Laserfiche WebLink
Meeting project deadlines for the water quality data assessment tasks was also difficult. <br />Water quality data collected in the Big Thompson Watershed are managed by multiple <br />entities including the Forum, three municipalities, the Northern Colorado Water <br />Conservancy District and Sanitation Districts. The time needed to interpret metadata and <br />manage thousands of records of water quality data from different sources was <br />underestimated. Aregional STOREY database has not been developed in the Big <br />Thompson Watershed, which could have made this task more manageable. <br />As the Proj ect progressed, the Project Team realized that milestones were not being <br />met and rescheduled many of them. Proj ect tasks that were originally scheduled for <br />Phase 1 and reschedule for Phase 2 include: 1) developing nutrient related water <br />quality goals and 2) modifying monitoring programs to provide missing data <br />necessary to support the planning process. <br />The task of developing watershed-wide nutrient goals was overly ambitious. The Project <br />Team realized that a Nutrient Problem Statement was needed before numeric goals could <br />be agreed on. The Proj ect Team also confused the process of developing nutrient goals <br />with the state's project of developing nutrient standards. One stakeholder even asked why <br />they should support a local goal that is not legally binding and may be more stringent <br />than a state standard. Clearly, the discussion of voluntary nutrient goals was not <br />politically ripe. <br />As mentioned previously, the task of modifying monitoring programs to provide missing <br />data was also rescheduled. The purpose of rescheduling this task is to better align it with <br />the statewide nutrient standards that are being developed. The Water Quality Control <br />Division has made significant progress in developing these standards and draft <br />regulations may go before the Water Quality Control Commission during the 2010 Basic <br />Standards Hearing. <br />EVALUATION OF GOAL ACHIEVEMENT <br />Goal :Actively involve stakeholders to prioritize water quality issues. <br />The Management Plan successfully involved maj or stakeholders in the watershed <br />planning process. Major stakeholders (Table 2) were appointed by the Executive Director <br />to be Project Team members and expected to guide the Management Planning process. <br />Bringing major stakeholders to the same table fostered healthy discussions about <br />nutrients and improved their understanding of this complicated issue. These meetings <br />built trust and resulted in a Nutrient Problem Statement that they all stakeholders support. <br />Consensus among these stakeholders about the current state of nutrients in the Big <br />Thompson Watershed and the associated recreational, economic and aquatic life issues <br />related to nutrient over-enrichment is a major accomplishment. <br />-9- <br />