HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 May 2023 packet
Agenda items are subject to change – Times are approximate and are also subject to change
Agenda | May 18, 2023
River Park Center
Second Floor Conference Room
123 Emma Road, Basalt CO 81621
TIME ITEM
Administrative Items
4:00 PM Board Comment Public Comment Additions/Deletions to Agenda Outreach/Education/Grants
4:15 PM Outstanding Waters and the Colorado River Basin Outstanding Waters
Coalition – Chad Rudow, Water Quality Program Manager, Roaring Fork
Conservancy Administrative Items
4:45 PM Healthy Rivers Grant Committee- Kirstin Neff, presenter with Wendy
Huber and Chris Lemons
6:00 PM Election of Chair and Vice-Chair- Healthy Rivers Board Staff Reports
6:15 PM Healthy Rivers Staff Report- Lisa Macdonald and Lisa Tasker
6:30 PM Open Discussion
6:45 PM Adjourn
1
Outstanding Waters (OW) is a designation
awarded to reaches of streams, rivers or
other bodies of water with high water
quality and exceptional recreational or
ecological significance that are deemed
worthy of increased protections by the
State of Colorado. The intent of the
designation is to preserve the high quality
of the designated reaches for future
generations. For a stream or part of a
stream to qualify, it must meet specific
water-quality criteria gathered across a
wide range of measures.
Protection of Colorado’s highest quality
streams is vital to our state and our way of
life. Clean water is not only critical for
drinking water for our communities, but
also for habitat for fish and other wildlife,
farming and ranching, recreation and the
long-term economic development of
Colorado’s towns.
A river or water body that is designated as
an OW receives special water quality
protections within and upstream of the
reach, protecting it from long-term
degradation, that is, from deterioration of
existing water quality conditions.
An OW designation is awarded through the
Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC)
of the Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment (CDPHE).
Designation occurs through a three-year
rulemaking hearing process that includes
three public hearings.
COLORADO’S OUTSTANDING
WATERS DESIGNATIONS HELP
SAFEGUARD WATER QUALITY
Any person may nominate
any state water for
designation as an OW.
OW nominations are
evaluated by basin on a
rotating triennial (every-
three-years) review schedule
by the CDPHE’s WQCC. The
process to propose an OW
nomination takes multiple
years and includes
substantial water sampling
across all seasons, rigorous
data analysis and evaluation,
extensive public outreach,
and three public hearings
where public comment is
encouraged.
Outstanding Waters
Pictured Right: Hermosa Creek –
designated OW in 2009[1] https://cdphe.colorado.gov/wqcc-public-participation
How are Outstanding
Waters designated?
1
2
OW protections only prevent new or increased
sources of pollution in designated streams.
Preexisting uses, such as grazing and recreation, as
well as Water Quality Control Division (WQCD)
permitted activities can continue at the levels and
intensities in place at the time of designation. In
other words, as long as a preexisting use does not
increase pollution in a stream, OW would not limit
that use. If a use (such as grazing or recreation)
does not currently require a permit from WQCD,
that would not change under an OW designation –
no new permit would be required.
Are New, Long-Term Activities Allowed
Near Or Along Outstanding Waters
Reaches?
Are Short-Term, Temporary Activities
Allowed?
New activities may also take place so long as they do
not result in any degradation of the high levels of
water quality of the given reach (relative to the
quality at the time of OW designation).
Short-term water quality degradation of a
waterbody designated as an OW may be allowed to
occur for activities that result in long-term ecological
or water quality benefit or clear public interest– for
example, for restoration of a campground- so long
as that degradation is minimized and water quality
returns to its prior high-quality condition after the
activity is completed.
An OW designation protects a defined reach of a
stream, river or lake that has a very high level of
existing water quality from future degradation of
that water quality. Waters designated as OW have
to be maintained and protected at their existing
quality. Only short-term degradation of existing
quality is allowed and only for activities that result
in long-term ecological or water quality benefit or
clear public interest.
No. OW is about water quality; it does not affect
water rights, which are about flow. OWs offer a
unique, state-level designation (within the legal
framework of the federal Clean Water Act) to
protect existing water quality, while allowing for the
exercise of valid water rights.
Yes. OW designations can go through private land
as long as the designation criteria for OW are met.
An OW designation prohibits any new activity or
any expanded activity that could degrade water
quality below designated levels for a given reach,
ensuring clean water for rivers flowing through
private property.
What does an Outstanding Waters
designation do?
Does Outstanding Waters Designation
Affect Water Rights?
Are Preexisting Activities Such As
Grazing Affected?
Can an Outstanding Waters
designation go through private land?
How are downstream water users
affected by an Outstanding Waters
designation?
Downstream water users are not impacted by an
OW designation other than benefiting from the
protection and delivery of high-quality water
downstream.
The FAQs
3
Outstanding Waters (OW) is a designation awarded to reaches of streams, rivers or other bodies of water with
high water quality and exceptional recreational or ecological significance that are deemed worthy of increased
protections by the State of Colorado. The intent of the designation is to prevent degradation, thus preserving
existing high water quality for future generations.
An OW designation is made through the Water Quality Control Commission (Commission) in the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). Designations are made as part of the Commission’s
triennial rulemakings held on a rotating basis for basins around the state; each basin rulemaking process is
spread over three calendar years from scoping, through issues formulation, to final action.
Waters must constitute an outstanding natural resource,
with “exceptional recreational or ecological significance”
and not modified by human activities in ways that
substantially detract from their natural resource values.
Examples include Gold Medal trout fisheries, native
cutthroat trout recovery waters, waters with outstanding
opportunities for recreation such as boating, swimming,
and fishing, as well as waters within national parks,
monuments, wildlife refuges, and wilderness areas.
Waters must require protection in addition to that
provided by water quality classifications, standards, and
protections from the CDPHE. For example, the
Commission has recognized the need for native trout to
have water quality maintained at existing high levels in
light of those species’ sensitivity to water pollution.
Similarly, wilderness areas require protection at their
existing high-quality levels to maintain that
“untrammeled by man” wilderness quality.
OUTSTANDING WATERS – HOW ARE THEY
DESIGNATED?
To qualify as an OW, a waterbody must meet
three key criteria:
4
Metals and other trace elements are found in
surface water from natural sources such as the
weathering of rock, but can also be elevated due to
disturbances such as wildfire or historic mining,
causing harmful impacts on aquatic life. Metals
measured in evaluating potential OWs are:
Water quality parameters required for Outstanding Waters consideration
chronic selenium
chronic silver
chronic zinc
chronic cadmium
chronic copper
chronic lead
chronic manganese
E. coli is a group of
bacteria that have the
potential to cause sickness
and disease; excessive E.
coli in surface water could
harm humans that
inadvertently swallow water
while recreating.
pH affects many
chemical and biological
processes in surface
water. For example, at
low pH metals are
typically more soluble
and more toxic to
aquatic life.
Waters must be equal to or better than the water quality standards for 12 key
parameters to support aquatic life, recreation, and/or domestic water supply uses.
These parameters are:
Dissolved oxygen (DO) is a
measure of oxygen
available to aquatic
organisms; some aquatic
organisms require
abundant DO while others
are adapted to survive with
less.
chronic ammonia
nitrate
Nutrients are essential for
living organisms and exist
in different forms that
naturally cycle through the
atmosphere, terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems. Excess
nutrients, however, can
adversely affect aquatic
habitat and become toxic
to sensitive aquatic species.
Nutrients used in
evaluating potential OWs
are:Representative data across multiple seasons should
be sampled to demonstrate that water quality is
indeed equal to or better than these water quality
requirements.Source: 5 CCR 1002-31.8 (2)(a)
Reference: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). (2018). Regulation No. 31- The Basic Standards and Methodologies for Surface Water (5 CCR 1002-31), effective 1/31/18.5
Outstanding Waters FAQ
Grazing, Private Property, and Water Rights
Q Will an Outstanding Waters (OW) designation affect current grazing rights? A An OW designation is a point-source protection. Cattle grazing is not considered a point source for contaminates so should not be impacted.
A There are many OW designations in active grazing leases. Examples of this include the West Elk and Weminuche Wilderness areas. A For a river to be designated as OW it must meet stringent water quality standards. Any current grazing operation along a river that meets these quality standards and continues to operate in a way that does not impact those standards will not be affected. Changes in grazing operations or increased cattle herd size may be affected. Q How does an OW designation affect the USFS's ability to put cattle back on an allotment that was vacant at the time of OW designation?
A If a use (such as grazing or recreation) does not currently require a permit from the CDPHE, that would not change under an OW designation, which cannot be used to require additional
permitting. A The CDPHE has addressed this concern previously in Statement of Basis and Purpose
language in Regulation 34: “The concern of the USFS that High Quality 2 classification will unduly burden their
management of multiple use areas is not well founded. This is because activities on Forest Service land, i.e. grazing, mineral exploration, trail and road maintenance, are considered as a historical impact upon existing ambient water quality conditions, and are non-
point sources which are presently not subject to any Water Quality Control Commission regulations.” Q Will an OW designation affect water rights? A No. An OW designation is a water quality protection and does not affect water rights which pertain to flow. Q Can an OW designation go through private land?
A Yes. An OW designation can go through private land as long as water quality standards and outstanding resource values are met. An OW designation helps ensure clean water for streams
flowing through private property by prohibiting activities that could degrade the water quality. OW designation would impact a landowner if the landowner were to seek a discharge permit from CDPHE for discharges into the stream.
A The CDPHE requires significant outreach to private landowners if a reach runs through their property. This outreach is to be conducted throughout the proposal process for OW designation.
6
Draft Candidate Reaches
Surface water reaches to be considered for
designation as Outstanding Waters in Pitkin
CountY, Colorado � Studies InstituteSAN /UAN MOUNlAINS COI.OMADO •Water Quality Monitoring
Locations
rt"'t, Outstanding WatersCandidate Reaches
rt"'t, Existing OutstandingWaters Reaches
,.sl"t, Streams
Land Ownership
Wilderness
USFS
BLM
Private
Local
7
0 2 4 •-c::::i--====--MD
( /
Draft Candidate Reaches
Surface water reaches to be considered for
designation as Outstanding Waters in Pitkin CountY, Colorado � Studies Institute SAN JUAN MOUNTAINS COIOMAOO
• Water Quality Monitoring
Locations rt1"L Outstanding WatersCandidate Reaches rt1"L Existing Outstanding
Waters Reaches rt1"l. Streams
".
Land Ownership
Wilderness
USFS
BLM
Private
Local
8
February 14, 2023
Dear Stakeholder,
In 2022 the Colorado River Basin Outstanding Waters Coalition (CRBOWC) formed
around a common goal of safeguarding clean water in Colorado. Participating
organizations include American Rivers, American Whitewater, Audubon Rockies,
Colorado Trout Unlimited, Eagle River Watershed Council, Friends of the Yampa, The
Pew Charitable Trusts, Roaring Fork Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, Western Resource
Advocates and Wilderness Workshop. These groups are working together to protect
some of Colorado’s most highly valued waters for habitat, recreation, clean drinking
water, enhancing biodiversity, and more.
CRBOWC’s goal is to identify candidate surface water reaches for potential “Outstanding
Waters” (OW) designations through the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment. This includes participation in the Colorado Water Quality Control
Commission’s 2024 triennial review process for the Upper and Lower Colorado River
Basins. CRBOWC has approached this effort strategically by incorporating best practices
for water quality sampling, submitting solid evidence and rationale of the conservation
values of candidate waters, and engaging and building support from a broad range of
stakeholders.
An OW designation recognizes streams that have important values and good existing
water quality and helps prevent degradation of these waterways. Within Pitkin and
Eagle Counties the CRBOWC has identified, based on findings to date, the following
potential candidate stream reaches for OW protections:
Pitkin County Eagle County
Avalanche Creek Big Alkali Creek
Hunter Creek Brush Creek
Middle and South Thompson Creeks
Woody Creek
This list is subject to change depending on the outcomes of continued water quality
sampling and outreach efforts.
As this work moves forward, your input as a stakeholder is very valuable. Please do not
hesitate to reach out with any questions, to discuss this further, or request additional
information.
Sincerely,
Chad Rudow
Water Quality Program Manager
Roaring Fork Conservancy
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Pat McMahon
President
George Kelly
Vice President
Michelle Schindler
Secretary
Don Schuster
Treasurer
Jeff Conklin
David Knight
Jim Light
Rick Lofaro
Executive Director
Rana Dershowitz
Diane Schwener
Larry Yaw
PROGRAM STAFF
Rick Lofaro
Executive Director
Heather Lewin
Director of Science &
Policy
Christina Medved
Director of Community
Outreach
Elliott Audette
Business Manager
Megan Dean
Director of Education
Alexis Hitzeroth
Watershed Educator
Chad Rudow
Water Quality
Program
Manager
Sheryl Sabandal
Development Director
Andrea Tupy
Ecologist
Matthew Anderson
Water Quality
Technician
9
530 East Main Street Suite 301 - Aspen, CO 81611
970 920 5191 office - 970 309 2139 cell
pitkincountyrivers.com
MEETING DATE: May 18, 2023
TO: Healthy Rivers Board FROM: Lisa Tasker CC: Lisa Macdonald
AGENDA ITEM: Healthy Rivers Grant Committee Proposal Administrative: The Healthy Rivers Board created a grant committee at the beginning of the year to revisit the grant criteria, scoresheets, and potentially the semi-annual grant cycle. The committee, comprised of board members Kirstin Neff, Wendy Huber, and Chris Lemons will present their suggestions at the May 18th board meeting and incorporate staff and board feedback. Attachments: Proposed edited criteria, draft budget template, draft application template, draft review sheet
10
530 E Main St Suite 301 Aspen, CO 81611 970.379.8654 pitkincounty.com/healthyrivers
PITKIN COUNTY HEALTHY RIVERS
GRANT PROCESS AND CRITERIA
1. Grant requests to the Pitkin County Healthy Rivers Board, (the Board) that exceed $5,000.00*
must follow the grant criteria and application format described herein. The format project narrative and
budget templates is are available at pitkincounty.com/healthyrivers and is also included below. Grant
applications must be delivered electronically to county staff (healthyrivers@pitkincounty.com) by March
Feburary 3128, 2023 2024 to be considered at an March or April board meeting or August July 31,
2023 2024 to be considered at an August or September board meeting. Grant requests must describe
the location and contain an address of the property. Applications that are incomplete or do not follow the
format will be returned for re-submission.
2. Grant applications for a single project may be made one time during a calendar year. There is
no limit on the number of grant requests an individual or organization can make in a calendar year. Total
grant awards in a calendar year will be limited by available $’sfunding budgeted for grants within the
Healthy Rivers Fund. Grants recommended for approval by the Board are advisory only and are subject
to final approval by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC).
3. Funds disbursed will apply to the budget year in which they are approved by the BOCC.
4. County staff with participation by a Board finance committee member will complete a
preliminary review of all applications to ensure they comply with the grant criteria. Incomplete
applications will be returned to Applicant with a request for more information.
5. Applications will be placed on a Board agenda following preliminary review. Applicant must
attend the meeting in person or via other means acceptable to the Chair (i.e. video conferencing) and
make a brief presentation (10 – 15 minute summary) to the Board. Meetings will follow BOCC meeting
procedures.
6. Each Board member will individually read the applications in advance of the Applicant’s
presentation to the Board, and will score the application (in advance of the scheduled meeting) based on
the grant criteria (see attached score sheet). Criteria will be equally weighted and scoring will be on a
scale of 0 – 1001-5, based on the extent to which the individual criteria have been met. Board members
may modify their scoring after applicant's presentation or during Board Q & A discussion. Board
members should will provide specific comments when scoring any category at less than 70%4. Grant
requests that receive an aggregate average score of less than 70% will not be presented to the BOCC
without additional discussion and majority approval by HRS Board, noting reasoning for requesting
approval to the BOCC. Grant approval/denial recommendations may be deferred to a future meeting, if
deemed necessary by the Board.
11
530 E Main St Suite 301 Aspen, CO 81611 970.379.8654 pitkincounty.com/healthyrivers
7. Grant applications approved recommended for approval by the Board will be forwarded to the
BOCC, for final authorization/disbursement, including a master score sheet which summarizes the
Board’s individual assessments of each request. Only Board members who are in attendance at the
meeting where an application has been considered will have their scores included. Applicants must also
attend the BOCC meeting at which their application is being considered for final approval. County Staff
will summarize the grant requests for the BOCC and applicants should be prepared to respond to BOCC
questions. At least one member of the HRS Board will attend the BOCC meeting where Grant requests are
being considered.
8. Key factors for Board consideration of grant requests:
a. Evaluations should be based on merits of the project/request;
b. Requests must be measurable and include accountability and reporting back to the
Board;
c. Requests must have specific measureable deliverables;
d. Requests must identify other funding partners when applicable
e. Requests exceeding $30,000.00 may be disbursed in specific segmented amounts based
on performance reporting and milestone/progress achievement.
9. Approved grants will require applicants to sign a contract with Pitkin County specifying the
terms, conditions and requirements associated with each grant.
*= Grant requests of less than $5000.00 must be submitted in a written request and generally follow the grant criteria, with an emphasis on the goals of the Board and the benefits of such requests to the community. The Board will consider such requests at the first available meeting based on its individual merits and presentation. Grant requests do not include sponsorships or subscriptions.
12
530 E Main St Suite 301 Aspen, CO 81611 970.379.8654 pitkincounty.com/healthyrivers
GRANT CRITERIA 20222024
A. Alignment of the Project with the Goals of the Healthy Rivers Board
The extent to which the proposed grant request/project meets the stated goals, objectives, and on-
going projects/priorities of the River Board.
1. Must be complete, clear and concise, with specific dollar amounts in total and
for each element of the project;
2. Must fulfill the intent of the ballot language.
B. Viability of the Project
The extent to which the proposed grant request/project is practical, will be completed as proposed
and/or may require other resources to be fully completed, and the extent to which the project can be
repeated in other locations such that it will not be limited to a single event.
1. Must address an essential need;
2. Demonstrates collaboration and/or partners with other agencies.
C. Public Need, Accessibility and Appreciation
The extent to which the proposed grant request/project will be seen, appreciated and/or used by the
people who live and/or work in Pitkin County and the Roaring Fork watershedpublic.
1. Does not duplicate existing services or programs;
2. Must serve and be appreciated by people who live and/or work in Pitkin County and
the Roaring Fork watershed;
3.2. Includes a specific Public Relations strategy;
4.3. Demonstrates an appropriate need for public funding.
D. History of the Requesting Party
The extent that the requesting individual/entity has been successful in other projects or efforts and is
known in the community.
E. Budget, Measurements and Accountability
The extent to which the proposed grant amount is appropriate to the project scope and includes other
appropriate sources of funding. The extent that the project includes specific measures for success and
reporting of progress and results to the River Board.
1. Demonstrates financial stability and presents accurate budgets and financial reports,
measurements and accountability;
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25", No bullets or numbering
13
530 E Main St Suite 301 Aspen, CO 81611 970.379.8654 pitkincounty.com/healthyrivers
2. Specific deliverables and measures of progress and success;
3. Reporting plan to the River Board/other stakeholders.
BALLOT LANGUAGE – GOALS OF RIVER FUND
(1) Maintaining and improving water quality and quantity within the Roaring
Fork watershed;
(2) Purchasing, adjudicating changes of, leasing, using, banking, selling, and
protecting water rights for the benefit of the Roaring Fork watershed;
(3) Working to secure, create and augment minimum stream flows in
conjunction with non-profits, grant agencies, and appropriate State and Federal
agencies to ensure ecological health, recreational opportunities, and wildlife and
riparian habitat; promoting water conservation; and
(4) Promoting water conservation; and
(45) Improving and constructing capital facilities that contribute to the objectives
listed above.
14
PITKIN COUNTY HEALTHY RIVERS
GRANT APPLICATION
PROJECT NARRATIVE TEMPLATE (V. 2023)
Max submission 6 pages
A. Address of physical location where the project will take place:
Enter address here.
B. Project Description
Describe the proposed project activities and location. Project description must be complete, clear and
concise, and with specific dollar amounts for each element of the project if the project contains
multiple elements.
Type here.
C. Alignment of the Project with the Goals of the Healthy Rivers Board
Describe the extent to which the proposed grant request/project meets the stated goals, objectives,
and on-going projects/priorities of the River Board. See ballot language in the application packet for
objectives and the Pitkin County Healthy Rivers website for River Board priorities.
Type here.
D. Viability of the Project
Describe the extent to which the proposed grant request/project is practical, will be completed as
proposed and/or may require other resources to be fully completed, and the extent to which the
project can be repeated in other locations such that it will not be limited to a single event. Specifically,
describe how the project:
1. Addresses an essential need;
2. Demonstrates collaboration and/or partners with other agencies.
Type here.
E. Public Need, Accessibility and Appreciation
Describe the extent to which the proposed grant request/project will be seen, appreciated and/or
used by people who live and/or work in Pitkin County and the Roaring Fork watershed. Specifically,
describe how the project:
1. Does not duplicate existing services or programs;
2. Includes a specific public relations strategy;
3. Demonstrates an appropriate need for public funding.
Type here.
15
PITKIN COUNTY HEALTHY RIVERS
GRANT APPLICATION
PROJECT NARRATIVE TEMPLATE (V. 2023)
F. History of the Requesting Party
Describe the extent that the requesting individual/entity has been successful in other projects or
efforts and is known in the community.
Type here.
G. Measurements and Accountability
Describe specific measures for success, deliverables, and a plan for reporting progress and results to
the River Board and other project stakeholders.
Type here.
H. Budget (use Excel template)
Use the provided Excel budget template to demonstrate the extent to which the proposed grant
amount is appropriate to the project scope and includes other appropriate sources of funding. Provide
notes in the budget notes section on the template when appropriate to further describe the
contribution of budget line items to the proposed project outcomes.
16
GRANT CRITERIA SCORE CARD
Applicant:____________________________________ Amount Requested:___________________ Board Member Name:_______________________________ Points
Possible
Alignment of the Project with the Goals of the Healthy Rivers and Streams Board Notes 1-5
The extent to which the proposed grant request/project meets the stated goals, objectives, and
on-going projects/priorities of the River Board.
1. Must be complete, clear and concise, with specific dollar amounts in total and for each
element of the project;
2. Must fulfill the intent of the ballot language.
Viability of the Project Notes 1-5
The extent to which the proposed grant request/project is practical, will be completed as
proposed and/or may require other resources to be fully completed, and the extent to which the
project can be repeated in other locations such that it will not be limited to a single event.
1. Must address an essential need;
2. Demonstrates collaboration and/or partners with other agencies.
Public Need Accessibility and Appreciation Notes 1-5
The extent to which the proposed grant request/project will be seen, appreciated and/or used
by people who live and/or work in Pitkin County & the Roaring Fork Watershed.
1. Does not duplicate existing services or programs;
2. Includes a specific Public Relations strategy;
3. Demonstrates an appropriate need for public funding.
History of the Requesting Party Notes 1-5
The extent that the requesting individual/entity has been successful in other projects or efforts
and is known in the community.
17
GRANT CRITERIA SCORE CARD
Budget, Measurements and Accountability Notes 1-5
The extent to which the proposed grant amount is appropriate to the project scope and
includes other appropriate sources of funding. The extent that the project includes specific
measures for success and reporting of progress and results to the Healthy Rivers Board.
1. Demonstrates financial stability and presents accurate budgets and financial reports,
measurements and accountability;
2. Specific deliverables and measures of progress and success;
3. Reporting plan to Healthy Rivers Board/other stakeholders.
OVERALL REVIEW: General notes TOTAL SCORE: 1-25
18
Proposed Pitkin County Health Rivers Funded Items
Hourly Rate Hours Fringe Total
Staff Name, Title
Ex: River Smith, Director of Education 40.00$ 400 51% 24,160.00$
Unit Unit Cost
Number
of units Total
Ex. Bus for field trip 1 bus for 1 day 1,000.00$ 3 3,000.00$
Ex. Mileage for monitoring site visits Miles 0.655$ 500 327.50$
Unit Unit Cost
Number
of units Total
Ex. Water quality testing kits 1 kit 50.00$ 30 1,500.00$
Total
120,000.00$
148,987.50$
Other Funding Sources Supporting this Project
Amount
15,000.00$
30,000.00$
193,987.50$
Notes: Use this box to describe the project purpose of budget items.
Personnel:
Travel:
Material and Supplies:
Subcontracts/subawards:
Name or purpose of subcontract/award
Ex. TBD engineering contractor to design bridge replacement
Total Request of Pitkin County Healthy Rivers Fund
Total Project Cost
Name of Funding Source
Ex. State Environmental Quality Fund
Ex. Private Family Foundation
Pitkin County Healthy Rivers Grant Budget Template (v. May 2023)
Application Status
Travel
Personnel
Materials and Supplies
Awarded
Application submitted
Subcontracts and Subawards
19
530 East Main Street Suite 301 - Aspen, CO 81611
970 920 5191 office - 970 379-8654 cell
pitkincountyrivers.com
MEETING DATE: May 18, 2023
TO: Healthy Rivers Board FROM: Lisa Tasker and Lisa Macdonald CC: John Ely and Laura Makar
AGENDA ITEM: May Staff Report A summary of projects and work is provided below. Administrative: By-law amendments were formally adopted at the April 26th regular BOCC meetings. Staff is working with the Back 40 Stories team on standard sign designs and has met with fabricator to work on signage for the Whitewater Park. Cost estimates have been provided and will be discussed internally. Temporary signage for the Fish Park Boat Ramp and WWPark have been ordered. Several types are on the way. High water warning signs have arrived and will be installed soon. As needed support for the Crystal Wild and Scenic efforts is being provided by staff with Back 40 Stories informational slide presentation being used for educational events. Standing bi-weekly meetings continue. Projects and Infrastructure: Fisherman’s Park Improvements Boardwalk and ramp are complete and have inspections pending. Temporary signs are ready to be installed. Equipment will be de-mobilized during the next week. Beaver and Cutthroat Project with the USFS Housing has been secured and interns are anticipated on June 1st. Wild and Scenic Efforts A Community Summit was held April 27th at 5:00 pm at the Marble Firehouse with approximately 140 attendees. The Board received the poster with a link to an interest form that seeks stakeholders to be on a smaller steering committee with plans to convene May through December 2023. Back 40 Stories created the informational and inspirational poster that was published in the April edition of the Crystal Valley Echo and distributed to members of the Crystal Wild and Scenic Coalition. Crystal River Restoration Project – Town of Carbondale Partnership on Project Staff continues to attend construction meetings and remains involved. The contractor is expected to be on the site in June to perform upland restoration and once river flows subside, in-channel work will begin.
20
530 East Main Street Suite 301 - Aspen, CO 81611
970 920 5191 office - 970 379-8654 cell
pitkincountyrivers.com
Outreach/Education/Grants
Staff continues to work with the Comms Team regarding the Board’s request to expand our radio presence on KDNK and KMTS. Ads are now being run on KDNK and KMTS in addition to APR. Content suggestions are always welcome. Contracts and invoicing have occurred.
Beaver Education Campaign details are ongoing. Social media and other avenues discussed in February are moving forward. Please check our website for current updates pitkincountyrivers.com
5 grant applications were received for the 2023 Spring Cycle
2 sponsorship requests are included in the April meeting
Scholarship recipient’s counselors have been notified at Basalt, Glenwood Springs and Aspen High Schools. Award ceremonies are GWS on April 12th, Basalt on April 20th, and Aspen on June 1st. Kirstin will attend the Aspen award event. Andrew Sebastian Bartnik of Glenwood Springs High School received the At-large award and India Butchart was the Basalt High School recipient. The Aspen High student will be shared here following notice of award at their ceremony June 1st. Education and Training 2023:
Colorado Water Congress Winter Conference end of January - Huber, Makar, Neff and Tasker
Stream Restoration SR23-270, Colorado Water Congress Subcommittee- Tasker
Audubon/DNR- two sponsored webinars supporting Stream Restoration Bill efforts - Tasker
Webinar: The Upper Colorado and San Juan rivers endangered fish recovery programs: What's at stake as reauthorization looms? Tasker
Webinar: Climate Change & Water in the West with Dr. Imtiaz Rangwala, Research Scientist, CU
Middle Colorado State of the River presented by the CO River District and Co-hosted by Middle CO Watershed Council, May 2, 5:30-8PM Glenwood Springs. Presentations about predicted spring runoff, local water projects and priorities, as well as a look at the "Big River" conversations taking place throughout the state and the Colorado River Basin as a whole.
Roaring Fork Watershed Summit, May 11th Third St Center Carbondale. Approximately 60 people attended. Healthy Rivers received numerous mentions of contributions and collaborations. Great PR for the Board and program. We presented a video https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t9t3NfqKUNTXGsMi3RtewLB8QwYOPHX-/view of current work. Staff and board members Chuck Ogilby and Kirstin Neff attended.
ONGOING- Staff continues to participate and collaborate with the following groups: - Roaring Fork Wildfire Collaborative - Watershed Collaborative Meetings, Board is on listserve - Colorado Basin Roundtable meetings every 2 months - Crystal River Wild and Scenic Core Group, Collaborative, and Coalition/Advocacy
- Colorado Water Congress State Affairs Committee 8AM Monday mornings when in session
- Local Beaver group including CPW, USFS, BLM, RFC, Sierra Club, EcoFlight, The Roaring Fork Biodiversity Initiative, National Forest Foundation and others
- Lincoln Creek/Grizzly/Ruby Mine stream impact discussions via Zoom with Pitkin, EPA, CPW, USFS, DNR, RFC, Trout Unlimited, Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Co.
21