My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Upper Yampa Implementation Plan
CWCB
>
Watershed Protection
>
DayForward
>
Upper Yampa Implementation Plan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 10:00:21 PM
Creation date
6/20/2008 11:43:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Watershed Protection
Document ID
hr_0008
Contract/PO #
PO 05-61
County
Routt
Community
Steamboat Springs
Stream Name
Yampa River
Basin
Yampa/White
Sub-Basin
Upper Yampa 14050001
Water Division
6
Title
Upper Yampa River Basin Implementation Plan
Date
1/3/2006
Prepared For
CWCB
Prepared By
Routt County Conservation District
Watershed Pro - Doc Type
Planning Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
95
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
March 200G <br />RCCD C peer Yampa Ricer I3arin Implementa[ion Plan • 17 <br />4.0 2005 IMPLEIMENTATION PLAN PRIORITIES <br />• ESS <br />4.1 SUMMARY OF IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PROC <br />As indicated previously, the process associated with development of this Implementation Plan was <br />modeled after the 208 Plan process to include open communication and public participation and <br />input. For preparation of the Draft Implementation Plan, the following tasks were completed: <br />• Task 1: Kick-off Meeting/DUork Session <br />• Task 2: Prioritization of Recommendations <br />• Task 3: Public Meeting <br />• Task 4: Draft Implementation Plan <br />'T'hese tasks are summarized in the following paragraphs. <br />Kick-off Meeting/Work Session <br />.A kick-off meeting/work session, which included participants from the 208 Plan, was held on <br />February 16, 2005. The agenda, included in Appendix A, included a general discussion of the <br />Implementation Plan scope, schedule, and budget; review of the 208 Plan; discussion and prioritization <br />of the 208 Plan recommendations; and identification of potentially interested parties. Action items <br />generated by the kick-off meeting included: <br />• Focus the Implementation Plan a:eound nonpoint source concerns and, if possible, specific <br />problematic areas/projects (such as wetlands/protection of key wetlands); <br />• Identify specific non-urban projects that would not likely fall under the jurisdiction of other <br />governmental agencies; <br />• Consider reviewing land management practices and emphasizing the need for land <br />stewardship and implementing conservation practices; <br />• Given the project budget, attempt to streamline the recommendations around projects that <br />could be accomplished within a reasonable scope, budget, and timeframe; <br />• Discuss potential nonpoint source/non-urban projects with other basin entities, including <br />the USFS, Nature Conservancy, Yampatika, etc. <br />Due to schedule and budgetary constraints, two major recommendations from the 208 1'lcur were <br />deferred for future planning/implementation efforts. These are briefly described below: <br />• Comprehensive Monitoring Program: One recommendation from the 208 1'!an was the <br />development of a cooperative, comprehensive, basin-wide water monitoring program, which <br />could include citizen monitorin€;, such as the River ~~'atch program. In addition, a database <br />for managing the information would provide agencies and the interested public the abilit<- to <br />• evaluate water qualih- data, monitor trends, and identify basin issues. <br />• Stagecoach Reservoir Studies: The 208 Plan also recommended a comprehensive evaluation <br />RCCD * 1 ~f7i Pate Grmr Road, .S)~tlr 2111-<I *.SleamGnal.S j~rirr~.r, CO ,YO~F37 * (`Jill) 87%-3321 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.