EPA908-R-01-013
Winter 2002
A Publication of The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 Ecosystem Protection Program
&EPA
United Status
Einnraimaital Protection
Agancjr
U.S.EPA
999 18th Street, Suite 300
8EPR-EP
Denver, CO 80202-2466
In this Issue:
EPA Labs Support Watershed
Work
Big Thompson Watershed
Forum
North Fork of the Gunnison
Pine River Watershed Group
EPA Region 5 Lab Supports
Monitoring on Red River
Tributaries
EPA Lab Supports Commu-
nity-Based Sampling Effort in
Costilla County, CO
Missouri River Currents:
Tribal Environmental Justice:
Preserving Cultural Resources
Missouri River Science:
Meeting the Challenge of
Change, 6th Annual Missouri
River Natural Resources
Conference
Smart Growth Strategies
Booklet
Grant Opportunities
Watershed Management:
How TMDLs and the Clean
1
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
Betsy Peterson, with instructor Fred
Renner practicing measuring flow on the
Big Thompson.
-Photo by Tina Laidlaw
EPA Labs Support Watershed
Work
~by Tina Laidlaw, EPA Region 8
Each year, EPA's Regional labs have
provided free analytical support to a
limited number of projects to support a
number of watershed efforts throughout
many states. EPA lab staff work behind
the scenes to ensure that samples are
analyzed in a timely and accurate manner.
We would like to acknowledge the hard
work of the watershed groups, volunteer
monitors, and EPA lab staff in supporting
watershed efforts. The highlights given
below in five articles are just that:
highlights. Monitoring forms only one
aspect of all of these programs. Each
project represents a combination of
diligence, perseverance, and partnership
building. These case studies depict the
work of watershed groups in multiple
states, lab staff in several EPA Regions,
and support at local, state, and regional
levels. It is through the work of many of
these dedicated individuals that
environmental protection occurs. EPA and
the state agencies cannot accomplish all of
the environmental protection that needs to
occur, which is why it is so important to
mobilize watershed groups, volunteer
monitors, and community groups.
For more information about volunteer
water quality monitoring, please contact
Tina Laidlaw at 1-800-227-8917 X6880 or
laidlaw.tina(S),epa.gov
Big Thompson Watershed Forum
~by Tina Laidlaw, EPA Region 8 and
Rob Buirgy, Big Thompson Watershed
Forum
In 1997, local citizens in Loveland/Fort
Collins, CO established the Big Thompson
Watershed Forum (BTWF). The Forum's
goal is to assess and protect water quality in
the watershed. One of the primary
activities of the Forum has been the
establishment of a paid professional
monitoring program. Due to the
collaboration of the Forum members, a
coordinated monitoring program was
designed that maximizes resources and
reduces duplication.
A volunteer monitoring program has
always been a strong component of the
BTWF's activities. Prior to establishment
of the Forum, the only basin-wide data
available was gathered by student
(Continued on page 2)
-------
volunteers associated with Thompson Valley High
School's River Watch program. This past year, Rob
Buirgy, coordinator for the BTWF, established an
advisory group and began to expand the volunteer
monitoring program. One objective was to engage
volunteers in filling data gaps in monitoring several
tributaries and the lower mainstem of the Big Thompson
River. According to Rob, "Combining the flexibility
and enthusiasm of volunteer monitoring with the rigors
of a professional program, we have found ourselves with
the best of both worlds. Our volunteers are especially
valuable when we are exploring new methods, while the
quality assurance and sheer volume of data from the
professional program bolsters confidence in our results."
A critical goal of the Forum's monitoring program is to
generate volunteer data comparable to the data collected
as part of the paid monitoring program. Volunteers
sample 9 sites in the lower portion of the watershed and
an additional 6 sites were added within the boundaries of
Rocky Mountain National Park. Two trainings have
been held with more than 50 people attending.
Volunteers take field measurements for pH, temperature,
and collect samples for E.coli bacteria. With support
from the US Geological Survey, a small team of
volunteers is collecting discharge and stage data.
Bacteria samples are sent to the EPA Region 8 lab for
analysis on a monthly basis for the next two years.
Sandie Spence, EPA Region 8 microbiologist, uses the
new Colilert method to analyze the samples. The
Colilert method is used for the simultaneous detection
and confirmation of total coliforms and E.coli in water.
Preliminary results show high E.coli bacteria
concentrations at some of the downstream sites in the
Big Thompson river and its major tributary, the Little
Thompson. Potential sources for the high E.coli levels
are wastewater discharges and livestock operations.
This year, the Forum plans to increase the volunteer
monitoring efforts to include nutrient, sediment and
macroinvertebrate (bug) sampling.
North Fork of the Gunnison
~by Tina Laidlaw, EPA Region 8 and Karla Brown,
CSTJ Extension Service
Since April 2001, the dedicated volunteers of the North
Fork Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Project have
been collecting water samples up and down the North
Fork Valley of western CO. Volunteers undergo a
rigorous 6-hour training in the lab, plus hours out in the
field, learning how to take samples according to EPA
protocols. Then every month, and sometimes twice a
month, volunteers go out to pre -determined sample
points located in key areas of the watershed, and collect
river samples for nutrients, bacteria, metals, and field
parameters.
This project is the result of an innovative local
partnership between Colorado State University (CSU)
Cooperative Extension, the Western Slope
Environmental Resource Council, and the North Fork
River Improvement Association. Collaborative
government agency support also makes this project
possible. The Colorado Division of Wildlife analyzes
the samples for metals, the Division of Water Quality at
the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment provides analytical support for nutrients,
and EPA covers the bacteria analyses.
According to CSU Extension Agent and technical
advisor for the project, Karla Brown, "Preliminary
results indicate that the water quality in our area is good,
although the local geology, land use, and hydrology
create changes in water chemistry consistent with the
journey of that water from mountain streams to farm
fields." Generally, data results will be used to assess the
overall health of the area's waters, to educate the
community about water quality issues, and as a basis for
local decision-making.
Danielle Carre, collecting a sample along the North
Fork of the Gunnison.
-Photo by Teresa Steely,
NFRIA assistant director
-------
Pine River Watershed Group
~by Tina Laidlaw, EPA Region 8 and Tony Ranalli,
USGS
Summer 2001 marked the third sampling season
(spanning from May to October) by the Pine River
Watershed Group (PRWG). More than 20 volunteers
are involved in sampling sites in Vallecito Reservoir and
on the Pine River, located in Southwestern CO near
Durango. Volunteers collect samples at one reservoir
site, at three different depths, and two sites on the Pine
River. Samples are analyzed for chlorophyll A
(reservoir only), low-level nutrients, and total and
dissolved metals. Field measurements for pH,
temperature, dissolved oxygen, and specific conductance
are also taken by volunteers. Samples are sent to the US
Geological Survey (USGS) for analysis with the
exception of the metals samples. EPA Region 8's lab
has provided the analytical support for metals.
The PRWG formed in 1997 in response to proposed new
uses of the water in Vallecito Reservoir and noticed that
water quality data was lacking on non-tribal lands. The
PRWG partnered with the Southern Ute Indian Tribe,
the local community, and state and federal agencies to
establish a baseline of water quality data for the
watershed. After four years of data collection, the
USGS will provide the group an interpretative report on
their water quality data. In addition, Tony Ranalli with
USGS, gives an annual presentation to the group on the
results of their data collection efforts. As a result of
examining preliminary data results, the group is
considering expanding their sampling efforts to include
collection of fish tissue for mercury analysis and
analysis of sediment for total metals. The PRW G is
working with the Bureau of Reclamation to secure
funding to cover analytical costs associated with their
sampling effort for 2003.
EPA Region 5 Lab Supports Monitoring on
Red River Tributaries
~by Tina Laidlaw, EPA Region 8 and Charlene
Crocker, Energy and Environmental Research
Center
The Red River flows from it's origins at the confluence
of the Otter Tail and Bois de Sioux Rivers at
Breckenridge, MN and meanders north 550 miles across
the ancient bed of glacial Lake Agassiz, with an average
gradient of half a foot per mile, forming the border
between MN and ND before continuing to its mouth at
Lake Winnipeg north of Selkirk, Manitoba. Groups in
MN and ND were interested in augmenting data
collection efforts already underway as part of the
Environmental Monitoring for Public Access and
Volunteers and EERCpersonnel collect Red River
water upstream of the Fargo-Moorhead metro area.
-Photo courtesy of Lindsay Beard, UND
Community Tracking (EMPACT) project, FM River
(see http://www.fmriver.org).
The Red River Mid -Basin Surface Water Nutrient
Loading Assessment Project entailed collecting samples
in the Wild Rice Watershed in MN and tributaries to the
Red in ND. Starting in June and ending in October,
samples were collected at ten sites on the Wild Rice
River in MN, four sites on tributaries in ND, and one
site on the mainstem Red River on a biweekly basis and
shipped to EPA Region 5's lab (in Chicago) for analysis.
In MN, school groups were assisted by local Soil and
Water Conservation District (SWCD) staff as field
measurements forpH, conductivity, turbidity, dissolved
oxygen, stage level, and air and water temperature were
taken with samples collected on site for shipment to the
Chicago EPA lab for analysis of chlorophyll A,
ammonia nitrogen, total phosphorus, (nutrients), and
total suspended sediment. ND sample parameters
included total dissolved solids, total suspended solids,
ammonia and nitrate/nitrite nitrogen, and total
phosphorus.
The Energy and Environmental Research Center
(EERC) was responsible for collecting the ND samples.
The project demonstrates both inter-state and inter-EPA
Region collaboration. This year marks the first
sampling program. The group may continue to collect
samples next year with support from EPA Region 5's
lab. Through the EMPACT program, groups in the Red
River have received funding to conduct monitoring on
the mainstem sections of the river. All of the data
(Continued on page 4)
-------
generated through these monitoring efforts will be
available to citizens and decision makers through a web-
based information sharing clearinghouse. Norman
County SWCD District Manager Curt Borchert notes,
"Between the great hands-on involvement for local
students, professional lab assistance, and data sharing
and interpretation; this project is greatly benefiting our
understanding and management of our local resources."
EPA Lab Supports Community-Based
Sampling Effort in Costilla County, CO
~by Peter Is mert, EPA Region 8
The EPA Region 8 Laboratory, located in Golden, CO,
has been analyzing groundwater samples collected by
the San Luis Water and Sanitation District (SLWSD) in
Costilla County, CO. This is part of a community-based
effort to address citizen's environmental concerns.
SLWSD and Battle Mountain Resources, Inc (BMRI)
are collaboratively monitoring groundwater quality
downgradient of the San Luis Mine, owned by BMRI.
The Town of San Luis obtains its drinking water from
deep groundwater wells and the mine is one of several
potential sources of contamination to these wells.
The San Luis Mine lies on the south-eastern edge of the
San Luis Valley in the foothills of the Sangre de Christo
Mountains, approximately 4 miles upstream of San Luis,
CO along Rito Seco Creek. BMRI operated the San
Luis Mine from 1991 until 1997, and is now reclaiming
the area as outlined in its mining permit. BMRI's
mining operations consisted of two open-pit mines, a
cyanide vat-leach mill, and a tailings impoundment.
Recently, a surface water discharge permit was issued
by the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment (CDPHE) to BMRI to control
contaminated groundwater seeps that flow to Rito Seco
Creek. BMRI installed a groundwater treatment system
to prevent future unregulated discharges of contaminants
to the creek. The San Luis community was concerned
about this discharge, which then led to the collaborative
effort to monitor the groundwater between the mine and
San Luis.
To help address community concerns, BMRI entered
into an agreement with SLWSD to install and jointly
monitor groundwater monitoring wells between the mine
and San Luis. BMRI has been sampling and analyzing
groundwater from these wells on a monthly basis since
June 2001. The primary goal of the sampling effort is to
obtain a baseline condition of the groundwater
downgradient of the mine site.
As part of the agreement, SLWSD has been collecting
its own samples from the groundwater monitoring wells
at the same time BMRI collects its samples. The EPA
lab then analyzes the SLWSD samples in the same
manner that BMRI analyzes its samples. After a full
year of sampling, BMRI and SLWSD will discuss the
sample results. If abnormalities are detected, BMRI and
SLWSD will determine if additional monitoring or
appropriate followup activities are needed. This effort
helps provide additional confidence to SLWSD as to the
viability of their drinking-water source and will provide
an early warning to San Luis in the event that
contamination were to move beyond the mine site
toward the drinking water wells.
EPA Region 8 and CDPHE both promote this approach
where local entities identify and address their own
environmental issues. Both agencies have provided
assistance in designing the monitoring plan and are
encouraged by the collaboration between BMRI and
SLWSD to take necessary actions to ensure San Luis's
drinking water remains safe from potential sources of
contamination. Ms. Jaunita Bernal of SLWSD states,
"The San Luis Water and Sanitation District board of
directors and staff appreciate and thank EPA for their
concern and assistance in testing the District's
monitoring well samples in order to ensure the safety
and good quality of the drinking water that we provide
for our consumers."
Missouri River Currents: Tribal
Environmental Justice: Preserving Cultural
Resources in the Missouri River Basin
~by Roxanne Ornelas, EPA Region 8
The preservation of tribal cultural resources in the
Missouri River Basin is an issue that has historically
received little attention from government agencies. EPA
is committed to working with Missouri River Basin
tribes toward improved recognition and resolution of
tribal cultural resource concerns. EPA's role in the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process is
to comment on the environmental impacts of proposed
major federal actions. One such action is the US Army
Corps of Engineers' proposed revision to the Master
Manual of Operations, which governs the system of
dams and reservoirs on the main stem of the Missouri
River. Among other concerns, EPA Regions 7 and 8
have raised questions about tribal water quality,
disclosure of water quantity impacts, and impacts to
tribal cultural resources. Additionally, EPA Regbn 8
has awarded a grant to the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe to
allow Tribal elders to identify the locations of culturally
sensitive areas on the Reservation. The geographic
information system (GIS) data that will be developed
will be used to support tribal decision making about
development.
-------
Tribal cultural resources include the land, human
remains, funerary objects, tribal cultural objects and
items, medicinal plants, wildlife, sacred sites and
architecture, as defined by the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990. "Anything tied
to the ongoing survival of our culture is a cultural
resource," says Scott Jones of the Lower Brule Sioux
Tnbe.
Tribal cultural resources being threatened in the Missouri
River Basin are significant. For example, the operation
of the Missouri River dam and reservoir system has led
to excessive erosion of river banks and reservoir
shorelines that are rich in cultural sites. The loss of land
along the river has led to the ruination and desecration of
tribal ancestral grave sites. Impairments to the quality of
Missouri River water cause the degeneration of
aboriginal plant and wildlife habitats, as well as
impacting the health of tribal members. Availability of
high quality water is essential for supporting tribal
health, economy and cultural life.
The destruction of tribal historic sites threatens the very
history and culture of tribes in the Basin. Ancient
historic sites and architecture, once destroyed, are gone
forever. Animals are considered a sacred part of life and
are often an important food source for many of the tribes.
Tribal ceremonies and celebrations are held to honor the
taking of an animal. Maintaining wildlife along the
Missouri River secures an essential part of tribal life and
culture. Aboriginal plants are mainstays of tribal diet
and health maintenance and often have ceremonial uses.
Plant habitats are being lost in many parts of the
Missouri River Basin.
Why are impacts to sacred places, plants, animals and
landscapes part of environmental impact review? Under
NEPA, the definition of environment states that "Human
environment shall be interpreted comprehensively to
include the natural and physical environment and the
relationship of people with that environment."
What makes the impacts significant? The determination
of significance requires a focus on both context and
intensity. Context is the society, region, interest or
locale. Intensity is the severity of the impact.
The goal of tribal environmental justice in the Missouri
River Basin includes the preservation of tribal cultural
resources. The preservation of tribal cultural resources,
and the protection of the natural environment, would not
only benefit tribes today, but provide a legacy for future
generations.
For more information please contact: Roxanne Ornelas
at 1-800-227-8917 X6740 orDeldi Reyes at X6055
15 to feel the. du*J* that bind
Missouri River Science: Meeting the
Challenge of Change, 6th Annual Missouri
River Natural Resources Conference
April 21-24, 2002, South Sioux City, Nebraska
This year's conference will focus on the challenge of
understanding the processes of a large dynamic river
system. Papers, posters and speakers will address how
river management can respond to new scientific infor-
mation. Keynote speakers include Brian Richter of The
Nature Conservancy's Freshwater Initiative and David
Galat, river ecologist with the University of Missouri.
Field trips will feature endangered least tern and piping
plover habitat, Gavin's Point National Fish Hatchery
where endangered pallid sturgeon are raised, and habitat
restoration sites on the channelized river.
For more information call 573-876-1876 or check:
httD://infolink.cr.usgs.gov/events/02.htm
Smart Growth Strategies Booklet
-Contributed by Paul Mclver, EPA Region 8
The National Association of Counties has produced a
booklet entitled "Smart Growth Strategies: Protecting
Water Resources. Local Government Roles and options
for the Rocky Mountains and Northern Great Plains."
This colorful and informative booklet, funded by the U.
S. Environmental Protection Agency, is available from
the National Association of Counties, 440 First Street,
NW, Washington, D. C. 20001. Their phone number is
202-393-6226. Limited copies are available from EPA
Region 8. For more information please contact Paul
Mclver at 1 -800-227-8917 X6056 or
mciver.paul(S),epa.gov
-------
Grant Opportunities
~From The Sonoran Institute's Conservation
Assistance Tools Winter Newsletter
American Rivers- NO A A Community Based
Restoration Program Partnership Grants
American Rivers is seeking proposals for community-
based river restoration grants as part of its new
partnership with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Community-Based Restoration
Program. These grants are designed to provide support
for local communities that are utilizing dam removal or
fish passage to restore and protect the ecological
integrity of their rivers and improve freshwater habitats
important to migratory (anadromous) fish. The
application deadline is April 1, 2002. For more
information, including application guidelines, visit
http://www.amrivers.org/feature/restorationgrants.
htm or contact Peter Raabe with American Rivers at
rivergrants(S),am rivers.org
The Five-Star Challenge Grant Program
The Five-Star Restoration Program provides modest
financial assistance on a competitive basis to support
community-based wetland, riparian, and coastal habitat
restoration projects that build diverse partnerships and
foster local natural resource stewardship through
education, outreach, and training activities. In 2001, 60
projects received grants of on average $10,000 out of
approximately 230 applications received. The
application deadline is March 1, 2002. For more
information, including an application form, visit:
http://nfwf.org/programs/5star-rfp.htm
"Anything else you're interested in \
I is not going to happen if you can't
breathe the air and drink the
water. Don't sit this one out.
Do something. You are by acci-
dent of fate alive at an
absolutely critical moment in the
| history of our planet."
~Carl Sagan
Watershed Management: How TMDLs and
the Clean Water Act Fit
~by Karen Hamilton, EPA Region 8
What is all the flurry and worry over these T...M...D...
Ls? What does Total Maximum Daily Load mean
anyway? And, especially, what does it mean to me?
This is the third article in a series about the Clean Water
Act and how it relates to watershed efforts.
A few issues ago in Natural News (Winter 2001) I
described how parts of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
address the activities you would do while managing
water quality on a watershed basis. In that article I used
this chart:
GENERIC PROCESS
Set water quality goals
Monitor water quality
Assess and allocate
pollutant loadings
Implement protection
and restoration measures
Evaluate goal attainment
and adapt management
CLEAN WATER ACT
Water Quality Standards
305(b) Reports, 106,
volunteer monitoring
TMDLs
Permits, BMPs
Grants (319, 104(b)(3),
SRF, etc.), 305(b)
In a previous issue of Natural News (Spring 2001), I
described what CWA water quality standards are and
how they can help goal setting for your watershed work.
In the CWA, water quality standards are the goals for
the rest of the water quality framework. Water bodies
are monitored by State and Tribal water quality agencies
to determine if the standards (designated uses, narrative
and numeric criteria) are being met. If any one of these
parts of the standards that the State or Tribal agency
applied to the water body are not being met, then that
water body is considered "impaired." The CWA
requires the State or Tribal water quality agency to
create a list of water bodies that are impaired (required
by Section 303(d) of the CWA) and submit it to the EPA
for approval. This is the "303(d) list."
The CWA requires that the State and Tribal water
quality agencies then develop a "Total Maximum Daily
Load" (pollution budget) for each water body that is
impaired. EPA had not been requiring State and Tribal
agencies to develop these TMDLs. In the 1990's
lawsuits were successfully brought against EPA for not
requiring the State water quality agencies to develop the
TMDLs. The results of the lawsuits, which now number
36 across the nation, were court orders for EPA to
develop TMDLs, usually through the State agencies, on
difficult schedules. To meet the schedules, EPA and the
States have had to significantly change the focus of their
water quality work - hence, the flurry. This has been
-------
noticed by many people, but sometimes the reasons for this change and the purpose of a TMDL are not clear- hence, the worry.
So, alright, already. A TMDL is the maximum amount (load) of a pollutant (e.g., ammonia) that a water body can receive and
still meet water quality standards. It is calculated by adding the loads of that pollutant from permitted discharges (point sources)
and runoff (nonpoint sources) and a margin of safety. This is the allocation part of the TMDL; the maximum amount is allocated
among the different sources of the pollutant.
The need for a TMDL is driven by the standard, or the goal, for the water body. The TMDL creates a target to aim for in order
to meet the standards. The target is met by finding ways to reduce the load of the pollutant. These methods are called controls
and might be regulatory or rely on voluntary efforts. However, the TMDL itself is not a regulatory requirement to put controls in
place.
Here is a chart of the relationship between standards, TMDLs, and controls using some examples of different pollutants and
situations:
CWA 303(c)
Standard or end point
1. 29 ug/l-N (ammonia)
2. 7.4 ug/1 phosphorus;
3. 20ug/l phosphorus
4. Salmonid spawning use
30% substrate fines
>73F in only 10 days annually
3,000 returning females/yr
CWA Section 303(d)
TMDL Target
7.2 Ibs ammonia/day
10,1651bsP/year
50% reduction in P
Sediment load same as
reference reach
50% reduction in erosive
banks
3-9cfs minflow
CWA 402 or 319
Controls
Improved waste water treatment at one source.
Improved waste water treatment. (Impaired
recreation use) Best management practices to
reduce runoff from urban areas and construction
sites.
Livestock feeding best management practices.
Streambank restoration.
Cropland best management practices.
Grazing BMPs.
Channel restoration.
Riparian restoration.
Irrigation withdrawal BMPs.
Sometimes a water body has several pollutants that are affecting its standards. In that case, there will be a TMDL for each
pollutant. CWA Section 303(d) has no implementing authorities. The TMDL target is usually met with a mixture of regulatory
and non-regulatory tools. At its simplest, the total source of a pollutant would be a permitted discharge (e.g., 1 above) and the
control would be to increase the requirement of the permit. When the source of a pollutant is several sources of runoff not
requiring a permit (e.g., 3 and 4 above), the control measures will rely on collaboration among many people and organizations to
put in place voluntary best management practices. When the sources are mixed (e.g., 2 above) both regulatory and voluntary
tools can help control the pollutant.
To develop a TMDL can require a significant amount of water quality and other watershed data that may not exist. Models may
also have to be used to allocate loads among sources and determine what the TMDL target should be to meet the water quality
standard. To make the TMDLs as scientific as possible, a large amount of effort may be needed to develop each TMDL.
Because of the court orders or settlement agreements that require so many TMDLs to be calculated in many states, the work is
greater than the amount of money and people available. Some locally driven watershed groups have expressed interest in
contributing to the effort to develop the data for calculating a TMDL on the water body they are working on. In other
watersheds, the data watershed groups have developed through volunteer monitoring efforts has been used to calculate a TMDL,
or coalitions have helped develop and implement best management practices for nonpoint sources.
For more information on TMDLs go to:
http://www.eDa.gOV/region8/water/tmdl.html or http://www.eDa.gov/owow/tmdl
-------
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)227-2917 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
------- |