Laserfiche WebLink
• A brief review and evaluation of the Golden experts' flow needs assessment methodology <br />relative to this study process. <br />• A list of recreation opportunities and flow- dependent attributes available at the course. <br />• A general discussion of how different flow levels may affect opportunities and attributes on <br />kayak courses and whitewater rivers. <br />• Preliminary flow evaluation curves that define the range of acceptable and optimal flows for <br />each opportunity available on the Golden course. <br />• Information that estimates the number of days in an average year when various opportunities <br />are available at acceptable and optimal levels. <br />• Alternative water right claims that provide the diversity of opportunities available on the <br />course, but which would also be efficient and possibly allow for other water uses. <br />Report Organization <br />The first two parts of the report summarize: 1) key elements and a general protocol used in <br />conducting a recreation flow needs assessment, and 2) a review and evaluation of Golden's expert <br />reports relative to this general protocol. Opinions in these sections of the report are based on an <br />analysis of Golden's flow quantification effort and comparisons with generally accepted methods. <br />These opinions are largely independent of the additional work planned for late January and early <br />February 2001. <br />The third part of this preliminary report outlines a process and associated methods that will be <br />used to illustrate an alternative study effort to the Golden quantification. The output from this <br />effort will be a preliminary assessment of whitewater flow needs on the course and a discussion <br />of alternative water right claims that could meet those needs efficiently. These opinions and their <br />basis are dependent upon the additional work planned for late January and early February 2001. <br />This document does not present the findings from that effort, which is on- going; the supplemental <br />expert witness report for Dr. Shelby will provide findings and opinions based upon that effort. <br />I. Assessing Flow Needs for Recreation: A General Process <br />This section summarizes the study process developed in a handbook on concepts and methods for <br />conducting instream flow assessments for recreation (Whittaker et al., 1993), and introduces key <br />concepts and terminology in the field (Shelby et al., 1992). Key points include: <br />• Flows can affect recreation in a number of ways: <br />• It is important to distinguish direct and indirect effects of flows on recreation. The focus in <br />the Golden case appears to be on direct effects on boatability, whitewater boating challenge <br />and safety, and related attributes of whitewater boating opportunities. <br />• Successful natural resource decision - making requires distinction between descriptive and <br />evaluative information (Shelby & Heberlein, 1986). Flow need assessments require a similar <br />separation of information during data collection and analysis. Descriptive information <br />describes relationships between flows and various conditions; evaluative information <br />suggests which conditions or flows are better or worse for various types of opportunities. <br />• Trade -offs and negotiation among groups interested in different flow regimes are inherent in <br />this conceptualization. Alternative flow regimes create more or less of different recreation <br />opportunities (or more or less recreation opportunities vs. other instream or out -of- stream <br />uses). <br />Clear Creek Whitewater Park flow assessment / January 2001 <br />