DOCSLIB.ORG

Sites of Biodiversity Significance

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sites of Biodiversity Significance A Natural Heritage Assessment of Wetlands and Riparian Areas in Routt County, Colorado Report Submitted to: the Colorado Department of Natural Resources December 1996 Prepared by: Denise Culver, Assistant Wetland Ecologist John Sanderson, Wetland Ecologist The Colorado Natural Heritage Program General Services Building Room 254 Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523 REPORT ORGANIZATION This report is divided into 3 sections. Each section contains a table of contents, list of tables, and list of figures (when necessary). The first section (red tabs) presents the executive summary, recommendations, and sites of biodiversity significance. The second section (blue tabs) presents the project’s background, wetland definitions and regulations, methods, major impacts, Colorado Natural Heritage Program description, wetland functions and values, and the hydrogeomorphic approach. The third section (green tabs) contains characterization abstracts of the wetland/riparian communities, plants, amphibians, birds, and invertebrates associated with Routt County wetlands. The literature cited and field form examples are located at the end of the report. It is hoped that this organization will be helpful to all who will use this report. 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Financial support for this study was provided by a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region VIII, through the Colorado Department of Natural Resources (DNR), with in-kind services provided by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. We greatly appreciate the support and assistance of Doug Robotham and Deborah Mellblom of the Department of Natural Resources. We appreciate the work of Bruce Gordon and Project Lighthawk for their help with an aerial reconnaissance. We greatly appreciated the accommodations at the Carpenter Ranch provided by Geoff Blakesly and The Nature Conservancy. Thanks to Holly and Brian Richter for being our fine-dining companions and the spirited discussions that would ensue. Gratitude is expressed to Susan Otis, Yampa Valley Land Trust and Jaime Williams, The Nature Conservancy for their help with landowner contacts. Many people at the Colorado Natural Heritage Program contributed to the success of this project, especially, Net Meredith and her entourage of interns who processed the field data. Chris Pague, Steve Kettler, Kevin Essington, and Melissa Landon reviewed a draft of this report, although any errors in the final report are the authors’. Finally, we thank the many landowners (too numerous to name here) for their cooperation in allowing us access to their land to conduct the inventory. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 REPORT ORGANIZATION...........................................................................................................1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................2 TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................3 LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................................................5 LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................7 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................9 SITES OF BIODIVERSITY SIGNIFICANCE .............................................................................10 (1) Bear River ............................................................................................................................13 (2) California Park Site..............................................................................................................15 (3) East Fork Williams Fork Site...............................................................................................19 (4) Elk River ..............................................................................................................................21 (5) Independence Creek Site......................................................................................................25 (6) Little Snake River ................................................................................................................28 (7) Mill Creek Site .....................................................................................................................31 (8) Morrison Creek ....................................................................................................................33 (9) Phillips Creek.......................................................................................................................36 (10) Pleasant Valley...................................................................................................................39 (11) Slater Park Site...................................................................................................................43 (12) Soda Creek .........................................................................................................................45 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS (contiunued) Section 1 (13) Steamboat Lake Site (Willow and Beaver Creeks)............................................................48 (14) Sunnyside Creek.................................................................................................................50 (15) Windemere Lake ................................................................................................................53 (16) Yampa River at Elk River ..................................................................................................55 (17) Yampa River at Hayden and Morgan Bottoms ..................................................................58 (18) Yampa River South of Steamboat......................................................................................61 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION..................................................................................................65 4 LIST OF TABLES SECTION 1 Table 1. Sites of Biodiversity Significance sites in Routt County, arranged by Biodiversity Rank (B-rank)..................................................................................................................................10 Table 2. Natural Heritage elements at the Bear River site............................................................13 Table 3. Wetland functional evaluation for the Bear River site. ..................................................14 Table 4. Natural Heritage elements at the California Park site. ...................................................16 Table 5. Wetland functional evaluation for the California Park site. ...........................................16 Table 6. Natural Heritage elements at the East Fork Williams Fork site. ....................................19 Table 7. Wetland functional evaluation for the East Fork Williams Fork site. ............................20 Table 8. Natural Heritage elements at Elk River site. ..................................................................21 Table 9. Wetland functional evaluation for Elk River site. ..........................................................22 Table 10. Natural Heritage elements at the Independence Creek site. .........................................26 Table 11. Wetland functional evaluation for the Independence Creek site..................................26 Table 12. Natural Heritage elements at the Little Snake River site..............................................28 Table 13. Wetland functional evaluation for the Little Snake River site. ....................................29 Table 14. Natural Heritage elements at the Mill Creek site. ........................................................31 Table 15. Wetland functional evaluation for the Mill Creek site. ................................................32 Table 16. Natural Heritage elements at the Morrison Creek site. ................................................33 Table 17. Wetland functional evaluation for the Morrison Creek site. ........................................34 Table 18. Natural Heritage elements at the Phillips Creek site. ...................................................37 Table 19. Wetland functional evaluation for the Phillips Creek site............................................37 Table 20. Natural Heritage elements at the Pleasant Valley site..................................................39 Table 21. Wetland functional evaluation for the Pleasant Valley site..........................................40 Table 22. Natural Heritage elements at the Slater Park site. ........................................................43 Table 23. Wetland functional evaluation for the Slater Park site. ................................................44 Table 24. Natural Heritage elements at the Soda Creek site. .......................................................45 Table 25. Wetland functional evaluation for the Soda Creek site. ...............................................46 Table 26. Natural Heritage elements at the Steamboat Lake site. ................................................48 Table 27. Wetland functional evaluation for the Steamboat Lake site.........................................49 Table 28. Natural Heritage elements at the Sunnyside Creek site................................................50
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Corydalis Incisa (Fumariaceae) in Bronx and Westchester Counties, New York
    Atha, D, J.A. Schuler, and S. Lumban Tobing. 2014. Corydalis incisa (Fumariaceae) in Bronx and Westchester counties, New York. Phytoneuron 2014-96: 1–6. CORYDALIS INCISA (FUMARIACEAE) IN BRONX AND WESTCHESTER COUNTIES, NEW YORK DANIEL ATHA and JESSICA A. SCHULER The New York Botanical Garden Bronx, New York 10458 [email protected] SARAH LUMBAN TOBING NYC Parks Arsenal North 1234 Fifth Avenue, Room 229 New York, New York 10029 ABSTRACT Spontaneously growing plants of the East Asian Corydalis incisa (Thunb.) Pers. (Fumariaceae) are reported from Westchester Co., New York, for the first time. The species was previously only known from a small area along the Bronx River in Bronx Co., New York. The Westchester County plants documented here represent the second known wild population in North America. This discovery increases the number of Corydalis species in North America from ten to eleven and from four to five in the northeastern USA. It is the only spontaneous, purple- or white- flowered species in the Northeast. Corydalis incisa (Thunb.) Pers growing outside of cultivation in North America were first discovered on the floodplain of the Bronx River, near the Burke Avenue Bridge in Bronx Park, New York, by Michael Sundue during the 2005 Bronx River BioBlitz (Sundue, pers. comm). No voucher specimens were collected. Soon after, Steve Glenn collected the species at the same locality and noted "dozens" of individuals along both banks of the River, reported for the first time as naturalized in North America by Lamont et al. (2011). The population has since persisted and expanded. In 2014, a second population was discovered by the authors and is detailed below.
    [Show full text]
  • Monument Rock Wilderness Baker County, OR T14S R36E S20, 21, 27, 28, 29, 33, 34 Compiled by Paul Slichter
    Monument Rock Wilderness Baker County, OR T14S R36E S20, 21, 27, 28, 29, 33, 34 Compiled by Paul Slichter. Updated January 9, 2011 Flora Northwest: http://science.halleyhosting.com Common Name Scientific Name Family Gray's Lovage Ligusticum grayi Apiaceae Mountain Sweet Cicely Osmorhiza berteroi Apiaceae Western Sweet Cicely Osmorhiza occidentalis Apiaceae Purple Sweet Cicely Osmorhiza purpurea ? Apiaceae Sierra Snake Root Sanicula graveolens Apiaceae Yarrow Achillea millefolium Asteraceae Western Boneset Ageratina occidentalis Asteraceae Orange Agoseris Agoseris aurantiaca Asteraceae Mountain Agoseris Agoseris monticola? Asteraceae Rosy Pussytoes Antennaria rosea Asteraceae Heart-leaf Arnica Arnica cordifolia Asteraceae Hairy Arnica Arnica mollis Asteraceae Big Sagebrush Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Asteraceae Leafy Aster ? Symphyotrichum foliaceum ? Asteraceae Green Horsebrush Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Asteraceae Long-leaved Hawksbeard Crepis acuminata Asteraceae Gray Hawksbeard Crepis intermedia Asteraceae Green Rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus (ssp. ?) Asteraceae Bloomer's Daisy Erigeron bloomeri v. bloomeri Asteraceae Cutleaf Daisy Erigeron compositus v. discoidea Asteraceae Eaton's Shaggy Fleabane Erigeron eatonii v. villosus Asteraceae Subalpine Daisy Erigeron glacialis Asteraceae Woolly Sunflower Eriophyllum lanatum v. integrifolium Asteraceae Rabbitbrush Goldenweed Ericameria bloomeri? Asteraceae Greene's Goldenweed Ericameria greenii Asteraceae White-flowered Hawkweed Hieracium albiflorum? Asteraceae Scouler's
    [Show full text]
  • Major Lineages Within Apiaceae Subfamily Apioideae: a Comparison of Chloroplast Restriction Site and Dna Sequence Data1
    American Journal of Botany 86(7): 1014±1026. 1999. MAJOR LINEAGES WITHIN APIACEAE SUBFAMILY APIOIDEAE: A COMPARISON OF CHLOROPLAST RESTRICTION SITE AND DNA SEQUENCE DATA1 GREGORY M. PLUNKETT2 AND STEPHEN R. DOWNIE Department of Plant Biology, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801 Traditional sources of taxonomic characters in the large and taxonomically complex subfamily Apioideae (Apiaceae) have been confounding and no classi®cation system of the subfamily has been widely accepted. A restriction site analysis of the chloroplast genome from 78 representatives of Apioideae and related groups provided a data matrix of 990 variable characters (750 of which were potentially parsimony-informative). A comparison of these data to that of three recent DNA sequencing studies of Apioideae (based on ITS, rpoCl intron, and matK sequences) shows that the restriction site analysis provides 2.6± 3.6 times more variable characters for a comparable group of taxa. Moreover, levels of divergence appear to be well suited to studies at the subfamilial and tribal levels of Apiaceae. Cladistic and phenetic analyses of the restriction site data yielded trees that are visually congruent to those derived from the other recent molecular studies. On the basis of these comparisons, six lineages and one paraphyletic grade are provisionally recognized as informal groups. These groups can serve as the starting point for future, more intensive studies of the subfamily. Key words: Apiaceae; Apioideae; chloroplast genome; restriction site analysis; Umbelliferae. Apioideae are the largest and best-known subfamily of tem, and biochemical characters exhibit similarly con- Apiaceae (5 Umbelliferae) and include many familiar ed- founding parallelisms (e.g., Bell, 1971; Harborne, 1971; ible plants (e.g., carrot, parsnips, parsley, celery, fennel, Nielsen, 1971).
    [Show full text]
  • Japanese Hedge Parsley
    v. August 9, 2010 Invasive Plants of Wisconsin Hedge-parsleys (Torilis sp.) Authors: Brendon Panke and Mark Renz1 Herbaceous biennials that establish as rosettes with parsley-like leaves. Plants flower in the 2nd year. Flowering stems are spreading, grooved, notably jointed, and covered in hair. Mature plants are typically 2-4’ tall. Legal Classification in WI: Japanese hedge-parsley Torilis japonica – Prohibited/Restricted Spreading hedge-parsley Torilis arvensis - Prohibited Leaves: Stem leaves are pinnately compound, alternate, fern-like, triangular, slightly hairy, and 2-5” long. Leaflets are pinnately divided and clasp the stem. Rosette leaves are similar to stem leaves. Flowers: Midsummer to late summer. White flowers found in small, loose, flat-topped umbels. Japanese hedge-parsley has two or more small bracts at the base of each umbel. Spreading hedge-parsley lacks bracts at the base of each umbel. Fruits & seeds: Each flower produces a pair of bristle-covered fruit that can attach to fur or clothing. Fruit are initially rosy or white-green, but become brown as they mature. Roots: Taproot. Similar species: Wild carrot (Daucus carota) is not as hairy and has larger, flatter, and denser umbels. Caraway (Carum carvi) is shorter, has dark, oblong seeds and leaves that are more finely divided than the hedge-parsleys. Sweet cicely (Osmorhiza) has leaves that are not as fern-like. Wild chervil (Anthriscus sylvestris) flowers in spring. The bristle-covered seed of the hedge-parsleys is a key characteristic to distinguish these two hedge-parsleys from other similar species. Ecological threat: Invades forest edges, fields, fencerows, roadsides, and disturbed areas.
    [Show full text]
  • DICOTS Aceraceae Maple Family Anacardiaceae Sumac Family
    FLOWERINGPLANTS Lamiaceae Mint family (ANGIOSPERMS) Brassicaceae Mustard family Prunella vulgaris - Self Heal Cardamine nutallii - Spring Beauty Satureja douglasii – Yerba Buena Rubiaceae Madder family DICOTS Galium aparine- Cleavers Boraginaceae Borage family Malvaceae Mallow family Galium trifidum – Small Bedstraw Aceraceae Maple family Cynoglossum grande – Houndstongue Sidalcea virgata – Rose Checker Mallow Acer macrophyllum – Big leaf Maple Oleaceae Olive family MONOCOTS Anacardiaceae Sumac family Fraxinus latifolia - Oregon Ash Toxicodendron diversilobum – Poison Oak Cyperaceae Sedge family Plantaginaceae Plantain family Carex densa Apiaceae Carrot family Plantago lanceolata – Plantain Anthriscus caucalis- Bur Chervil Iridaceae Iris family Daucus carota – Wild Carrot Portulacaceae Purslane family Iris tenax – Oregon Iris Ligusticum apiifolium – Parsley-leaved Claytonia siberica – Candy Flower Lovage Claytonia perforliata – Miner’s Lettuce Juncaceae Rush family Osmorhiza berteroi–Sweet Cicely Juncus tenuis – Slender Rush Sanicula graveolens – Sierra Sanicle Cynoglossum Photo by C.Gautier Ranunculaceae Buttercup family Delphinium menziesii – Larkspur Liliaceae Lily family Asteraceae Sunflower family Caryophyllaceae Pink family Ranunculus occidentalis – Western Buttercup Allium acuminatum – Hooker’s Onion Achillea millefolium – Yarrow Stellaria media- Chickweed Ranunculus uncinatus – Small-flowered Calochortus tolmiei – Tolmie’s Mariposa Lily Adendocaulon bicolor – Pathfinder Buttercup Camassia quamash - Camas Bellis perennis – English
    [Show full text]
  • INDEX for 2011 HERBALPEDIA Abelmoschus Moschatus—Ambrette Seed Abies Alba—Fir, Silver Abies Balsamea—Fir, Balsam Abies
    INDEX FOR 2011 HERBALPEDIA Acer palmatum—Maple, Japanese Acer pensylvanicum- Moosewood Acer rubrum—Maple, Red Abelmoschus moschatus—Ambrette seed Acer saccharinum—Maple, Silver Abies alba—Fir, Silver Acer spicatum—Maple, Mountain Abies balsamea—Fir, Balsam Acer tataricum—Maple, Tatarian Abies cephalonica—Fir, Greek Achillea ageratum—Yarrow, Sweet Abies fraseri—Fir, Fraser Achillea coarctata—Yarrow, Yellow Abies magnifica—Fir, California Red Achillea millefolium--Yarrow Abies mariana – Spruce, Black Achillea erba-rotta moschata—Yarrow, Musk Abies religiosa—Fir, Sacred Achillea moschata—Yarrow, Musk Abies sachalinensis—Fir, Japanese Achillea ptarmica - Sneezewort Abies spectabilis—Fir, Himalayan Achyranthes aspera—Devil’s Horsewhip Abronia fragrans – Sand Verbena Achyranthes bidentata-- Huai Niu Xi Abronia latifolia –Sand Verbena, Yellow Achyrocline satureoides--Macela Abrus precatorius--Jequirity Acinos alpinus – Calamint, Mountain Abutilon indicum----Mallow, Indian Acinos arvensis – Basil Thyme Abutilon trisulcatum- Mallow, Anglestem Aconitum carmichaeli—Monkshood, Azure Indian Aconitum delphinifolium—Monkshood, Acacia aneura--Mulga Larkspur Leaf Acacia arabica—Acacia Bark Aconitum falconeri—Aconite, Indian Acacia armata –Kangaroo Thorn Aconitum heterophyllum—Indian Atees Acacia catechu—Black Catechu Aconitum napellus—Aconite Acacia caven –Roman Cassie Aconitum uncinatum - Monkshood Acacia cornigera--Cockspur Aconitum vulparia - Wolfsbane Acacia dealbata--Mimosa Acorus americanus--Calamus Acacia decurrens—Acacia Bark Acorus calamus--Calamus
    [Show full text]
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC)
    Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Summits on the Air USA - Colorado (WØC) Association Reference Manual Document Reference S46.1 Issue number 3.2 Date of issue 15-June-2021 Participation start date 01-May-2010 Authorised Date: 15-June-2021 obo SOTA Management Team Association Manager Matt Schnizer KØMOS Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged. Page 1 of 11 Document S46.1 V3.2 Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Change Control Date Version Details 01-May-10 1.0 First formal issue of this document 01-Aug-11 2.0 Updated Version including all qualified CO Peaks, North Dakota, and South Dakota Peaks 01-Dec-11 2.1 Corrections to document for consistency between sections. 31-Mar-14 2.2 Convert WØ to WØC for Colorado only Association. Remove South Dakota and North Dakota Regions. Minor grammatical changes. Clarification of SOTA Rule 3.7.3 “Final Access”. Matt Schnizer K0MOS becomes the new W0C Association Manager. 04/30/16 2.3 Updated Disclaimer Updated 2.0 Program Derivation: Changed prominence from 500 ft to 150m (492 ft) Updated 3.0 General information: Added valid FCC license Corrected conversion factor (ft to m) and recalculated all summits 1-Apr-2017 3.0 Acquired new Summit List from ListsofJohn.com: 64 new summits (37 for P500 ft to P150 m change and 27 new) and 3 deletes due to prom corrections.
    [Show full text]
  • Apiaceae Lindley (= Umbelliferae A.L.De Jussieu) (Carrot Family)
    Apiaceae Lindley (= Umbelliferae A.L.de Jussieu) (Carrot Family) Herbs to lianas, shrubs, or trees, aromatic; stems often hol- Genera/species: 460/4250. Major genera: Schefflera (600 low in internodal region; with secretory canals containing ethe- spp.), Eryngium (230), Polyscias (200), Ferula (150), real oils and resins, triterpenoid saponins, coumarins, falcri- Peucedanum (150), Pimpinella (150), Bupleurum (100), Ore- none polyacetylenes, monoterpenes, and sesquiterpenes; with opanax (90), Hydrocotyle (80), Lomatium (60), Heracleum umbelliferose(a trisaccharide) as carbohydrate storage (60), Angelica (50), Sanicula (40), Chaerophyllum (40), and product. Hairs various, sometimes with prickles. Leaves Aralia (30). Some of the numerous genera occurring in alternate, pinnately or palmately compound to simple, then the continental United States and/or Canada are Angeli- often deeply dissected or lobed, entire to serrate, with pinnate ca, Apium, Aralia, Carum, Centella, Chaerophyllum, Cicuta, to palmate venation; petioles ± sheathing; stipules pres- Conioselinum, Daucus, Eryngium, Hedera, Heradeum, ent to absent. Inflorescences determinate, modified and Hydrocotyle, Ligusticum, Lomatium, Osmorhiza, Oxypolis, forming simple umbels, these arranged in umbels, Panax, Pastinaca, Ptilimnium, Sanicula, Sium, Spermolepis, racemes, spikes, or panicles, sometimes condensed into Thaspium, Torilis, and Zizia. a head, often subtended by an involucre of bracts, termi- nal. Flowers usually bisexual but sometimes unisexual Economic plants and products: Apiaceae contain many (plants then monoecious to dioecious), usually radial, food and spice plants: Anethum (dill), Apium (celery), small. Sepals usually 5, distinct, very reduced. Petals usual- Carum (caraway), Coriandrum (coriander), Cyuminum ly 5, occasionally more, distinct, but developing from a ring (cumin), Daucus (carrot), Foeniculum (fennel), Pastinaca primordium, sometimes clearly connate, often inflexed, (parsnip), Petroselinum (parsley), and Pimpinella (anise).
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Streamflow and Water Quality in the Upper Yampa River Basin, Colorado, 1992–2018
    Prepared in cooperation with Upper Yampa River Watershed Group, Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Yampa-White- Green Basin Roundtable, Mount Werner Water and Sanitation District, Routt County, Colorado, and the city of Steamboat Springs, Colorado Assessment of Streamflow and Water Quality in the Upper Yampa River Basin, Colorado, 1992–2018 By Natalie K. Day i Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 9 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................................................. 12 Previous Studies ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Description of the Study Area .................................................................................................................. 13 Hydrology and Water Use.................................................................................................................... 15 Approach and Methods ................................................................................................................................ 17 Data Compilation and Quality Assurance ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Report 2012–5214
    Prepared in cooperation with Routt County, the Colorado Water Conservation Board, and the City of Steamboat Springs Water-Quality Assessment and Macroinvertebrate Data for the Upper Yampa River Watershed, Colorado, 1975 through 2009 Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5214 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey COVER: Yampa River at Steamboat Springs, Colorado, looking downstream. Steamflow is an estimated 104 cubic feet per second. Photograph by Nancy J. Bauch, U.S. Geological Survey, taken February 10, 2011. Water-Quality Assessment and Macroinvertebrate Data for the Upper Yampa River Watershed, Colorado, 1975 through 2009 By Nancy J. Bauch, Jennifer L. Moore, Keelin R. Schaffrath, and Jean A. Dupree Prepared in cooperation with Routt County, the Colorado Water Conservation Board, and the City of Steamboat Springs Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5214 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text.
    [Show full text]
  • Access Status Recreation Potential
    Recreation BLM BLM Parcel Potential Potential State District/Field Project Area Name County Size (approx. Access Status 1 - Low Acquisition Office acres) 2 - Medium Tool 3 - High Colorado River CO Harris Gulch Garfield 2,500 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee Valley Colorado River CO Upper Grand Hogback Garfield 7,600 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee Valley Colorado River CO Consolidated Reservoir Garfield 1,950 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee Valley Colorado River CO South Canyon (2 parcels) Garfield 3,790 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee Valley CO Grand Junction Bangs Canyon Clarks Bench Mesa 831 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee CO Grand Junction Bangs Canyon East Creek Mesa 6,268 Restricted Access 3 Easement, Fee CO Grand Junction Bottle Rock Mesa 869 no legal access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Bull Draw Mesa 2,480 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Larsen Canyon Mesa 878 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Mount Logan Garfield 760 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Mud Spring Canyon Garfield 6,313 Restricted Access 3 Easement CO Grand Junction Pritchard Spring Garfield 1,278 no legal access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Sink Creek Mesa 8,481 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction Snyder Creek Mesa 698 no legal access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction South Grand Mesa Slopes Mesa 6,113 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction The Breaks Mesa 2,543 no legal access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction The Palisade Fish Creek Mesa 2,026 Restricted Access 2 Easement CO Grand Junction The Palisade
    [Show full text]
  • The Yampa River Basin, Colorado and Wyoming- a Preview to Expanded Coal-Resource Development and Its Impacts on Regional Water Resources
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WYOMING GEOLOGICAL SURVEY COLORADO THE YAMPA RIVER BASIN, COLORADO AND WYOMING- A PREVIEW TO EXPANDED COAL-RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND ITS IMPACTS ON REGIONAL WATER RESOURCES ^'^v^bSvi'--" WATER RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS 78-126 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA 1. Report No. 2. 3. Recipient's Accession No. SHEET 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date THE YAMPA RIVER BASIN, COLORADO AND WYOMING A PREVIEW TO September 1979 EXPANDED COAL-RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND ITS IMPACTS ON 6. REGIONAL WATER RESOURCES 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Rept. T. D. Steele, D. P. Bauer, D. A. Wentz, and J. W. Warner No- USGS/WRI 78-12 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division Box 250^6, Denver Federal Center, Mail Stop *H5 11. Contract/Grant No. Lakewood, CO 80225 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report & Period U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division Covered Box 250^6, Denver Federal Center, Mail Stop ^15 Final Lakewood, CO 80225 14. 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstracts Expanded coal production and conversion in the Yampa River basin, Colorado and Wyoming, may have substantial impacts on water resources, environmental amenities, and socioeconomic conditions. Preliminary results of a 3-year basin assessment by the U.S. Geological Survey are given for evaluation of surface- and ground-water resources using available data, modeling analysis of waste-load capacity of a Yampa River reach affected by municipal wastewater-treatment plant effluents, and semiquantitative descriptions of ambient air and water-quality conditions. Aspects discussed are possible constraints on proposed development due to basin compacts and laws regulating water resources, possible change; in environmental-control regulations, and policies on energy-resource leasing and land use that will influence regional economic development.
    [Show full text]