook papers two years after publication. Members have access to all papers. This is in keeping with our mission of promoting interest, research, and cooperation regarding geology in New Mexico. However, guidebook sales represent a significant proportion of our operating budget. Therefore, only research papers are available for download. Road logs, mini-papers, maps, stratigraphic charts, and other selected content are available only in the printed guidebooks. Copyright Information Publications of the New Mexico Geological Society, printed and electronic, are protected by the copyright laws of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Technical Support Document (PDF)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Technical Support Document ARIZONA Nonattainment Area Designations for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard Summary Pursuant to section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA must initially designate areas as either “nonattainment,” “attainment,” or “unclassifiable” for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2) primary national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The CAA defines a nonattainment area as one that does not meet the NAAQS or that contributes to poor air quality in a nearby area that does not meet the NAAQS. Table 1 below identifies the counties and portions of counties in Arizona that EPA has initially designated “nonattainment” based on monitored violations. EPA is not yet prepared to designate other areas in Arizona, and will address such areas in a subsequent round of final designations. Table 1. Nonattainment Designations for Arizona Arizona’s Recommendation of EPA’s Designated Area (listed alphabetically) Areas/Counties Nonattainment Areas/Counties Hayden Gila County (partial) Nonattainment Nonattainment Pinal County (partial) Nonattainment Nonattainment Miami Gila County (partial) Nonattainment Nonattainment Background On June 2, 2010, EPA revised the primary SO2 NAAQS (75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010) by establishing a new 1-hour standard at a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb), which is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations is less than or equal to 75 ppb, as determined in accordance with Appendix T of 40 CFR part 50. 40 CFR 50.17(a)-(b). EPA has determined that this is the level necessary to provide protection of public health with an adequate margin of safety, especially for children, the elderly, and those with asthma.
    [Show full text]
  • Classifications and Numeric Standards for Upper Colorado River Basin and North Platte River
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. November 12, 2020 Regulation No. 33 - Classifications and Numeric Standards for Upper Colorado River Basin and North Platte River Effective March 12, 2020 The following provisions are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes with these few exceptions: EPA has taken no action on: • All segment-specific total phosphorus (TP) numeric standards based on the interim value for river/stream segments with a cold water aquatic life classification (0.11 mg/L TP) or a warm water aquatic life classification (0.17 mg/L TP) • All segment-specific TP numeric standards based on the interim value for lake/reservoir segments with a warm water aquatic life classification (0.083 mg/L TP) Code of Colorado Regulations Secretary of State State of Colorado DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Water Quality Control Commission REGULATION NO. 33 - CLASSIFICATIONS AND NUMERIC STANDARDS FOR UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN AND NORTH PLATTE RIVER (PLANNING REGION 12) 5 CCR 1002-33 [Editor’s Notes follow the text of the rules at the end of this CCR Document.] 33.1 AUTHORITY These regulations are promulgated pursuant to section 25-8-101 et seq. C.R.S., as amended, and in particular, 25-8-203 and 25-8-204.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Mountain Reservoir Substitution and Power Interference Agreements Final EA
    Green Mountain Reservoir Substitution and Power Interference Agreements Final EA Table of Contents Acronyms...................................................................................................................................... vi 1.0 Purpose and Need .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Project Purpose and Need .................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Study Area........................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 Background.......................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4.1 Prior Appropriation System .....................................................................1-2 1.4.2 Reclamation and Green Mountain Reservoir...........................................1-2 1.4.3 Western Area Power Administration.......................................................1-4 1.4.4 Springs Utilities’ Collection Systems and Customers .............................1-4 1.4.5 Blue River Decree....................................................................................1-7 1.4.6 Substitution Year Operations...................................................................1-8 1.4.7 Substitution Memorandums of Agreement............................................1-10
    [Show full text]
  • A Soak & Eat Adventure in the Roaring Fork Valley
    Published on Colorado.com (https://www.colorado.com) A Soak & Eat Adventure in the Roaring Fork Valley 3 days More Itineraries Explore this spectacular area ? Carbondale, Redstone, Snowmass, Glenwood Springs and Marble ? via hike or ski/snowshoe and then soak your weary muscles in steamy hot springs, all while feasting on locally sourced meals. Sustainability Activity How to Give Back to These Special Places: Sustainable Settings was formed in order to create a shared vision of a sustainable and desirable society, one that can provide permanent prosperity within the biophysical constraints of the real world, in a way that is equitable to all of humanity, other species and future generations. You can volunteer for a day of ranch work and feasting, buy their products or donate to the cause. Day 1 ACTIVITY Bike or Cross-Country Ski Around Carbondale Opportunities for both activities abound around this mountain town. With easy trails that follow creeks and rivers, making for gorgeous scenery, as well as more challenging treks for those looking to extend their technical skills. Insider's Tip Insider's Tip Backcountry Safety Get out in front of backcountry danger this winter, and keep safety top-of-mind! Seek education and training prior to heading out, or utilize a professional guide or a seasoned mentor to explore Colorado's backcountry. Find more ways to get informed and stay safe in Colorado. LUNCH Granetta Panini Baked goods, high quality coffee and sandwiches make up the menu of this adorable cafe in downtown Carbondale. ACTIVITY Avalanche Ranch Cabins & Hot Springs Designed around the natural landscape and rock formations of our dramatic Crystal River Valley, Avalanche Ranch features 3 Colorado natural hot springs pools in a tiered layout.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES SECURITIES and EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 8-K CURRENT REPORT Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Date of report (Date of earliest event reported): September 13, 2016 Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter; State of Incorporation; IRS Employer Commission File Number Address and Telephone Number Identification Number 1-8962 Pinnacle West Capital Corporation 86-0512431 (an Arizona corporation) 400 North Fifth Street, P.O. Box 53999 Phoenix, AZ 85072-3999 (602) 250-1000 1-4473 Arizona Public Service Company 86-0011170 (an Arizona corporation) 400 North Fifth Street, P.O. Box 53999 Phoenix, AZ 85072-3999 (602) 250-1000 Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions: ¨ Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) ¨ Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) ¨ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) ¨ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) This combined Form 8-K is separately filed or furnished by Pinnacle West Capital Corporation and Arizona Public Service Company. Each registrant is filing or furnishing on its own behalf all of the information contained in this Form 8-K that relates to such registrant and, where required, its subsidiaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Character Descriptions of the White River National Forest
    Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume 3 Landscape Character Descriptions of the White River National Forest Headwaters of the South Fork of the White River Jan Spencer – Landscape Architect Writer/Editor Ron Wright – Soil Scientist Bill Kight – Heritage Resource Manager Kit Buell – Wildlife Biologist Carolyn Upton – Social/Economics Specialist Marsha Raus – Fisheries Biologist Narrative and Photography Contributors: Ron Taussig, Beth Boyst, George Myser, Tom Kuekes, Al Grimshaw, Dan Mathews, Paula Johnston, Kathy Hardy, Angela Glenn, Gary Osier P-1 Appendix P White River National Forest Preface The word landscape evokes certain unique and special images and meanings to each of us as individuals. As children we may have attached a sense of place to some small parcel of ground, be it a backyard or an open meadow blooming with the rainbow color of wildflowers. The rest of our lives then build upon those early impressions, layer upon layer of geographic recognition. Year after year we go back to a stream, yet each time we fish there we read something new into the landscape. It may even be some picnic spot with a backdrop of mountain majesty we can still see in our mind even with our eyes closed. These places uplift our spirit, but we are hard-pressed to put into words exactly how or why we feel the way we do. The comforting sense of familiarity a prominent granite peak holds for us never quite gets communicated beyond the photo image. “Like all real treasures of the mind, perception can be split into infinitely small fractions without losing its quality.
    [Show full text]
  • A E Ica Whi Eae CWCB Wa E Pla
    RE: American Whitewater’s CWCB Water Plan Grant American Whitewater (AW) is in the process of developing a grant application for the Colorado Water Conservation Board’s (CWCB) Colorado Water Plan Grant. This Grant would provide funding to complete the development and implementation of an economic impact analysis tool that can be utilized by local governments, Chamber of Commerce, business owners, NGOs, community members, and other groups to identify river recreation’s impacts on local economies. We recognize direct impacts from river recreation, solely, does not compare in magnitude to impacts from irrigated agriculture or suburban expansion. In addition to the direct and indirect impacts from water- based recreation, we propose to review synergistic opportunities, identified by basin roundtables and local stakeholders, that have the potential to expand and/or preserve flow conditions that support river recreation throughout the state. This will provide a tool for parties with interests that either directly or indirectly allow more water to freely flow downstream to assess an economic metric of recreation in their decision making. Synergistic opportunities may include, though are not limited to: ● Ecosystem preservation and endangered fish species protection ● Colorado River Basin Compact actions ● Water banking and other alternative transfer mechanisms ● Sustainable Front Range suburban growth ● The transfer or sale of water rights from retiring industries AW is a national non-profit 501(c)(3) river conservation organization founded in 1954 with over 6,000 national dues-paying members, 100 local-based affiliate clubs, and 50,000 supporters representing whitewater enthusiasts across the nation. American Whitewater’s mission is to protect and restore America’s whitewater rivers and to enhance opportunities to enjoy them safely.
    [Show full text]