|
Home
River Initiative being considered by West Denver TU:
By John Snyder
Given our Chapter’s extensive conservation work on Clear Creek, we
are now considering a special designation that will accurately reflect
a long term stewardship role. Among the conservation roles being considered
is the designation of “Home River”. Attaching the label Home
River to a favorite flyfishing river seems like an obviously good thing
to do. It is appealing because we clearly understand that protecting our
homes is perhaps the most fundamental type of stewardship we should perform.
But labels should not be taken at face value. People and organizations
define Home Rivers differently and the implications of those distinctions
are important as WDTU determines its future conservation relationship
with Clear Creek. The purposes of this Conservation Corner are to briefly
describe the crucial factors affecting Clear Creek’s environmental
management; how National Trout Unlimited (NTU) defines its Home Rivers
Initiative; and prominent management implications of Home River designation.
This information is essential for determining our future conservation
relationship with Clear Creek. We also realize that Clear Creek’s
water resource use, abuse, and restoration are a complex story that needs
to be well understood and thoughtfully considered in order to render any
decisions. This information is intended to help with those discussions.
The most consistent idea regarding various definitions of Home Rivers
is that it includes the entire watershed. All of the lands and tributaries
within a water catchment area comprise a Home River region. The dominant
environmental feature of the Clear CreekWatershed is that it was declared
National Superfund Site under federal CERCLA Law. This classification
with all of its associated laws, liabilities and regulations both identifies
the magnitude of the environmental restoration challenge and, from a positive
perspective, the availability of extensive resources committed to address
the problems. This is a balance we need to keep in mind. There are huge
resources and alliances in place dedicated to enhancing the Clear Creek
Watershed. When WDTU considers Clear Creek it confronts significant challenges
and opportunities. Environmental challenges include a severely polluted
watershed; continuing development pressures of all sorts; beetle kill
and other deforestation impacts; as well as pollutants and sediments from
land uses along the I-70 corridor. From the chapter’s perspective,
we need to evaluate the several challenges associated with legal requirements,
geographic scope, the level of required commitment, and the need for long
term commitment. But simultaneously the opportunities are equally significant.
There are enormous financial, legal, and political resources and commitments
in place to accomplish conservation. This is reinforced by WDTU’s
expert knowledge of the watershed, positive working relationships with
key stakeholders, and the chapter’s demonstrated history of successful
Clear Creek restoration and conservation projects. In 1994 NTU implemented
a Home Rivers Initiative program to tackle watershed management challenges.
The program now consists of six watersheds located throughout the nation
none of which, by the way, is a Superfund Site. Based on positive conversations
with the Director of the NTU program Clear Creek would be eligible for
inclusion if:
(1) all liability under CERCLA Law is eliminated;
(2) a Good Samaritan legal judgment in favor of TU is on record; and
(3) a full time project director is hired with funding secured for a period
of 3 to 5 years.
The existence
of Colorado Native Trout in Clear Creek further strengthens NTU’s
attraction to the Home Rivers designation. Among the important lessons
learned from NTU and discussions with Clear Creek stakeholders are
(1) the need to eliminate all potential liability and
(2) create a comprehensive plan with explicitly stated goals and objectives.
The implementation of a plan that has well defined goals enables the application
of best science, the ability to monitor progress, and the capacity to
accommodate change. The absence of goals and objectives creates the same
dilemma that the Cheshire Cat described to Alice in Wonderland: “If
you don’t know where you’re going then any road will take you
there”. Regardless of the designation that WDTU assigns to Clear
Creek conservation projects, liability cautions and consensus based goals
are both prudent and useful. During WDTU’s recent Board meeting four
Clear Creek conservation goals and several relevant objectives were suggested.
The goals included the Protection of Colorado’s Native Trout Habitat;
Restore the Watershed’s Environmental Quality; Improve Access to
Quality Fisheries; and Conserve Backcountry Angling Experiences. Information
and supplementary materials were supplied to begin this important discussion.
It is certain that a rigorous discussion will produce the best conservation
projects and elements of a comprehensive plan to assist WDTU’s long
term efforts. The issue now is how to proceed. Does WDTU want to commit
to a long term TU Home Rivers Initiative? Or perhaps pursue a more opportunistic,
short term approach to Clear Creek conservation. We must recognize that
both approaches demand diligent liability protection, a conservation plan
to achieve WDTU goals, apply the best possible science, and take advantage
of the numerous resources in place to restore Clear Creek. If a formal
designation of TU Home Rivers is sought, then considerable due diligence
is required. But regardless of that formality, it is vital for WDTU members
to know that much of that work must be accomplished to responsibly accomplish
stream projects within a National Superfund Site.
This is the
beginning of an important discussionand we
welcome the comments of all WDTU members.
Roan Plateau Oil
and Gas Develop Issue
Colorado
Trout Unlimited (CTU) is gravely concerned about the BLM Plan's potential
impacts on trout, including rare populations of genetically-pure Colorado
River cutthroat trout. We are also troubled by the lack of opportunity
for public review on the new plan, and by the document's bureaucratic
doublespeak, which calls the whole plan's credibility into question. Read
about the concerns of Colorado Trout Unlimited's concerns.
Congressmen
Salazar and Udall both supported a 'Time Out' for Leasing Roan Plateau
for more details visit http://www.saveroanplateau.org/
Upper
Colorado River Plagued by Low Flows
Solutions
Sought by CTU, Grand County & Colorado River Water Conservancy District
The Upper
Colorado River Basin was plagued by low water flows this past fall which
led to high temperatures in the river with fish congregating in pools
from Granby down to Kremmling. If several ranchers who had senior water
rights had decided to use them fully, stretches of the river would have
been left bone dry. read
article
Oppose the
sell-off of Colorado public lands!
Last year,
Congress - facing overwhelming opposition from the public including sportsmen
and conservationists - rejected a Bush Administration proposal to sell
off National Forest lands as a way of generating budget revenue. Like
a bad penny, this ill-advised proposal keeps turning up, and is now in
the Administration's proposed 2008 federal budget. Read
More
Roadless
Area Message
Ted
Williams has written a detailed message about his view of the Roadless
Area issue. I think you will find it informative and interesting. Ted
William's Message
- ROADLESS AREA REVIEW COULD AFFECT TROUT
IN COLORADO
One of the great benefits of living in Colorado is having abundant wilderness
available and Roadless areas within our public lands. These wild places
provide so many benefits to the State, serving as a home to an abundant
array of wildlife, clean water at the headwaters of our major rivers,
and great scenery; one of the things that Colorado is famous for. But
all of that may now be threatened as the current Bush Administration is
offering States the opportunity to determine how these Roadless areas
should be managed...Please read
the rest of this article to see how this can affect trout in Colorado.
The article includes information of how you can make you desires known
to the Department of Wildlife. Most
of the threatened Greenback Cutthroat trout habitat is in Roadless areas.
http://www.roadlessland.org/
Bark Beetles:
Flyfishers
are frequently obsessed with bugs, but there is a strong possibility we
are not giving enough attention to the insect causing the greatest impact
on Colorado’s coldwater fisheries. Our attempts to match the hatch
have perhaps distracted our attention from the extensive destruction of
our forests by the Dendronctonos ponderosae---the Mountain Pine Beetle.
This voracious little SOB (son of bug) is rapidly decimating Colorado’s
forests and, most significantly, the largest amount of that destruction
is occurring at the headwaters of our major rivers.
Recent reports published by the U.S. Forest Service predict that every
large mature Lodgepole Pine forest in Colorado and southern Wyoming will
be dead within three to five years as a result of this unprecedented mountain
pine beetle infestation. Lodgepole Pine is not the only species at risk---Limber,
Bristelcone, and Ponderosa Pine are also being devoured. In January, 2009,
a total of almost 2 million acres of forest were infested, and the annual
rate of infestation is enormous. By examples, 500,000 acres were infested
in 2007 and another 400,000 in 2008. The fact that most of that loss occurred
in counties located at the highest elevations of the State should be a
huge concern to both anglers and water resource planners. The headwater
forests of the South Platte, Colorado, North Platte, and Arkansas rivers
are now fatally damaged. The southwest advance of the insect will inevitably
endanger the headwaters of the Rio Grande River. Closer to home, forest
scientists estimate that Clear Creek’s Lodgepole Pine forests will
be dead within five years and that 27 percent of all its forests will
be destroyed by then.
The environmental value at stake is forest cover and the canopy and other
environmental functions it serves. The shade provided by forest cover
reduces the evaporation of snow pack, the speed and amount of runoff,
the depletion of water amounts during summer months, and moderates water
temperatures during warm periods. The trees’ nutrients and root systems
enhance soil building, promote stability and reduce erosion. Forest cover
provides a vegetative regime that offers both food and cover for wildlife
that directly enrich the quality of the aquatic habitat. All of these
vital functions contribute to the environmental quality of our water and
fishery resources.
A lot of publicity associated with the mountain pine beetle’s infestation
has rightfully focused on its geographic scope, rapid advance, and potential
land use impacts. From the perspectives of forest managers, property owners,
and local government officials, the biggest concerns associated with dead
forests are wildfire, threats to life and property, further infestation,
and visual blight. The Hayman fire’s destruction of property, elimination
of forest cover, and contribution to massive sedimentation of the South
Platte River exemplifies the magnitude of devastation that can occur.
It also epitomizes the difficulty of selecting forest management practices
that simultaneously prevent fire and protect coldwater fisheries.
Tree removal is the prevalent solution for reducing the threats caused
by pine beetles. At first glance, this solution makes good sense. The
cutting and removal of dead trees certainly eliminates fuel for fires,
destroys beetles, and reduces blight. From a forest management and property
protection standpoint, it is a reasonable approach. There is also strong
bi-partisan support for that approach. Many millions of dollars will be
expended this year to clear and thin large expanses of dead timber from
Colorado forests. But, what about the hydrologic impacts? Clearly, the
ecological benefits of forest cover previously described
are also eliminated. We need to recognize that the publicity about the
mountain pine beetle’s unprecedented ecological activity and the
significant risks associated with wildfire have, unfortunately, overshadowed
its potentially
devastating effects on Colorado’s rivers and streams.
The mountain pine beetle has begun a process that is destroying the environmental
quality of forests and their beneficial contributions to water resources
and aquatic habitat. Timber harvest practices that remove the dead trees
will complete that deforestation process. Ultimately, deforestation will
affect water quantity, rates of flow, schedule of flows, flood frequency
and magnitude, water quality, and water temperature. Obviously, none of
the land managers want to harm the hydrologic character of our rivers
but, regrettably, their proposed solutions will have that effect unless
we insist on mitigation practices. Our mission to conserve coldwater fisheries
requires serious engagement on behalf of forest health. Forest management
practices such as tree plantings, soil stabilization, and sediment control
need to be extensively implemented in order to safeguard Colorado’s
coldwater fisheries. Our observations of the hatch should no longer distract
us from this reality.
John Snyder
Luca's
Blog - TU Projects across the US
Luca
traveled across the US during the summer of 2006 talking to Local TU Chapters
in numerous states about their TU issues and projects.
Here are some things he has written during his travels through out Colorado:
Black
Canyon of the Gunnison
Gunnison
Buena
Vista
Love Towards Death
Our Clear Creek Project is discussed in the following Blog
Silver
and Gold- Clear Creek & Snake River
Colorado
River Trip
A
Lesser known Tailwater
In
Search of Greenbacks
Home
of Luca's Blog
Greenback
Cutthroat Trout
Open
this PDF
to read about a new threat to the Greenback Cutthroat and other
Wildlife in Rocky Mountain National Park
The
Incredible Journey of the Greenback Cutthroat Trout
US
Fish and Wildlife Greenback information
Western
Native Trout Campaign
Historic
Range Map
Map of current Greenback populations
|
Greenback
Cutthroat Trout Recovery Program
may or may not have a setback
A
DNA study of the Greenback Populations in state show that
5 of the 9 populations of the Greenback may actually be
Colorado River Cutthroat. Back in the late 30's the greenback
cutthroat was believed to be extinct. But in the 50's
Doctor Benke verified two small populations in a couple
of High Mountain streams. The goal of the the program
has been to establish 20 naturally reproducing populations
of at least 500 fish in each population. Historically
Greenback Cutthroats were in over 140 miles of streams
on the Front Range. It currently is estimated to be 11
miles of streams. Dr. Benke thinks that the differences
in the genetic code that has been identified as being
specific to Colorado River Cutts may actually just be
a normal variance in genetic code. The only observable
differences between Greenback and Colorado River Cutthroats
is that one is on the Eastern side of the Continental
divide and the other is on the otherside of the Continental
divide. The DOW has suspended all Greenback planting operations
until more analysis can be completed. The winter 2008,
Vol 5 Iss 1, issue of High
Country Angler, has two articles about Greenbacks
and Colorado River Cutthroat in it. Get a Copy of it and
Read the Articles. It's free.
|
|
CTU's Current Conservation
Issues
CTU
Strategic Implementation Plan
- Jan 2006, Probably, like myself, you do not know much about CTU's conservation
plans. This report should help in highlighting them to all of us.
Check out the latest
conservation issues on CTU's website. Such as: New threats to the
Greenback Cutthroat and a Battle over Bear Creek Status as an impaired
waterway and Roadless Area Protection
New Threats
to Greenback Cutthroats in Rocky Mountain National Park
Trout
Unlimited and Public Access Issues- Colorado
Trout Unlimited's Executive Director, David Nickum, wrote an article for
the High Country Angler which clearly explains the access issues. It is
now posted on the CTU website. Read
the Article
It
has been decided that further review of the position TU should take with
respect to private vs public access rights. TU's mission is the conservation
of cold water fisheries but such activities can cause varied differences
of opinion with respect to rights of access when raising funds for projects
requiring large donations and/or the need to involve privately held tracks
of land. Here are two PDF documents sent to the TU National Leadership
Council for their review at the National meeting held in September 2007
Document
1
Document
2
Download
zipped file with both documents
Colorado Water
Conservation & Drought News:
It
is a Drought: DO SOMETHING
WaterSaver, the web
site dedicated to helping you save water
CSU Centralized
Source of Drought Related Info
Top
of Page
Water
Usage in the United States
"Everyone
knows that our population continues to grow. A census count in 1980 identified
close to 227 million residents of the United States. Twenty years later,
the Census Bureau tallied more than 281 million people here. But did you
know that demand for water in the United States declined in 1985 and that
it has remained fairly steady since then?" ..... Changes in technology,
in our laws, and in our economy, along with increased awareness of the
need for water conservation, have resulted in more efficient use of the
water from the Nation's rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and aquifers."
quoted from nationalatlas.gov
|
