^X" 'if T~"3§£S. lifc'J^--=0
EPA908-R-01-012
A Publication of The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 Ecosystem Protection Program
&EPA
United Slates
Enwonruentjl Pmtectrai
Agency
U.S.EPA
999 18th Street, Suite 300
8EPR-EP
Denver, CO 80202-2466
In this Issue:
Fargo-Moorhead River Project
Kicks Off
Cherry Creek Stewardship
Partners Conference
Colorado Plateau Ecosystem
Stewardship
Consolidated Funding Process
Lake Poinsett Watershed
Restoration Project
Missouri River Currents:
Monitoring and Assessment
Activities along the Fort Peck
The Story of Basalt's Storm
Water
Speaking of Ground Water...
Did You Know?
Ground Water in the Plains,
Canyonlands and Mountains
Protecting Threatened and
Endangered Species in
Nonpoint Source Projects
1
9
2
3
4
4
5
6
6
7
Volunteer monitoring field training on the Red River of the North for the Fargo-
Moorhead River Project.
Fargo-Moorhead River Project
Kicks Off
~Tom Moe, Energy and Environmental
Research Center and Stacey Eriksen, EPA
Region 8
Anew EPA agency-led Environmental
Monitoring for Public Access and
Community Tracking (EMPACT) project
recently kicked off in the Fargo, ND -
Moorhead, MN metropolitan area. The
FM River project will concentrate on water
quality monitoring and community
education of the Red River of the North,
the most prominent natural feature in the
region. A key feature of FM River will be
the development of a community/student
volunteer monitoring force that can carry
on the newly established water quality
monitoring work long after the planned 2-
year project period of performance. In this
-Photo by Lindsay Beard, EERC
»»»»»*»»»»»»»*»»»»»»»<
way, FM River will not only create a
heightened community awareness of this
valuable resource, but will also help to
establish a water quality database of basic
chemical and biological indicators.
The parameters that are being regularly
monitored were selected with an eye on
sustainability and usefulness for assessing
future water quality changes. A July 24,
2001, meeting brought the main project
partners together to discuss project details
and sampling specifics, including
representatives from EPA Region 8, the
Energy & Environmental Research Center
(EERC), River Keepers, Prairie Public
Television, City of Fargo, City of
Moorhead, Moorhead Public Service
Department, Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, North Dakota Department of
Health, and River Watch.
-------
Red River water quality monitoring for the FM River
project was initiated August 2, 2001, while volunteer
monitoring training through classroom and field
instruction was conducted August 14 and 15, 2001.
Prairie Public Television will be broadcasting a 30
minute television program to be aired in October, which
will introduce the project to the public. They are also
creating a website to house all of the monitoring data
and will air 18 "water spots" to educate the public on
water issues. Prairie Public Television airs in North
Dakota, Minnesota, and Manitoba.
For more information, please contact Tom Moe at
EERC at (701) 777-5231 or tmoe(S),undeerc.org or
Stacey Eriksen at EPA at (303) 312-6692 (1 -800-227-
8917) or
eriksen.staceyfa),epa.gov or the EPA headquarters
EMPACT webpage at
http://www.epa.gov/empact
Cherry Creek Stewardship Partners Annual
Conference
-Paul Mclver, EPA Region 8
Cherry Creek Watershed 2001: A Year of Change,
Opportunities for the Future
Friday, November 2, 2001 8:30 to 4:30
South Suburban's Lone Tree Golf Club and Hotel
Facility, Littleton, CO
The focus for the Cherry Creek conference this year will
be on the changes resulting from the September 2000
Water Quality Control Commission hearings and
subsequent workshops on controls for the reservoir that
affect all watershed residents. Building on last year's
conference that emphasized gathering input from y ou on
your vision for the Cherry Creek corridor, we hope to
highlight a year of positive change and exciting
developments that demonstrate the opportunities for
continuing stewardship of the Cherry Creek Watershed.
For more information, please check our web site at:
www.cherry -creek.org or e-mail us at
partners(S),cherrv-creek.org Contact Chris Rowe,
Coordinator for the Partners at (303) 291-7347 for more
information.
Colorado Plateau Ecosystem Stewardship
-Karen Hamilton and Doug Johnson, EPA Region 8
Labyrinthine canyons, intriguing red rock formations,
breathtaking panoramic vistas, and diverse cultural
heritage and spiritual significance are signature
characteristics of this place that is unique in the world.
If you have ever explored even small parts of it, you
have probably been captivated by its entrancing desert
light and spellbound by its landscape dominated by
soaring formation canyons equal to any artistic
imagination. Through the Plateau, and responsible for
much of the carved landscape, flows the Colorado River
and its tributaries. The Colorado River is one of the
most dammed and diverted rivers in the world. The
River provides a water supply to over 30 million
residences from Colorado to California. The Plateau is
among the richest of 114 North American ecoregions
recognized by the World Wildlife Fund in terms of
flowering plants, butterflies and mammals. At least 12
Tribes maintain their indigenous languages.
This special place, once so isolated and unknown, has
become so attractive that it is suffering from a variety of
environmental impacts:
sprawl-type growth;
deteriorating air quality, affecting visibility;
being "loved to death" by large numbers of tourists;
loss of wildlife habitat;
infiltration of exotic species like Tamarisk and
Russian olive;
water quality degradation due to many sources;
surface and ground water quantity reduction, mostly
from municipal use increase;
riparian destruction;
ecosystem fragmentation from roads and associated
development; and
land damage from a variety of uses.
Colorado Plateau Vital Statistics include:
130,000 square miles
Parts of Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado, and
Wyoming
1.25 million human residences
Monument Valley (Utah/Arizona).
-Photo by Doug Johnson
-------
Five of the fastest growing metro areas ring the
Plateau: Denver, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Las
Vegas, Albuquerque
Largest cluster of National Parks within a single
geomorphic region: 36 parks and monuments
About Tribes on and around the Plateau claim a
spiritual connection to the Colorado River
40 counties, 225 local governments.
Land ownership: 50% public, 24% Native
American, 15% private, 6% state
40 million visitors annually from around the world.
Many decisions about resource use on the Colorado
Plateau are made on a daily basis by local, state, federal
and tribal governments and private land and home
owners. These decisions are often made without good,
if any, environmental information, including the quantity
and spatial distribution of the natural and cultural
resources of the Plateau. Kn Atlas of those resources
would help people see a comprehensive picture of the
Plateau and how their individual or governmental
decisions and actions may affect its natural resources.
An Atlas of Colorado Plateau Natural Resources that is
based on electronic data bases of many kinds of
characteristics would allow people to create as many
kinds of pictures as they need to understand how their
activity fits into the Plateau landscape. Unlike a typical
paper-bound atlas, an electronic atlas combines many
data base layers of different natural resources and man
made features. An electronic atlas can be manipulated
by interested people to create nearly limitless varieties of
landscape pictures. More importantly, the atlas can be
linked with certain decision support systems (computer
models) to develop "what if scenarios.
A groups of representatives from federal, state, tribal,
1-70 cut through east side of San Rafael Swell, Utah.
-Photo by Doug Johnson
local, private and academic agencies and organizations
is trying to create a Resource Atlas for the Colorado
Plateau. Pulling together the data that different
organizations and agencies have in a computer format
known as geographic information systems (GI S) is one
of the first steps. Merely compiling the political, land
ownership, and administrative boundaries in their
electronic formats from various sources was a hard-won
victory. So far, 814 data layers from five states have
been compiled and put into the same electronic format.
The next step is "integrating" the data. In that process
the boundaries of various layers are manipulated so that
they show up on the same place on a map; that is the
boundaries are "seamless." This can be extremely
difficult and time-consuming. Once the data are
compiled and integrated, the condition of the Plateau's
natural and cultural resources can be described through a
process known as data interpretation and assessment.
Data integration will help people better understand the
Plateau and their place within its varied natural
resources. Resource assessment will provide the tool to
establish trends of resource condition and how expected
uses of natural resources will affect them.
For more information, please contact Doug Johnson at
(303) 312-6834 (1-800-227-8917) or
i ohnson. douglas(S),epa. gov
Consolidated Funding Process
~Pam Dougherty, EPA Region 8
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 One Stop Shopping Process,
now known as the Consolidated Funding Process,
formally concluded the week of August 13, 2001, with
an EPA internal forum to discuss success and
improvement in the process. Region 8 Ecosystem
Protection Program developed this new funding process
in FY2001 in response to comments from applicants.
Applicants often weren't sure which funding program
best fit their proposal. They complained that it was
frustrating and time consuming to write multiple
proposals to compete for different funding opportunities.
The overall response to the One Stop Shopping process
was favorable. As a result, F Y2002 will be the second
year that Region 8's Ecosystems Protection and Water
Program will be issuing one Request for Proposal (RFP)
for four different Clean Water Act section 104(b)3
programs. The programs include Regional Geographic
Initiative, Wetlands, National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System and Total Maximum Daily Loads.
The FY2002 process will begin on October L 200 L
(request for proposals mailed out) with a ]
-------
deadline of December 3. 2001. and the process will be
completed by March 1, 2002 (draft final decisions
pending funding availability). Please make a note of the
above dates as they have changed from last year. As a
reminder, the RFP and current information will be
available on October 1, 2001, on our website at:
http://www.epa. gov/region08/community_resources/
ecoprotection/ecogrant.html and beginning in FY2002
One Stop Shopping will now be known as the
Consolidated Funding Process. Should you have any
questions, please contact Pam Dougherty at (303) 312-
6012 (1-800-227-8917) or doughertv.pam(a)epa.gov
Lake Poinsett Watershed Restoration Project
-Richard Smith, Lake Poinsett Watershed Coordinator
and Doug Lofstedt, EPA Region 8
Lake Poinsett is in the Big Sioux River watershed in
eastern South Dakota. It is one of the largest natural
lakes in South Dakota at 7000 acres. The South Dakota
Department of Environment & Natural Resources
completed a detailed study in 1996 that identified higher
than normal nutrient and sediment levels coming from
several parts of the watershed. The fishing, wildlife,
recreation and drinking water values in Lake Poinsett
and the rest of the watershed are important to local
residents and thousands of state park and educational
camp users. Under the leadership of Richard Smith, the
Lake Poinsett Watershed Restoration Project was
developed to protect these important values.
The project sponsors set a very ambitious goal of fully
restoring all the designated uses of Lake Poinsett. With
such a large watershed area (287,628 acres), they knew
they had a difficult and expensive challenge on their
hands. Local landowners are contributing large amounts
of their own labor, materials and money for water
quality practices. Project supporters have acquired
funding from the South Dakota Conservation
Commission and Consolidated Water Facilities
Construction Fund, EPA Clean Water Act Section 319
and USDA Environmental Quality Incentives Program.
In addition local entities such as Lake Poinsett Water
District, East Dakota Water Development District and
local county conservation districts are also contributing
resources to this effort. The total cost to complete the
project is estimated to be over $1.9 million not including
"When we save a river, we save a major part of an eco-
system, and we save ourselves as well because of our
dependence-physical, economic, spiritual,on the wa-
ter and its community of life.
-Tim Palmer
The Wild and Scenic Rivers of America
easements or land purchases by USFWS, USDA or
South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks. The
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
provides much of the technical assistance needed.
Richard Smith, the Lake Poinsett Watershed Project
Coordinator, states, "Don't expect landowners to buy
into conservation practices just because public opinion
favors it. Many landowners need to be shown their own
economic advantage to participate in conservation."
After two years , the project is on schedule with
construction of grassed waterways, small dams,
alternative water facilities, cross-fencing, new grass
seedings, animal waste systems and over 6000 feet of
hard practice shoreline stabilization. Anticipated end of
the project is 2006. For more information please contact
Richard Smith at Box 165, Hayti, SD 57241 or
richard-smith(S),sd.nacdnet.org
Missouri River Currents: Monitoring and
Assessment Activities Along the Fort Peck Reach
-Jean Lillich, EPA Region 8
Back in the Spring 2001 issue of Natural News, we
featured a story on the status of water quality along the
2500 miles of the Missouri River. Currently, around
two thirds of the river is listed by states or tribes as
impaired and will ultimately require the development of
Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) to address the
listed impairments. Development of TMDLs has not yet
been initiated for most of these listed segments.
However, due to the need for comprehensive data and
information on the reach, preliminary efforts have
already begun. The first TMDL issuance is for the reach
of the Missouri River from the Fort Peck Dam to the
North Dakota border by 2005.
State and federal agencies, the Fort Peck Tribes, the
Lower Missouri River Coordinated Resource
Management (CRM) Council, and the conservation
districts downstream of Fort Peck Dam have actively
begun work to develop a watershed planning effort for
the reach. The CRM in conjunction with the Tribe are
developing an action plan for a watershed roadmap of
the Fort Peck Reach. The action plan will address how
they intend to get funds for developing a roadmap, and
how they may assist with monitoring and assessment in
order to play a stronger role in the TMDL process. EPA
is developing a multi-agency strategy for monitoring and
assessment that would provide the data and information
necessary to develop the TMDL. This strategy includes
coordination and contributions by the US Geological
Survey, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Tribes, EPA,
the Montana Department of Natural Resources
Conservation and the Montana Department of
-------
Basalt 8th graders use the Stream Trailer to explore
riverbank erosion.
-Photo by Carlyle Kyzer
Environmental Quality, as well as the Army Corps of
Engineers.
For more information, please contact Jean Lillich at
(303) 312-6258 (1-800-227-8917) or
lillich. i e an(S),ep a. go v
The Story of Basalt's Storm Water
-Kristine Crandall, Roaring Fork Conservancy
An undercurrent is at work in Basalt, located midway
between Aspen and Glenwood Springs, in west-central
Colorado's Roaring Fork Valley. The plot revolves
around storm water runoff, a secretive phenomenon
whose impacts on water quality tend to follow the
saying, "out of sight, out of mind." The main characters
are the Roaring Fork Conservancy and the Town of
Basalt. At the urging of Bill Mckee, Upper Colorado
Watershed Coordinator for the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment's (CDPHE) Water
Quality Control Division, they successfully applied for a
Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution grant from the
EPA and CDPHE. The Roaring Fork Watershed
Improvement Project thus was born, with the goals of
assessing Basalt's storm water runoff and related
management practices, and expanding water quality and
river ecology education opportunities.
The Conservancy, located in Basalt, is a watershed group
focused on protecting and preserving the rivers and
tributaries of the Roaring Fork Valley. In pursuing its
mission, the Conservancy relies strongly on education
and also has an established water quality-monitoring
program. The Town of Basalt, situated on the Fryingpan
and Roaring Fork Rivers, has been concerned about
maintaining the water quality, riparian and wetland
habitat, and aesthetic values of these rivers. The
Roaring Fork and Fryingpan attract visitors from far and
wide, particularly for the outstanding fly fishing, and
they define the area's natural environment and quality of
life. The combination of a case study of a Colorado
mountain community's storm water runoff with student
education programs and other forms of outreach has
provided a unique opportunity to learn and share
valuable information. The project's timing is appropriate
given that the EPA recently drafted rules for its Phase II
storm water program, which are being applied to a
greater number of municipalities.
The project began in 1999 with the challenging endeavor
of evaluating Basalt's storm water runoff. Robert
Krehbiel of Matrix Design Group provided his drainage
engineering expertise. He conducted a full assessment
of drainage basins, runoff quantities during different
storm events, geologic influences on drainage, storm
water runoff entry points into the Fryingpan and Roaring
Fork Rivers, the area's land use patterns, and the Town's
existing storm water management infrastructure and
policies. The result is the "Storm Water Evaluation and
Recommendations Report" for the Town of Basalt,
which contains a wealth of information.
Recommendations from the report are being tailored by
Krehbiel and Town staff into a final action plan of
proposed storm water management improvements. This
plan will be presented to the Town's Board of Trustees
this fall. With the grant coming to an end in September,
the goal is to provide the Town with some examples of
possible demonstration projects. The projects will use
Best Management Practices to improve runoff entering
the river. Next steps beyond the grant will be
facilitating implementation of such projects, sharing
Basalt's case study with other communities, and refining
education programs specific to storm water runoff
issues. The report, although technical in nature, is also
broadly written and thus provides a practical tool for
information outreach. The Conservancy is excited to
make the case study and lessons learned available to
other communities in the Valley, such as Aspen and
Glenwood Springs, as well as other mountain
communities that are grappling with the issue of
increased development and related impacts of nonpoint
source pollution runoff.
On the education front, during the 1999-2000 and 2000-
2001 school years and summers, the Conservancy
provided education programs within the following
curricula areas: River Watch water quality monitoring,
aquatic invertebrate studies, riparian corridor studies,
and stream dynamics. In the 1999-2000 school year and
summer alone, the Conservancy achieved 1,845 student
-------
6
visits within the Roaring Fork Valley related to these
topics. Storm water outreach has formed a key part of
the education efforts, including Girl Scout EPA Water
Droplet Patch certification and use of the Natural
Resource Conservation Service's Stream Trailer.
The Stream Trailer, an 8-foot by 12-foot sand box
equipped with water, hose, and circulating pump, has
provided an effective tool for teaching stream dynamics.
Using the trailer, students create a complete river
environment, including forests and riparian vegetation,
which are complemented by a range of human activities.
Students then experiment with varying degrees of stream
flow to observe the interrelationships among all the
components of their watershed. The Stream Trailer
dramatically illustrates the processes of stream
morphology, erosion and sediment transport/deposition,
contribution of development to runoff, and importance
of riparian vegetation in filtering runoff and stabilizing
riverbanks.
For further information on the Roaring Fork Watershed
Improvement Project, and/or for details on obtaining the
Town of Basalt's "Storm Water Evaluation and
Recommendations Report," please contact Kristine
Crandall at the Roaring Fork Conservancy
(970) 927-1290 or rfconsvfgrof.net
Speaking of Ground Water, Did You Know...?
-Contributed by Darcy Campbell, EPA Region 8
Nearly 1.5 billion people world-wide rely on ground
water as their sole source of drinking water
(Groundwater: A Threatened Resource, U. N.
Environmental Program, Nairobi, Kenya, 1996)
Dealing with contamination of a ground water
supply may be, on average, 30 to 40 times more
costly than to prevent it in the first place (based on
an analysis of 7 cities in the U. S.)
In the U. S., about 30% of all irrigation water is
ground water pumped from the High Plains aquifer,
now drawn down so far it will take thousands of
years to recharge naturally (National Geographic,
April 2001).
Ground Water in the Plains, Canyonlands and
Mountains
-Darcy Campbell and Marcella Hutchinson, EPA
Region 8
The Source Water/Ground Water Unit in EPA Region 8
is currently writing a summary of the status of ground
Rainbow Lake, Colorado
-Photo by Peter Ismert
water in the states of Colorado, Montana, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. We expect the
report to be completed in late 2001.
The report includes:
an introduction with basics about
hydrogeology, contamination and
classification;
discussion of the major aquifers and
aquifer systems in the Region;
ground water use data by State and by
type;
ground water quality (natural and
contaminants);
success stories (examples of ground water
protection and management at the federal,
state, tribal and local levels); and
recommendations and conclusions.
The report shows that public water systems within
Region 8 are highly dependent on ground water. From
75% to 90% of each State's public water systems rely on
ground water. About 73% of the ground water within
Region 8 is used for irrigation. This is dominated by
Colorado, with almost 2,000 million gallons per day
used for irrigation. Other uses include public water
supply (approximately 15 %), industrial/commercial,
mining, livestock, domestic, and thermoelectric.
If you are interested in getting a copy of the report when
it is completed, please contact Darcy Campbell at
campbell.darcvfa),epa.govor (303) 312-6709
(1-800-227-8917).
-------
Protecting Threatened and Endangered Species In
Nonpoint Source Projects
-Kim Larson, EPA Region 8
Endangered Species Act
The Bald Eagle has become an icon of the success of
protecting and ultimately reestablishing threatened and
endangered species. We are all exposed, in one way or
another, to the underlying message of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), that is: to protect and preserve listed
species. Some of us are, however, more affected by
ESA than others. Many environmental programs and
projects are becoming intimately involved with
complying with ESA. These include several EPA
programs, such as Total Maximum Daily Loads, and
Water Quality Standards in addition to the Nonpoint
Source Pollution Program.
Nonpoint Source Program
It is EPA's obligation to ensure that NPS project
activities are not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any listed or proposed species. EPA is
required to consult with FWS where an activity "may
affect" listed species. How is this done? First, is the
activity subject to ESA compliance? To address this, a
request is made for a species list from FWS for any on-
the-ground project. Secondly, will project activities
affect any listed species or critical habitat ("effect
determination")? Project and species information is
gathered to make this determination. The information
and effect determination are compiled in a document
called a Biological Evaluation (BE). This BE is then
sent to FWS for concurrence on EPA's determination.
ESA and NPS: The Environmental Benefits
Many have questioned the benefits of addressing ESA
with regard to NPS projects. On the most basic level,
when one thinks of an environmental project, shouldn't
the protection of species automatically be a goal,
whether it is written on paper or not? Accordingly, one
benefit might be a greater understanding of a species'
habitat. Other benefits may include improved
environmental results, project flexibility and
partnerships.
If eagle nesting sites are found on a project site, for
example, the initial reaction of the project sponsor may
be to groan and expect the project to be terminated in
order to comply with ESA. This does not have to be the
case. Actually, this has not been the case so far in
Colorado. Of the ten Colorado NPS projects in 2001
that have needed BE's, only a few projects needed
additional modifications due to the presence of a listed
species. Actions necessary for a project sponsor to
address ESA may be the application of simple
conservation measures to avoid adversely affecting a
listed species. One way to address the presence of
eagles is to write into the project plan that the sponsor
agrees not to do any earth moving activities within a
certain distance of nesting sites during nesting season.
This allows the eagles to continue to nest undisturbed,
and the project to proceed due to its flexibility. In
addition, all who are involved have learned a bit about
the habitat and nesting behaviors of the eagle. Finally, a
positive relationship may be initiated between the
project sponsors and other agencies or individuals
involved with the project due to the good faith effort put
forth to protect threatened and endangered species. The
bottom line is that the presence of a listed species within
a project site does not automatically mean the project
will not happen. In reality, the knowledge and the
partnerships gained from addressing ESA may aid in the
design of outstanding future NPS projects!
For more information, please contact Kim Larson at
(303) 312-6212 (1-800-227-8917) or
larson.kim(S),epa.gov
The Mittens, Navajo Tribal Park..
-Photo by Doug Johnson
"Rivers run through our history and folklore, and
link us as a people. They nourish and refresh us and
provide a home for dazzling varieties offish and
wildlife and trees of every sort. We are a nation rich
rivers. "
-Charles Kuralt
-------
protection
Volunteer Monitoring
Tina Laidlaw (303) 312-6880
laidlaw.tina@epa.gov
Wetlands
Paul Mclver (303) 312-6056
mciver.paul@epa.gov
Watersheds and Community-
Based Environmental Protection
Marc Alston (303) 312-6556
alston.marc@epa.gov
Ground Water
Darcy Campbell (303) 312-6709
Campbell. darcy@epa. gov
Nonpoint Source Pollution
Kris Jensen (303) 312-6237
jensen.kris@epa.gov
EPA Region 8 Environmental
Information Service Center
1-800-227-8917
Natural News
Editor: Stacey Eriksen
Layout: Greg Davis
If you have an article concerning ecosystem protec-
tion, community based environmental protection, or
watersheds; we would like to hear from you!
We need your help in updating our mailing list in
order to keep Natural News coming to you!
Conserve our natural resources, please share your
copy with a friend or recycle.
Natural News Editor
Stacey Eriksen (303) 312-6692
eriksen.stacey@epa.gov
(800) 227-8917 x6692
Ecosystem Stewardship on the web: http://www.epa.gov/region08/communitv_resources/steward/est/est.html
?/EPA
U.S. EPA
999 18th Street, Suite 300
8EPR-EP
Denver, CO 80202-2466
------- |