Laserfiche WebLink
beginning with an easier stream will allow development of tools to have available for more <br /> "complex" stream. <br /> How will river protection be viewed by press? Not do something too complex too soon. <br /> This will make second easier. <br /> 14. Consensus: Work on Hermosa Creek first for about four to five months, then <br /> move to Animas or Piedra when we have more ideas. <br /> Not do Animas second, has had too much focus recently. <br /> Piedra: When initial W&SR process started there were four miles of private property. <br /> Community looked at stopping development through support for W&SR, canyon wall/wall. <br /> Actual W&SR proposal then covered entire basin. The community opposed this larger plan. If <br /> community process could develop protection in canyon without W&SR Protection, this may be <br /> supported by community. Not destroy community above. <br /> Development and use of river will occur. USFS will develop campgrounds. W&S - <br /> worst form of protection. On the Piedra, water rights are critical to agricultural. If interfere with <br /> agriculture, there will be significant development. Need to develop alternatives. <br /> Piedra presents a "meat and potatoes" stream from SWCD perspective. Get local <br /> community and others to think outside the box. <br /> John Taylor ok if Piedra is the second stream, seek to protect canyon without bad parts of <br /> W&SR. Therefore, consensus is Hermosa first with strong direction to Piedra second, but <br /> Committee not need to announce what's in line or whether start second stream within three to 5 <br /> months of starting first. There is value to planning, even if not process not work out as planned. <br /> Dolores River through DRD on own path. Will provide another source for learning about <br /> alternatives. <br /> Committee suggested Animas after Piedra <br /> C. Process Budget <br /> 1. Committee reviewed the attached proposed budget <br /> 2. Need to develop meeting agendas, with suggested time frames <br /> 3. Amount of time per meeting - question whether two hours, 7-9:00 p.m., is enough <br /> 4. Need system in place to evaluate costs from past meetings <br /> 5. One source of funds: CWCB staff recommended proposal for$200,000 for <br /> alternative approaches to W&SR designation for Upper Colorado/Yampa. CWCB approved <br /> $400,000 non-reimbursable money from Construction Fund to include streams besides <br /> 3 <br />