WSPC12446 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.,..~.. Additionally, a hydrograph (Figure 2-5) for the period from August 200 I through August 2003 is presented to show the effects of the drought year of 2002 on Yampa flows. Flows in July of 2002 were below 20 cfs for a short period and below 80 cfs for a good part of the summer and fall. Conversely, a wetter than nonnal winter resulted in 2003 spring runoff flows that exceeded 4,000 cfs, USGS 09289500 YAMPA RIVER AT STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, CO ~ 5QQQ 04000 ~ 3000 400 2QOQ l; ~1000 .. ~ " :s 1l ,; f 100 i5 ~ ;;: c 10 If\^'-''''~ ^ J. \" )~ \ ......--:'1; _ . "'..-y _. . . .' \' "', -,J .' . c 'v::;':;;::;:;- ,.;"" . t Recent Discharge Oct 2001 Jan 2002 Apr 2002 Jul 2002 Oct 2002 Jan 2003 Apr 2003 Jul 2003 Figure 2-5. HydTOgraph of the Yampa River at Steamboat Springs, Colorado; 92 year average discharge compared to recent years. Water Rights Presently, the City owns a variety of water rights on the Yampa River and some of its tributaries for drinking water supply, irrigation and snowmaking purposes. The City also owns stored water in Stagecoach Reservoir for municipal purposes. However, there are no water rights dedicated to preserving existing flows in the Yampa River as it passes through the City. In many ways, the Yampa River is the life blood of the community, providing drinking water, first-class recreational opportunities, and a scenic corridor through the heart of the City. In recognition of the irreplaceable nature of this resource, the City is investigating the acquisition of water rights to protect flows in the Yampa River. The CAC recommends that the City pursue a Recreational In-Channel Diversion or Water Rights to protect against possible future diversions upstream of the City. In addition, consideration should be given to asking the Colorado Watcr Conservation Board (CWCB) to seek a minimum in-stream flow (MISF) to provide the minimum flows necessary to support the biological integrity of the Yampa River throughout its entire reach through the City. ~~~___ l~-..,.~_r "'_.~"J.."~'..~._"__~_" ,\ ,\i p. u A"J ) I" ={ ! N C;-; l\ L \) ;\ I~ ]) 0 till Water Quality Activities such as road construction, home construction, overgrazing, agricultural activities, recreation, mineral development, logging and wildfire can contribute to modifying water quality and quantity. Water quality effects resulting from these and other activities may include increases in runoff volumes from storm events and introduction of contaminants from non-point sources of pollution. Increased runoff volumes can also cause increased sedimentation from erosion and possible increases in nutrient and pollutant loading, Walton, Fish and Spring Creeks, which have a combined drainage area of ovcr 70 square miles, have a great influence on water quality within the study area, Based on 2001 water quality studies, there are no major health related concerns associated with the river or its tributaries. This conclusion is based on laboratory analysis of water samples from 14 points along the river and five tributary drainages. However, several areas of possible concern were idcntified. One of these was low dissolved oxygen levels and high temperatures observed during the mid-summer low flow months in the Yampa River. These conditions can be detrimental to cold water fish populations, especially if fish are put under additional stress from disturbance during that period, Another area of concern was excessive algal growth in the river during thc summer, which may be indicative of water quality problems. A third area of concern was elevated heavy metal concentrations within Butcherknife Creek, especially during stonn runoff periods, The Yampa Basin Watershed Plan (2002) identified several areas with elevated iron and manganese concentrations. These included the Yampa River upstream of Stagecoach Reservoir, Yampa River downstream of Stagecoach Reservoir, Oak Creek (just upstream of its confluence with the Yampa River), and the Yampa River at Steamboat Springs. The report attributes the potential causes of these elevated concentrations to natural mineralization or mining activities. An ongoing study being perfonned by the Colorado Water Quality Control Division suggests there could also be some concerns with nutrient loading in the Yampa, Ci c;., o c.o C" c.J1 Fisheries Previous studies of the Yampa River within the study area identified past and ongoing negative impacts to the riparian habitat, streambank stability, and instream fish habitat Some reaches of the river channel, streambanks, riparian and aquatic habitats, and wetlands have been degraded and continue to be degraded by encroachment of development, channel straightening, streets, riparian habitat losses, dikes to reduce flooding, and a host of lesser habitat modifications. The collective impact of these habitat modifications has reduced the capacity of the river to retain and maintain its historical productivity and resourcc values. Restoration of the river has begun with a number of recent projects completed by both the private and public sectors. Overall, the river through the study area suppons a healthy rainbow and brown trout fishery. Table 2-6 presents fish population estimates from various sample sites for the year 2000. Species identified during sampling included rainbow trout, mountain whitefish, brown trout, mottled sculpin, speckled dace, cutthroat trout, brook trout, white sucker, longnose sucker, creek chub and northern pike. ( II /\ I' E 1'- I I " , C \, 'I c, ,\ ,; 1'\ I ,; '.' x