Colorado Native Aquatic Species Protection Workshop Summary

Home Browse Search

• Others. • De -facto coordinated flow management. • Instream flow program. Missing resources, tools, information and partnerships • Clear definition of watershed management. • Database /information transfer. • Integrating water quality /quantity database. • Conflict between quality /quantity statues • Lack of partnership although pieces exist. • Trust factor at local /state /federal levels (county commissioners). • Education on how land use can affect water resources. • Basin management authorities. • Mandates for non -point source pollution. • Consequences of not organizing. • Big picture - biological. • Incentives. Possible actions to achieve desired results • More local partnerships at watershed levels. • Increase education. • Develop an integrated management approach with existing technology. • Local authority, who, what and how. • Big picture for data collection and analysis. • User friendly data. • Incentives for watershed management. Additional Comments • Colorado Water Quality Forum's work on common data structure provides guideline for what "data" is needed to begin watershed management. 2) Common Vision Workshop participants identified the need for a common vision. Participants indicated the effort should be based on, "a shared vision that has clear goals that are identifiable, realistic, achievable, broadly based, ecosystem emphasis, monitoring accountability, bottom -up public support and with stakeholder empowerment. " Existing resources, tools. information and partnerships available to achieve desired results • Strong public interest in native species. 5