DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluation of Streamflow Traveltime and Streamflow Gains and Losses Along the Lower Purgatoire River, Southeastern Colorado, 1984-92

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluation of Streamflow Traveltime and Streamflow Gains and Losses Along the Lower Purgatoire River, Southeastern Colorado, 1984-92 Evaluation of Streamflow Traveltime and Streamflow Gains and Losses Along the Lower Purgatoire River, Southeastern Colorado, 1984-92 By RUSSELL G. DASH and PATRICK EDELMANN U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4291 Prepared in cooperation with the PURGATOIRE RIVER WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT and the ARKANSAS RIVER COMPACT ADMINISTRATION Denver, Colorado 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Box 25046, Mail Stop 415 Box 25286 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225-0286 Denver, CO 80225-0046 CONTENTS Abstract............................................................................................................^^ 1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and Scope....................................................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................................................... 2 Description of the Study Area..................................................................................................................................... 2 Previous Studies.......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Generalized Study Approach....................................................................................................................................... 6 Method of Data Presentation....................................................................................................................................... 7 Streamflow Characteristics.................................................................................................................................................... 9 StreamflowTraveltimes..........................................................................^ 14 Reach 1........................................................................................................................................................................ 15 Reach 2....................................................»^ 15 Reach 3 .................................................................... 15 Streamflow Gains and Losses................................................................................................................................................ 16 Reach 1 ..................................................................... 17 Reach 2.....................................................................................................................^^ 17 Reach 3............................................................. 19 Confidence in Accuracy of Estimates.................................................................................................................................... 22 Summary................................................................................................................................................................................ 23 References Cited.................................................................................................................................................................... 24 FIGURES 1. Map showing locations of surface-water sites and river reaches used in the evaluation of Streamflow traveltime and Streamflow gains and losses in the study area..................................................................................... 3 2. Graph showing mean monthly precipitation and mean monthly air temperature near Hoehne, 1947-92................. 5 3. Diagram showing explanation of information for a boxplot...................................................................................... 9 4. Graph showing flow-duration curves for the streamflow-gaging stations, Purgatoire River below Trinidad Reservoir (site Ql) and Purgatoire River at Trinidad (site Q1A) comparing two different periods of Streamflow entering the study area, 1957-67 and 1984-92 ...................................................................... 10 5. Boxplots showing daily mean Streamflow for the streamflow-gaging stations (A) Purgatoire River at Trinidad (site Q1A), 1957-67; Purgatoire River below Trinidad Reservoir (site Ql), 1984-92; and (£) Purgatoire River near Las Animas (site Q4), 1957-67 and 1984-92................................................................... 11 6. Boxplots showing daily mean Streamflow by season for the streamflow-gaging stations Purgatoire River below Trinidad Reservoir (site Ql); Purgatoire River near Thatcher (site Q2); Purgatoire River at Rock Crossing near Timpas (site Q3); and Purgatoire River near Las Animas (site Q4), 1984-92 ...................... 13 7 9. Graphs showing: 7. Relation of traveltime to instantaneous peak Streamflow for two reaches of the study area, 1990-94............. 16 8. Example of (A) unadjusted hydrographs and (B) a traveltime-adjusted upstream hydrograph of daily mean Streamflow................................................................................................................................................ 18 9. Example of selection of streamflow-event periods for analysis of daily Streamflow gain and loss .................. 19 10. Boxplots showing daily mean Streamflow gains and losses and daily mean streamflow-event gains and losses for reach 2 of the study area, 1984-92............................................................................................................. 20 11. Boxplots showing daily mean Streamflow gains and losses and daily mean streamflow-event gains and losses for reach 3 of the study area, 1984-92............................................................................................................. 22 TABLES 1. Summary of river reaches, streamflow-gaging stations, river distances, drainage areas, and analysis periods used at selected surface-water sites along the lower Purgatoire River....................................................... 8 2. Percentage of time daily Streamflow occurred at selected tributary streams for the upper and middle reaches of the study area, 1957-67 and 1984-92.................................................................................................... 14 3. Statistical summary of daily Streamflow estimates of gains and losses and daily streamflow-event gains and losses for the middle and lower reaches of the study area, 1984-92...................................................... 21 CONTENTS III CONVERSION FACTORS AND VERTICAL DATUM Multiply By To obtain acre 0.004047 square kilometer acre-foot (acre-ft) 1,233 cubic meter acre-foot per year (acre-ft/yr) 1,233 cubic meter per year cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second foot (ft) 0.3048 meter inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer n square mile (mi ) 2.59 square kilometer Degree Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degree Celsius (°C) by using the following equation: °C = 5/9(°F-32) Sea level: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD of 1929) a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of both the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929. IV CONTENTS Evaluation of Streamflow Traveltime and Streamflow Gains and Losses along the Lower Purgatoire River, Southeastern Colorado, 1984-92 By Russell G. Dash and Patrick Edelmann Abstract 40.1 miles ranged from about 11 to about 47 hours, and in the lower reach of the river, Traveltime and gains and losses within a traveltime for the 58.5 miles ranged from about stream are important basic characteristics of streamflow. The lower Purgatoire River flows 6 to about 61 hours. Traveltime in the river more than 160 river miles from Trinidad to the reaches generally increased as streamflow Arkansas River near Las Animas. A better decreased, but also varied for a specific stream- knowledge of streamflow traveltime and stream- flow in both reaches. flow gains and losses along the lower Purgatoire Streamflow gains and losses were River would enable more informed management estimated using daily streamflow data at the decisions about the availability of water supplies upstream and downstream sites, available for irrigation use in southeastern Colorado. tributary inflow data, and daily diversion data. In 1994-95, the U.S. Geological Survey, in Differences between surface-water inflows and cooperation with the Purgatoire River Water surface-water outflows in a reach determined Conservancy District and the Arkansas River the quantity of water gained or lost. In the Compact Administration, evaluated streamflow most upstream reach of the river near Trinidad, traveltime and estimated streamflow gains and difficulties in establishing streamflow travel- losses using historical surface-water records. times prevented the estimation of streamflow Traveltime analyses were used along gains
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Boggsville Reconnaissance Study, History, and Evaluation of Significance Bent County, Colorado
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Boggsville Reconnaissance Study, History, and Evaluation of Significance Bent County, Colorado Thomas O. Boggs December 2012 Boggsville Reconnaissance Study, History, and Evaluation of Significance Bent County, Colorado Background his reconnaissance study was prepared by the National Park Service (NPS) at T the request of U.S. Representative Cory Gardner (CO), who asked the NPS to evaluate Boggsville, Colorado, as a potential new unit of the park service.1 Boggsville, which is in Bent County, Colorado, is a 39-acre historic district that was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1986; that nomination determined that Boggsville had a state level of significance. The purpose of the NPS reconnaissance study was to determine if Boggsville also met NPS criteria for national significance. If deemed nationally significant, Boggsville could then be further considered as a National Historic Landmark, or as a potential unit of the NPS. The primary contributing buildings at Boggsville include the Thomas O. Boggs home and the John W. Prowers house. The Pioneer Historical Society of Bent County acquired Boggsville in 1985. The site consists of 110 acres of land, of which 39 acres are associated with the Boggsville settlement. Thomas Boggs Home - NPS Photo, Greg Kendrick The history and evaluation of national significance was prepared by historian and PhD candidate Steven C. Baker, under the supervision of Dr. Ralph Mann, associate professor, Department of History, University of Colorado Boulder, working in cooperation with the Heritage Partnerships Program of the NPS Intermountain Region. 1 Cory Gardner, Member of Congress, House of Representatives, letter to Jon Jarvis, Director, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Paper FIRM Conversion Bent County Hydrology Report
    CHAMP Phase III, Bent County, Colorado Hydrologic Analyses Report CWCB CONTRACT # CT PDAA 2017-3860 November 30, 2017 Submitted by: Amec Foster Wheeler Colorado Center Tower II 2000 South Colorado Blvd., Suite 200 Denver, CO 80222 USA Page i List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... ii Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Scope ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Existing Hydrology ..................................................................................................................... 3 Flood Insurance Study .................................................................................................................. 3 Letters of Map Amendment ............................................................................................................ 3 Proposed Hydrology .................................................................................................................. 3 Method Selection ......................................................................................................................... 3 Bulletin 17C Summary .................................................................................................................. 3 USGS Qualification Codes ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Field Guides
    Downloaded from fieldguides.gsapubs.org on November 7, 2013 Field Guides Fossils and geology of the Greenhorn Cyclothem in the Comanche National Grassland, Colorado Steve Miller Field Guides 2013;33;269-278 doi: 10.1130/2013.0033(10) Email alerting services click www.gsapubs.org/cgi/alerts to receive free e-mail alerts when new articles cite this article Subscribe click www.gsapubs.org/subscriptions/ to subscribe to Field Guides Permission request click http://www.geosociety.org/pubs/copyrt.htm#gsa to contact GSA Copyright not claimed on content prepared wholly by U.S. government employees within scope of their employment. Individual scientists are hereby granted permission, without fees or further requests to GSA, to use a single figure, a single table, and/or a brief paragraph of text in subsequent works and to make unlimited copies of items in GSA's journals for noncommercial use in classrooms to further education and science. This file may not be posted to any Web site, but authors may post the abstracts only of their articles on their own or their organization's Web site providing the posting includes a reference to the article's full citation. GSA provides this and other forums for the presentation of diverse opinions and positions by scientists worldwide, regardless of their race, citizenship, gender, religion, or political viewpoint. Opinions presented in this publication do not reflect official positions of the Society. Notes © 2013 Geological Society of America The Geological Society of America 18888 201320 Field Guide 33 2013 CELEBRATING ADVANCES IN GEOSCIENCE Fossils and geology of the Greenhorn Cyclothem in the Comanche National Grassland, Colorado Steve Miller Western Interior Paleontological Society, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plant Species of the Comanche National Grassland in United States Department Southeastern Colorado of Agriculture
    Vascular Plant Species of the Comanche National Grassland in United States Department Southeastern Colorado of Agriculture Forest Service Donald L. Hazlett Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-130 June 2004 Hazlett, Donald L. 2004. Vascular plant species of the Comanche National Grassland in southeast- ern Colorado. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-130. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 36 p. Abstract This checklist has 785 species and 801 taxa (for taxa, the varieties and subspecies are included in the count) in 90 plant families. The most common plant families are the grasses (Poaceae) and the sunflower family (Asteraceae). Of this total, 513 taxa are definitely known to occur on the Comanche National Grassland. The remaining 288 taxa occur in nearby areas of southeastern Colorado and may be discovered on the Comanche National Grassland. The Author Dr. Donald L. Hazlett has worked as an ecologist, botanist, ethnobotanist, and teacher in Latin America and in Colorado. He has specialized in the flora of the eastern plains since 1985. His many years in Latin America prompted him to include Spanish common names in this report, names that are seldom reported in floristic pub- lications. He is also compiling plant folklore stories for Great Plains plants. Since Don is a native of Otero county, this project was of special interest. All Photos by the Author Cover: Purgatoire Canyon, Comanche National Grassland You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your mailing information in label form through one of the following media.
    [Show full text]
  • Moses, Wittemyer, Harrison and Woodruff, P. C. M. E
    • MOSES, WITTEMYER, HARRISON AND WOODRUFF, P. C. LAW OFFICES 1002 WALNUT STREET, SUITE 300 RAPHAEL .J. MOSES BOULDER, COLORADO 80302 HUNTLEY STONE SPECIAL COUNSEL JOHN WITTEmYER TELEPHONE:(3031443-8782 COUNSEL MONTANA COUNSEL (303) 443-8796 TCLECOP1ER: MATTHEW W. WILLIAMS DAVID L. HARRISON 506 EAST BABCOCK STREET CHARLES N. WOODRUFF ADDRESS CORRESPONDENCE TO: BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 ROBERT E. L. BEEBE P. 0. BOX 1440 (406) 586-1373 DAVID N. BROWN BOULDER. CO 80306-1440 JAMES R. MONTGOMERY VERONICA A. SPERLING J. DUBOIS JAMES July 28, 1988 M. E. MacDougall, Esq. 530 South Nevada • Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Mary M. Hammond, Esq. 1700 Lincoln Street, 42750 Denver, CO 80203 Dennis M. Montgomery, Esq. 100 Blake Street Building 1441 Eighteenth Street Denver, CO 80202 Howard Holme, Esq. One United Bank Center 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Denver, CO 80203 Rexford L. Mitchell, Esq. 512 North Main Street Rocky Ford, CO 81067 Carmel A. Garlutzo, Esq. 314 West Main Trinidad, CO 81082 RE: Applications for Change of Water Rights of the City of Trinidad Dear Counsel: Enclosed for your information are copies of two applications which we have filed on behalf' of the City of Trinidad. The first is to change certain rights owned by the Corps of Engineers to storage in the permanent pool of Trinidad Reservoir. The second is a change of certain Johns Flood Ditch rights owned by Trinidad to storage in Trinidad Reservoir for an municipal, industrial and other purposes. July 28, 1988 Page 2 If you have any questions regarding either application, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, MOSES, WITTEMYER, HARRISON AND WOODRUFF, P.C.
    [Show full text]
  • COLORADO MAGAZINE Published by the Sta.Te H Istorical Society of Colorado VOL
    THE COLORADO MAGAZINE Published by The Sta.te H istorical Society of Colorado VOL. V Denver, Colorado, June, 1928 No. 3 The Hatcher Ditch (1846-1928) The Oldest Colorado Irrigation Ditch Now in Use By ..A. W. McHendrie* While it is probable there were irrigating ditches constructed and in use within the present boundaries of the state of Colo­ rado nearly, if not quite, a century prior to this year of our Lord, 1928, none of them are in existence today, nor have they been in use within the memory of any man now living. Priority number one for the right to beneficially use the waters of a natural stream in this state for irrigation purposes has been awarded to, and is still in use by, a ditch located on the Culebra, a tributary to the Rio Grande River, in Costilla County. The beginning of the construction of this ditch, known as ''The San Luis People's Ditch," was ..April 10, 1852, and the ditch has an officially recorded priority as of that date.1 While this ditch is probably entitled to the distinction of being the oldest ditch in Colorado continuously in operation from the date of its construction, nevertheless there is in existence another ditch, the history of which begins about five and a half years earlier and which, ·with a comparatively brief interrup­ tion, has continuously carried water from the stream from which it derives its supply and delivered it to and made fruitful the very tract of land the reclamation of which was the object of its original construction, begun in the latter part of September or the early part of October, 1846.
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Fe Trail Scenic & Historic Byway Corridor Management Plan
    Corridor Management Plan Table of Contents Introduction Location and Maps Section 1 Physical Description Section 2 Intrinsic Qualities Section 3 Visitors Needs and Expectations Section 4 Marketing and Promotions Section 5 Peoples Involvement and Responsibilities Appendices Santa Fe Trail Scenic and Historic Byway Interpretive Plan Updated May 2017 for the Santa Fe Trail Scenic and Historic Byway- Mountain Branch Organization Originally prepared in 1997 for Southeast Colorado Enterprise Zone, Inc. & Mountains and Mesas Enterprise Zone Funded in part by Colorado Scenic Byway's, AMerica's Byways, CDOT & FHWA. Introduction Purpose of this Corridor Management Plan Organization and Preparation of the Plan Public Participation Process Mission Statement Goals and Objectives Brief History of the Santa Fe Trail National Historic Trail and Colorado Historic and Scenic Byway Designation Terms and Abbreviations Back to Main Contents Purpose of this Corridor Management Plan This Corridor Management Plan describes the condition, evaluates the resources and guides the future of the Santa Fe Trail Colorado Scenic and Historic Byway. It was created with the participation of persons representing broad interests along the Byway. It incorporates information on the many preservation, development and promotional activities which these agencies and individuals have already implemented and describes future plans for road improvements, management of intrinsic qualities, interpretive development, improvements in tourism facilities and services, sign installation, and marketing. Top Organization and Preparation of the Plan This document consists of six main sections as specified by the guidelines for corridor management plans published by the Federal Highway Administration, Office of Environment and Planning. These sections are: 1. Location and Maps covering the Trail location relative to the Byway, corridor boundaries, land use and land ownership; 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Existing Corridor Conditions Report Is Presented for This Purpose
    Southern Mountain Loop Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) Study Existing Corridor Conditions Report - Final December 2019 Prepared for: South Central Council of Governments Colorado Department of Transportation Region 2 Prepared by: Hg Consult, Inc. Atkins Alta Planning + Design Walden Mills Group SOUTHERN MOUNTAIN LOOP PEL STUDY Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................... i List of Figures ....................................................................................................... ii List of Tables ....................................................................................................... iii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................. v Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 Study Location and Description ................................................................................................ 1 Transportation Planning Context.............................................................................................. 3 Regional Tourism and Recreation Activity ................................................................... 10 Regional Tourism Economy ................................................................................................... 10 Scenic Highway of Legends Byway .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Southeast Colorado Hunting Guide
    COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE 2017 Southeast Colorado Hunting Guide Includes: • Detailed GMU Descriptions • Public Land in SE GMUs • 2016 Harvest Statistics/Success Rates • Phone Numbers & Contact Info COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE Southeast Region • 4255 Sinton Rd., Colorado Springs 80907 719-227-5200 • www.cpw.state.co.us 2017 Big Game Season Dates & License Fees ARCHERY SEASONS Deer/elk (west of I-25 and Unit 140) Aug. 26-Sept. 24 Plains Deer or Whitetail Only Oct. 1-27, Nov. 8-30, Dec. 15-31 (east of I-25, except Unit 140) Moose Sept. 9-24 Pronghorn (bucks only) Aug. 15-31 Pronghorn (either sex) Sept. 1-20 MUZZLELOADING SEASONS Deer/elk/moose Sept. 9-17 Plains Deer or Whitetale, except Unit 140 Oct. 14-22 Pronghorn Sept. 21-29 RIFLE SEASONS Moose Oct. 1-14 Pronghorn (by draw only) Oct. 7-13 Separate limited elk (1st season) Oct. 14-18 Combined deer/elk (2nd season) Oct. 21-29 Combined deer/elk (3rd season) Nov. 4-12 Combined limited deer/elk (4th season) Nov. 15-19 Plains Deer (east of I-25, except Unit 140) Oct. 28 – Nov. 7 Whitetail Only (Plains) Oct. 28 – Nov. 7 Whitetail Only (West of I-25) Dec. 1-31 Whitetail Only (Plains Late) Dec. 1–14 Late Plains Deer east of I-25, except Unit 140 Dec. 1–14 BLACK BEAR SEASONS Rifle limited (by draw only) Sept. 2-30 Archery (over-the-counter w/cap) Sept. 2-30 Muzzleloading (over-the-counter w/cap) Sept. 9-17 Rifle Bear (over-the-counter w/cap)* Concurrent with deer/elk rifle seasons.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register Off Historic Places Inventory — Nomination Form
    NPS Form 10-900 0.32) OMB No. 1024-0018 Expires 10-31-87 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service , For NFS u»e only National Register off Historic Places received SEP 1 2 see Inventory — Nomination Form date entered See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms 2 4 /988 Type ail entries — complete applicable sections uL.»;Xc..',... 1. Name Historic and or common BOGGSVILLE 2. Location street & number jwo miles South of ' La's Animas on Colorado' Highway 101 Hg not tor publication city, town Las Animas X vicinity of '08 state Colorado code' ' county ' 6'ent code Oil 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use X district H/apublic _D/a occupied X agriculture Jl/^museum Jl/abuilding(s) X private x unoccupied Jl/dcommercial n / apark Jl/dstructure Jl/Sboth H/awork in progress Jl/Beducational Jl/Sprivate residence jo/asite Public Acquisition Accessible -A/aentertainment JlZareligious -B/aobject ft/3 in process x yes: restricted n^a government -Q/ascientific n/a being considered H/ayes: unrestricted Jl/a industrial -niatransportation H/ano H/^military ,- • Jl/lother: 4. Owner pff Property name Piortefer 'Historical Society of Bent County c/o Galen Moss, -President street & number P. 0. BOX 63 city, town Las Animas vicinity of state Colorado 81054 5. Location off Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Bent County Courthouse street & number 730 Carson Avenue city, town Las Animas state Colorado 81054 6. Representation in Existing Surveys ________ title Colorado Inventory of Historic Sites has this property been determined eligible? __ yes A no date Ongoing federal state county local depository for survey records Colorado Historical Society, OAHP city, town Denver state Colorado 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Preserved Dinosaur Tracks in North America
    A VISION FOR WILD GRASSLANDS A SUSTAINABLE USE CONSERVATION ALTERNATIVE FOR THE CIMARRON AND COMANCHE NATIONAL GRASSLANDS REVISED LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN INTRODUCTION On December 28, 2005 the U.S. Forest Service released its Draft Cimarron and Comanche National Grasslands Land Management Plan (70 FR 77373-77374). The Forest Service has been working on the revised plan for several years. Every 10 to 15 years each Forest Service management division must undergo a management plan revision, and the existing plan is over 20 years old. The Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands revision process and subsequent Revised Plan will affect the general character and specific components of these public lands including native species and habitat viability, livestock grazing, oil and gas development, and recreation. The revision process presents an opportunity to highlight the diverse wildlife and unique natural and cultural features of the Southern Great Plains prairie region and to promote a shift to biodiversity protection and a nature-based economy. This is also an opportunity for the public to influence management direction on its lands. The purpose of this Sustainable Use Conservation Alternative is to provide a set of land and resource management planning options for the Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands that promote restoration and protection of native wildlife and natural communities while allowing sustainable human uses of these federal lands. The Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands Context The Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands are hidden jewels within the vast network of public land managed by the federal government. Though containing just over half a million acres these lands host over 1,000 vertebrate and plant species, rare plant communities, picturesque rocky canyons and expansive mesas, numerous sites displaying ancient Native American rock art, long stretches of the Santa Fe National Historic Trail, and the largest assemblage of preserved dinosaur tracks in North America.
    [Show full text]
  • Purgatoire River Watershed Plan
    Purgatoire River Watershed Plan Purgatoire Watershed Partnership 2014 Trinidad, Colorado ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Purgatoire River Watershed Plan is a compilation of material from many sources with contributions from numerous community members, watershed stakeholders, government agencies, non-profit organizations and natural resource consultants. The plan was funded through a Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART Cooperative Watershed Management Program grant awarded in September 2012 to the Purgatoire Watershed Partnership of Trinidad, Colorado. Special thanks goes to the Spanish Peaks-Purgatoire River Conservation District for serving as the fiscal agent for the Purgatoire Watershed Partnership. Jeff Crane of Crane Associates, LLC, in Carbondale, Colorado, was contracted by the Purgatoire Watershed Partnership to develop the Watershed Plan. However, this plan received substantial assistance from numerous individuals and organizations including but not limited to: Rachel Theler, Purgatoire Watershed Partnership Coordinator (2013-2014) Karen Wolf, Purgatoire Watershed Partnership Coordinator (2014) Elisa Dawson, AmeriCorps VISTA Volunteer (2014) Stephanie DiBetitto, Crane Associates, Assistant (also CWA VISTA-BOR WaterSMART grant application principal author) Ashley Bembenek, Principal, Alpine Environmental, Crested Butte, Colorado Jonnalea Tortorelli, Spanish Peaks-Purgatoire River Conservation District Manager Lucia Machado, Nonpoint Source Section Leader, Colorado Water Quality Control Division Jeff Montoya, District 19 Water Commissioner Jeris
    [Show full text]