My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02157
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02157
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:12:54 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:11:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/13/2004
Description
Flood Section - Alamosa River Watershed Restoration Master Plan (Information Only)
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
<br />""" '-, <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br />. Impeded agricultural uses due to lack of water and damage to structures, and <br />. Impeded recreational uses. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Special Characteristics of this Particular Planning Effort <br />This planning effort has some special characteristics that distinguish it from some of the other CWCB watershed <br />planning studies. These include: <br /> <br />. A great deal of public involvement, <br />. The NRDS process means that there is an unusual degree of federal agency participation, and <br />. A sizeable amount of money for implementation ($5 million) is already "in the bank" due to the legal <br />settlement related to the Summitville Mine. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />Purpose of the Master Plan <br />The $5 million from the settlement will be spent for eligible watershed restoration projects. The purpose of the master <br />planning effort is to prepare a cohesive, comprehensive, and cost-effective plan for how best to spend that $5 million <br />and any matching money that can be leveraged by that $5 million. The planning process is as rigorous as possible in <br />order to ensure that the NRDS money and other money is spent responsibly. <br /> <br />Developing a Master Plan that Addresses Other Concerns Besides the Impacts of the Summitville Mine <br />Despite the fact that the money that is paying the cost of preparing the Master Plan is derived from the NRDS funds, <br />the planning money will address far more than just impacts and issues directly attributable to the Sumrnitville Mine. <br />The NRDS Trustees (representatives of three Federal agencies and three State agencies) agreed that the plan needed to <br />be watershed-wide and comprehensive. The usual NEP A requirements associated with a NRDS master plan have been. <br />blended with the broader scope of a traditional multi-objective watershed study. Nevertheless, when it comes to the $5 <br />million ofNRDS money, the Trustees have a special seat at the table of this study. They are charged by federal law <br />with managing that NRDS money (as contrasted with any matching funds), so while they are working very hard to <br />involve all interested parties, they are ultimately responsible for making decisions regarding the expenditure of the <br />NRDS funds. <br /> <br />Historical Background <br />Cindy Medina of Alamosa Riverkeepers (the only Riverkeepers organization in Colorado) will provide Board <br />members with a brief historical perspective on the Alamosa River watershed, what is being done, and why, Very <br />succinctly three major features in the watershed that will be addressed by the Master Plan are the impacts of <br />constructing and operating Terrace Reservoir early in the 20th century, the straightening of several miles of the river <br />channel near Capulin in the 1970's, and the operation of and cleanup at the most recent gold mining facilities at <br />Summitville in the 1980's and 1990's. Much of the history of the watershed relates to those three features and their <br />impacts both on the natural environment and on the people who live in the watershed and uses its water. <br /> <br />The Planning Process <br />The planning process being followed for the Master Plan is fairly traditional. The steps are: <br /> <br />1. Problem definition, <br />2. Development of alternatives, <br />3. Ranking of alternatives, and <br />4. Preparation of a master plan <br /> <br />There will actually be three master plan alternatives, based on three different funding levels. One level of funding . <br />assumes that no additional funding is obtained ($5 million). The other two funding levels assumed some leveraging of <br />additional funding ($10 million or $15 million). <br /> <br />Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Finance. Stream and Lake Protection <br />Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.