Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Exhibit 3 <br />QUESTION 3: What are the most significant bani"", to achieving your organization's goals for stream corridors? <br /> <br />... Stroam Corridor Goal Barriers <br />ENl'IRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS <br />Boulder Creek Watcnhcd Initiative Finmcial support to maintain community baed monitoring network. <br />co Water Conservation Alliance We don't have any goals relating specifically to stream corridors. <br />Colorado Division of Wildlife . Puttman All ofthc above. <br /> We 8R primarily an educational organWtion - not advocacy or policy oriented. Time and money limit the <br /> depth of our work on specific projccts such as stream protection. We do promote and tcacb watcnhcd <br />Roaring Fork Environmental Education Association education. <br /> 1) Manasins proper use of riparian zoncs on publiQ lands; 2) Use oflcgalltccb. rcsourtlCI to combat improper <br /> 404 permits on private lando 3) CW A insufficiently powerful to deal with .n.treamIwetland disturbance <br />S;erra Club, Rooky MbL Chapter - Cunningham problems <br /> Water mangcmcnt and flood control dcvclopmcnl4. potential hydropower developments. land U8C practices like <br /> inItrcam. sravel mining and cxtreclm grazing of riparilUl areal that cause impactI to neighboring land! thro bank <br />Valley Land Conacrvancy destabilization,. channel chanp. <br />FEDERAL AGENCIES <br /> Ignorance:: leading to political oppoIilion; R.caistancc to management concepts that arc dift'c:rcnI: from "the way <br /> we've always done it"~ Slickins to old concepts like channelization. riprap. trapezoidal. ovcr-desiBDcd <br />EvUonm..... Protection Ap\ay -llamiltonlRuiler cbanncls.lPolitieal opposition to protection/restoration of naturaIlystcma:. <br />US Geological Survey - Lystrom Consislently SCCur1n funding for rcacarch. monitoring and aoalysil. <br />USDA - Natural Resources Conservati.on Service cduca1i.on, cultural backgrounds. fmancial, political, cnvirodmcntal <br />USFWS Political barriers arc the most difficult to ovcroomc. People refuse to stay out ofthc floodplain. <br />FLOODPLAIN 01 SPECIAL DISTRICT <br /> Political, tcchnicial, and fmancial. We must convince elected offioials that watenhcd health ill worthy of <br /> Qhaogins: development oodcs and spending money. We also must dcvi.sc coat4cctive solutions to watcnIhcd <br />Fountam Creek Watorsbed Proj... inNbility. <br />Graod JunctionDroinago OUt. Political. USF&WS, Carpi ofEngincan <br /> PolitioaVfmanciat. A sipifioant amount of private land exists along stream corridon within our planning <br /> region and many Jooal govcnuncnta are loathe to be perceived .. infringing on private property rightlJ and local <br />Northwest Colorado COG fimding is cxtn:mcly limitcdlSignifiC8ll.t land value pushing development oloser to streams. <br />San Miguel Watcnhcd Coalition tcQhnical and filW1cw <br /> Politcal - getting throush the .uperl\utd numdotes with negoti"'d prooeos - ball<ling Ilust, .....izing good <br />Upper Arkansas iUver Restoration Projeot sense. meeting local landowner wishes &: resolving legal liability rcquiremcnl.t. <br />WATER ORGANIZATIONS <br /> PolitiQal. getting: aUlandowncn to work together cooperatively to improve the health ofthc river corridor. <br />AlllD1OI8 River Watershed Project FinanQial. fimding erosion control work. <br />Battlement Mesa WeD Environmental and legal rcstriQtions. <br /> Eltablishing thac goal. are CSIC1\tiaUy a local land use issue whiQh our organization docs not set involved <br />Colorado River WCD. Mcrrittlrcnney inJgcncralacccptaMc of the nature of sIrcamI and rivers - they arc d)namic <br />Uoner GwuUson WCD All of the above. [Underlined 'technical. fwatKlial. political, or Others' in question.] <br />