Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-4- <br /> <br />Need for State Stream Restoration Program <br />Stream corridors in Colorado are a valuable asset to local communities and to the state as a <br />whole. Many of these COrridOTS have become degraded for a variety of reasons including <br />human activities (like urbanization, agriculture, and mining) and natural reasons (like flood <br />damage, vulnerable geology, and vulnerable riparian vegetation). Whether for reasons of <br />economic development, protection of lifestyle (rural and urban), stewardship of habitat, or <br />aesthetic enjoyment, these corridors are usually central features in Colorado's communities. <br />Protecting or enhancing them protects and enhances communities, From a strictly utilitarian <br />point of view, most communities would benefit economically from stream restoration: 1) <br />communities where agricultural irrigation is an economic mainstay, 2) communities where <br />fishing and water-based recreation are economic mainstays, 3) communities where many <br />buildings and elements of infrastructure are prone to flooding, and 4) communities that derive <br />their domestic water from their own watershed, Given the climatic/hydrologic conditions in <br />Colorado (extensive areas of semi-arid desert), water is a particularly scarce commodity, and <br />protecting it is in the interest of the state as a whole. At least in the streams that have been the <br />subjects ofthe 10 studies and projects listed above, this scarce resource has been significantly <br />damaged. That damage was the major reason for the studies or projects being requested in the <br />first place. <br /> <br />Damages have resulted from urbanization, agricultural activities, mining activities (past and <br />present), floods, and unique geological and vegetative conditions, Those factors will all <br />continue to be part of Colorado's watershed geography, so they are not going to go away. <br />Stream restoration studies and proj ects give communities the opportunity to understand their <br />own streams' vulnerabilities and to determine whether restoration pToject design and <br />implementation is warranted. The CWCB's experience so far shows that stream restoTation <br />studies can lead to measurable actions. <br /> <br />Tangible results of some of the 10 studies and projects listed earlier are shown in the table <br />below: <br /> <br />Results from Past and Cnrrent cwca Stream Restoration Studies <br /> <br /> <br />:i::,1 ,:)fq'.':::,'~~1,101 'i~ .- <br />Arkansas River Channel <br />Capacity and Riparian <br />Habitat Plannin Stud <br />Roaring Fork and <br />Fryingpan Rivers Multi- <br />Objective Planning <br />Pro'ect <br />Rio Grande Headwaters <br />Restoration Project <br /> <br />Ecosystem restoration <br />initiative underway <br /> <br />Eagle and Pitkin <br />Counties <br /> <br />Follow-up feasibility study in <br />Basalt <br /> <br />Rio Grande and <br />Alamosa Counties <br /> <br />Implementation coordinator <br />will be hired; implementation <br />committee formed <br />Congressional approval of <br />funding for Corps of <br />En ineers Watershed Plan <br /> <br />Fountain Creek <br />Watershed GIS <br />Database <br /> <br />Teller, El Paso and <br />Pueblo Counties <br /> <br />Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Financing. Stream and Lake Protection <br />Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />