A second look at "trash fish"

Ugly fish. Trash fish. Suckers. Chubs. A lot of native fish in our rivers don’t get no respect. Many anglers consider them good for nothing, except for throwing back—way back onto the bank.

But we anglers and sportsmen who care about rivers and cutthroats need to adjust our attitude a bit and quit looking down our noses at some of the “other” native fish.

Turns out “trash” fish like Colorado pikeminnow, razorback sucker, humpbacked chub, bonytail and other native species are critically important to river and trout habitat conservation efforts here in the Colorado River Basin and other watersheds in the West.

And trout and other angler-favored species are riding their fintails to a better life.

The pikeminnow has been around for millions of years in the Colorado Basin and can grow up to 6 feet long and live for decades. Pioneers used pitchforks at times, it’s said, to haul them out of the river, they were so abundant. The fish provided food (albeit a bit bony) for the settlers.

But with growing water diversions, drought, invasive species and other factors pressuring the river in the last half century, the numbers of these native fish plummeted, and they were listed under the Endangered Species Act. In 1988, the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program was launched to bring them and the chubs and suckers back to sustainable numbers.

For three decades, the program has fostered cooperation, rather than conflict, among water users and directed federal and state funds to infrastructure projects that have benefited multiple users, from ranchers and farmers to municipalities.

Trout Unlimited and other conservation groups have supported those efforts, because the water projects, improved infrastructure and enhanced river flows needed to recover pikeminnows, suckers and chubs also benefit upstream coldwater species like trout.

For instance, TU helped upgrade the Relief Ditch and Hartland irrigation diversions on the Gunnison River a few years ago—a project that improved habitat and flows for trout.

The project would not have been possible without funds directly tied to native fish recovery.

Cary Denison, TU’s project coordinator in the Gunnison area, says that many anglers don’t realize that much of the West’s native trout have been removed from their historical ranges, and the remaining “natives” are those fish that many consider to be trash fish.

“If we aim to improve these rivers, we need to leverage the importance of these species to improve trout habitat as well.”

They are some of the original members of that river community, and they belong there. We need all of the pieces of a river ecosystem intact to keep it healthy.

So take a second look at that “trash” fish and give it some serious props for helping improve and restore our rivers for the other fish species we love.

Randy Scholfield is TU’s communications director for the Southwest.

Photo credit: US Fish and Wildlife Service

Partnerships Paying Off for Fraser River

The fish are returning to Fraser Flats. It took years of vision and persistence, but Trout Unlimited’s long-game strategy of collaboration on the Upper Colorado River is paying big dividends for anglers and local communities that depend on a healthy river.

Exhibit A is the Fraser Flats Habitat Project. The Fraser River, a key tributary of the Upper Colorado, had been degraded by years of water diversions and other pressures.

TU and a host of water stakeholders joined forces to reverse that decline. The effort, called Learning by Doing, brought together a variety of partners including Denver Water, Northern Water, Grand County, Trout Unlimited, and Colorado Parks and Wildlife to help restore the Upper Colorado watershed.

The group’s inaugural project at Fraser Flats aimed to restore a roughly one-mile stretch of the Fraser between the towns of Tabernash and Fraser, with the goal of providing healthy habitat for trout even during periods of reduced flows. The Fraser in this section had become too wide and shallow, resulting in sedimentation and high temperatures that smothered bug life and pressured coldwater-loving trout.

Design work began last fall. In late spring, more than 150 volunteers turned out to plant willows and cottonwoods along the streambank for shade and bank stability. Then in summer and fall, the group brought in Freestone Aquatics to narrow the river with point bars and other structures to increase velocity and depth of the river. Freestone also created a series of riffle and deep pools to provide better holding water for trout.

The results already have been nothing short of spectacular.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife conducted a fish survey on Oct. 5, shortly after completion of the project, and found dramatic increases in the biomass of brown and rainbow trout in the stretch compared to previous surveys, and an even larger increase in numbers of larger (14" and up) fish.

Preliminary electrofishing survey results from CPW showed the reach experienced a 415% increase in brown trout biomass, and a 550% increase in the numbers of brown trout greater than 14" in length. While rainbows are a smaller component of the population (15% of biomass, 25% of larger fish #s), they also blossomed with an increase of 267% in biomass and a 400% boost in fish over 14".

"We are elated," Mely Whiting, legal counsel for Trout Unlimited, told the local Ski-Hi News. "This is amazing. The biomass [in the river] has more than tripled, just from last year, and only in the matter of a couple of weeks since the project was completed.”

Biologists also reported seeing large brown trout actively spawning in many areas of the stretch. In short, Fraser River trout have wasted no time moving into the improved habitat.

What’s more, starting in spring 2018, the project will also provide public fishing access along a half-mile of the Fraser Flats section.

“This section of the Fraser River is the healthiest I’ve seen this river in the 47 years I’ve lived here,” TU’s Klancke said. “The best part is we’re hoping to do more river improvements like this in the future with our Learning By Doing partners.”

Colorado Public Radio this week aired a segment about the successful project and the "unusual partnership" between TU and Denver Water .

Watch the video below from Denver Water for another good overview of the project benefits.

TU, partners move forward on Fraser River restoration

In this 5 1/2 minute video, Kirk Klancke, Anna Drexler-Dreis and other leaders with the Colorado River Headwaters Chapter share the story of how collaboration among TU, Grand County, Denver Water, and other stakeholders is creating opportunities to restore healthier habitat for the Fraser River and its riparian corridor.

Unveiled at the Colorado Headwaters Chapter's annual banquet in July, the video was part of that evening's theme of recognizing how "conservation starts with conversation", recognizing key leaders including Denver Water board member Tom Gougeon and former Grand County Commissioner James Newberry for their leadership in opening the door for greater dialogue and cooperation among former adversaries in addressing  shared interests in the health of the Fraser River watershed.

To learn more about the work of the Colorado River Headwaters Chapter with the Fraser and Upper Colorado  Rivers, you can visit the chapter website here.

Corps approves permit for Moffat Project in Colorado headwaters

The Army Corps of Engineers gave its approval to Denver Water's proposal to expand Gross Reservoir in Boulder County in order to firm its Moffat System water supplies from Grand County. While the project will increase total diversions from the Colorado headwaters, Denver Water has incorporated mitigation and enhancement measures to the project that local TU members in Grand County believe can actually improve the Fraser River's health. As part of its commitments under this permit and the associated mitigation and enhancement plans, Denver Water will manage diversions to help provide needed flushing flows on the Fraser and its tributaries, complete habitat and native trout restoration work in the Williams Fork basin, and contribute funds toward ongoing habitat improvement efforts like the Fraser Flats project.

“The Fraser is a river beloved by generations of anglers, boaters and other outdoor enthusiasts —it’s the lifeblood of our community,” said Kirk Klancke, president of TU’s Colorado River Headwaters chapter in Fraser and a longtime advocate for the river. “As an angler and Fraser Valley resident, I’m gratified that this agreement keeps our home waters healthy and flowing.”

Most significantly, Denver Water will participate in an adaptive management program called "Learning by Doing" through which Denver, Grand County, Trout Unlimited, and other local stakeholders are cooperating to apply mitigation and enhancement resources, monitor river and watershed conditions, and make adjustments to achieve the best results over time. "Rather than remaining an adversary, Denver Water has joined us and our west slope partners as a partner working to improve conditions in the Fraser watershed," explained Colorado TU Executive Director David Nickum.

In addition to the Learning by Doing effort, Denver Water has also pledged resources for improvement work on South Boulder Creek and on the North Fork South Platte (which will be impacted by ripple effects from Gross Reservoir expansion on Denver's systemwide operations, including the Roberts Tunnel). 5000 acre-feet in the enlarged reservoir will also be reserved as an environmental pool to be managed to help provide instream flows at key times to downstream reaches of South Boulder Creek.

Good News for Colorado Headwaters & Native Trout

Denver Water recently filed its application for an amended license with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for its Gross Reservoir/Moffat Firming project. The filing included valuable new commitments to benefit native trout in headwater watersheds within the Fraser and WIlliams Fork basins - and that's good news for cutthroats and the anglers who value them. More than two years ago, Denver Water came to an agreement with Grand County and TU that incorporated a variety of river protections and enhancements in conjunction with their Moffat Firming Project - measures that we agreed would result in a healthier Fraser and Upper Colorado River system than without the Moffat project. The agreement was a great model of collaborative conservation to achieve better outcomes than we could achieve alone.

On top of reiterating their past commitments to enhancing the Colorado headwaters, Denver Water's new FERC application includes additional commitments to benefit native trout on pubilc lands in the Williams Fork of the Colorado and the Fraser River watersheds. Specifically:

• Denver will install fish barriers on Bobtail and Steelman creeks in the Williams Fork headwaters to secure existing populations of native cutthroat trout in approximately 6.3 miles of habitat
• Denver will install a fish barrier in nearby McQueary Creek that will secure another 2.6 miles of habitat that can then be restored for native cutthroat trout by the US Forest Service and Colorado Parks and Wildlife
• Denver will maintain and operate its diversions on Hamilton and Little Vasquez creeks in the Fraser watershed to permanently secure existing native cutthroat trout populations in approximately 10 miles of habitat
• Denver will help coordinate and participate in a joint interagency restoration project to protect up to 15 miles of new cutthroat trout habitat in St Louis Creek, also in the Fraser watershed

These commitments were incorporated in a settlement agreement between Denver and the US Forest Service for the FERC licensing process, and represent another important step in ensuring that the impacts of Denver Water's Moffat project are mitigated. Denver Water has said that they intend to leave the watersheds impacted by their project in better health than they are today - and these new commitments to native trout restoration in the Williams Fork and Fraser basins are another positive move in converting those words into on-the-ground action.

Kudos to Denver Water and the US Forest Service for launching a strong partnership to benefit native trout!

Lessons from the Roan

By David Nickum For more than a decade, the battle over Colorado’s Roan Plateau—a beautiful green oasis surrounded by oil and gas development—raged in meetings and in courtrooms. At issue: Would the “drill, baby, drill” approach to public lands carry the day and the path of unrestrained energy development run over one of Colorado’s most valuable wildlife areas? Or would “lock it up” advocates preclude all development of the Roan’s major natural gas reserves?

Luckily, this story has a happy ending—and a lesson for Colorado and other states in the West struggling with how to balance the need for energy development with conservation of public lands and irreplaceable natural resources.

The Bureau of Land Management recently issued its final plan for the Roan Plateau, closing the most valuable habitat on top of the plateau to oil and gas leases. The plan, which will guide management of the area for the next 20 years, also acknowledges the importance of wildlife habitat corridors connecting to winter range at the base of the Plateau.

At the same time, the BLM management plan allows responsible development to proceed in less-sensitive areas of the plateau that harbor promising natural gas reserves and can help meet our domestic energy needs.

What happened? After years of acrimony and lawsuits, stakeholders on all side of the issue sat down and hammered out a balanced solution. Everyone won.

It’s too bad it took lawsuits and years of impasse to get all sides to do what they could have done early on: Listen to each other. We all could have saved a lot of time, money and tears.

The Roan example is a lesson to remember, as the incoming administration looks at how to tackle the issue of energy development on public lands.

There’s a better way, and it’s working in Colorado.

The BLM also this month, incorporating stakeholder input, closed oil and gas leasing in several critical habitat areas in the Thompson Divide—another Colorado last best place—while permitting leasing to go ahead in adjacent areas.

That plan also represents an acknowledgment that some places are too special to drill, while others can be an important part of meeting our energy needs.

And in the South Park area—a vast recreational playground for the Front Range and an important source of drinking water for Denver and the Front Range—the BLM is moving ahead with a Master Leasing Plan (MLP) for the area that would identify, from the outset, both those places and natural resources that need to be protected and the best places for energy leasing to proceed.

We have said that we want federal agencies in charge of public lands to involve local and state stakeholders more closely in land management planning—that perceived disconnect has been the source of criticism and conflict in the West regarding federal oversight of public lands.

The MLP process is a new tool that promises to address some of that top-down, fragmented approach to public land management. To their credit, the BLM is listening and incorporating suggestions from local ranchers, conservation groups and elected officials into their leasing plan for South Park.

This landscape level, “smart from the start” approach is one way for stakeholders to find consensus on commonsense, balanced solutions that allow careful, responsible energy development to occur while protecting our most valuable natural resources.

The lesson I take from the Roan? We can find solutions through respectful dialogue—and we shouldn’t wait for litigation to do so. Coloradoans can meet our needs for energy development and for preserving healthy rivers and lands by talking earlier to each other and looking for common ground.

Fish-friendly irrigation: flood or sprinkler?

By Brian Hodge In Trout Unlimited’s work with ranchers and farmers of the Upper Colorado River Basin, we often hear arguments about the relative benefits of flood and sprinkler irrigation for stream flows and fish.

Proponents of flood irrigation note that it requires a producer to divert more water from a stream than the crop can consume, and that unused irrigation water provides a benefit to fish because it returns to the stream when flows are otherwise low.

Meanwhile, proponents of sprinkler irrigation note that it requires a producer to divert little more from a stream than the crop demands, and that water left instream provides a benefit to fish because it maintains flows when water would otherwise be diverted.

But which is correct—in other words, does flood or sprinkler irrigation provide a greater benefit to fish in the Upper Colorado River Basin?

The short answer is, it depends.

In some cases, return flows from flood irrigation provide delayed benefits to streams and fish.  A research group from the University of Wyoming recently concluded, for example, that late-summer return flows from flood irrigation are critical to the brown trout fishery in the New Fork of the Green River (Blevins et al. 2016).  Moreover, the authors posited that if ranchers in the watershed improve efficiency by converting from flood to sprinkler irrigation, late-season streams flows will drop, and with them, the density (pounds/mile) of brown trout.  The authors also suggested that perpetuating flood irrigation in the Upper Green River Basin might be an effective way to maintain its healthy trout streams.

Although flood irrigation return flow can provide delayed benefits to fish, not all return flows reach streams at a time and in an amount necessary to confer a benefit.  An important assumption in the New Fork study was that water diverted in early-summer returned to streams later that season.  Our own analyses suggest that lag time on the western slope of Colorado can range from as little as days or weeks to as much as months or more.  Lag time on surface return flow (e.g., water flowing across a saturated field) is typically very short, whereas lag time on sub-surface return flow is highly variable and largely dependent upon the groundwater flow rate and distance between field and stream.  In some cases, return flows are intercepted and used by other irrigators.

In our thinking, fish- and flow-related benefits are intimately tied and dependent on a number of variables.  A 25% boost to flows in August, for instance, when flows are typically low and temperatures warm, could be quite meaningful for fish.  In contrast, a 5% increase in discharge in mid-fall or early-spring, when flows are low to moderate and temperatures cool but not cold, could go undetected by fish.  In short, the fish-related benefits of return flow (or lack thereof) depend on a number of factors, including the timing and amount of return flow, stream conditions, and the biology of the fishes in the stream.

Irrigation efficiency improvements, such as conversions from flood to sprinkler irrigation, can provide fish-related benefits where the short-term effects of leaving water instream outweigh the long-term benefits of taking it out.  Consider an example where the current regime is flood irrigation and the lag time on return flows is on the order of days or weeks.  In this case, there is little if any delayed benefit: water leaves from and returns to the stream in relatively short order.  In the meantime, more water is diverted from the stream than is required to meet crop demand, and consequently, stream flows and fish habitat are reduced between the point of diversion and point of return.  Also, return flow water—especially that on the surface—is likely to be warmer and more nutrient-rich than the source stream.  Here, a simple efficiency improvement could improve flows and water quality below the point of diversion.

Because each agricultural operation and watershed is different, TU tends to avoid generalizations about flood and sprinkler irrigation. The truth is, fish-related goals might be attained with flood irrigation in one watershed, and with center pivot sprinklers in another.  At the end of the day, the best solution is the one that works for both agricultural producers and fish.

Brian Hodge is a fisheries biologist and restoration coordinator for Trout Unlimited in the Upper Colorado River Basin.

Rain Barrels are Officially Legal!

On Wednesday, August 10, using a a barrel to collect rain water is legal in Colorado. Coloradans can now collect up to 110 gallons of rain water and store it for outdoor usage on yards, gardens, or plants. According to Conservation Colorado, using rain barrels could conserve up to 1,200 gallons of water each year per household. A study by the state of Colorado found that in just Douglas County alone, 97 percent of rain water was lost to evaporation and vegetation. Using these barrels, the rain will be collected in a covered unit to reduce the amount of evaporation.

Using rain barrels will also allow users to become more connected to water- the most valuable resource in the West. When collecting water through a rain barrel, it will give users a better idea of how much water they have received recently, how much they're using, and how clean the water is.

For anglers using a rain barrel will not only help keep water in rivers but it will also provide a demonstration of the current state of water. The barrel's fluctuation provides a good example of how the highs and lows of rivers fluctuate with rainfall amounts.

For more information about the collecting rain water, visit The State Website or check out this Fact Sheet from CSU

The Year After Gold King

It's been a year and a few days since a spill at the Gold King Mine near Silverton released three million gallons of heavy-metal-laden, mustard yellow sludge into the Animas River. Photos of the yellow water dominated headlines all over the world. Words like "disaster" and "catastrophic" were used. While the initial spill came as a shock to most, the river was able to withstand the blow. One year after the sludge came through, the river is back to it's usual state of water quality.

There was no fish mortality documented from the spill, while bug sampling by an aquatic biologist with Mountain Studies Institute indicates a still thriving population of mayfly nymphs and caddis pupa. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) had installed pens of fingerling trout in the Animas before the plume arrived- and none of those fish died either. CPW ran an electro-shocking episode after the “Spill” with the usual re-capture protocol and got essentially the same results as the year before. Actually, the survey showed a slight improvement.

"This is not to diminish our concern for the Animas River and the fishery in the canyon below Silverton. This reach has been substantially impacted by three draining mines at the headwaters of Cement Creek, which flows into the Animas at Silverton," said Buck Skillen, President of the 5 Rivers Chapter of TU. "This, plus the Gold King Spill, highlights the very need for Good Samaritan Legislation for which TU is strongly advocating – so that abandoned mine cleanup projects can proceed here and elsewhere."

Getting the river back to it's usual state was no easy task but Trout Unlimited and partners were willing to take the lead. "It’s been quite a year since the Gold King spill sent a torrent of yellow, metal-laden mine water down the Animas River in SW Colorado," said Ty Churchwell, TU San Juan Mountains Coordinator. "But long before this unfortunate event, TU was deeply embedded in the water quality conversation – and now we’ve doubled down. Our efforts to pass Good Samaritan legislation are bearing fruit in the form of a bipartisan discussion draft now working its way through the halls of Congress. We hope to see the bill formally introduced this session."

The 5 Rivers Chapter of Colorado TU worked with Mountain Studies Institute (MSI) in Durango by taking water samples every two hours from before the plume arrived until days later. They also monitored the macro-invertebrates in the river as the disaster unfolded. The year previously, 5 Rivers Chapter had worked with MSI to do a macro-invertebrates study that served as a baseline for clean-up efforts following the spill.

Also prior to the spill in August, Trout Unlimited teamed up with other partners to form the San Juan Clean Water Coalition. The intent when forming the coalition was to produce a site-specific Good Samaritan legislation for the San Juan Mountains of Colorado. In the wake of the spill, the intentions have broadened to use the Animas as an example for the potential issues in the West.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, abandoned hard rock mines affect 40 percent of headwaters in the western United States. Just in the San Juan Mountains, slow acid drainage has led to the death of multiple rivers. "The community of Silverton, at the Animas’ headwaters, is now pursuing a Superfund listing to finally, once and for all, deal with the lingering problem of acid mine drainage (AMD) from dozens of old mining sites," said Churchwell. "The TU-led, San Juan Clean Water coalition, has grown dramatically and we’re making a real difference.  In the wake of the spill, the coalition’s objectives have expanded to include a comprehensive, five-point plan to greatly improve the overall health of the watershed and the world class trout fishery in Durango"

The Good Samaritan Legislation would address the current pollution clean-up laws in the United States. Currently, the Clean Water Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, place the clean-up burden on the property owners. But in the case of these abandoned mines, the owners are long-gone. Now the clean-up falls on the shoulders of Good Samaritans like TU and other partners. However, the liabilities in the laws- requiring a project to show significant improvements for a specific period of time and makes the Good Samaritan liable for any failures in improvements- have caused a legal gridlock.

Since the Gold King Mine spill, Colorado’s Senators Michael Bennet and Cory Gardner, and Representative Scott Tipton have taken the issue to Washington where the Good Sam legislation has been moving along.

"If there are any silver linings to all of this, it’s that citizens, elected officials and communities all over the west are now aware of the massive problem of acid mine drainage, and people are paying attention. The Gold King spill was a wakeup call for the nation," said Churchwell. "Thank goodness the Animas didn’t die to make a point.  In the end, there was no real ecologic ‘disaster’, as was portrayed in the media. There was no die-off of fish and our bug studies are showing excellent insect populations in the Gold Medal water in Durango. But, there is a real problem at the top of the watershed and we’re moving in the right direction. The Animas remains one of Colorado’s premier trout fisheries."

Elk Creek Fish Passage Project

Last week Trout Unlimited was granted a $78,000 Fishing Is Fun grant from Colorado Parks and Wildlife for a fish passage project on Elk Creek near New Castle, Colorado. TU partnered with CPW to design and build a fish passage channel around the Ware and Hinds irrigation diversion structure on Elk Creek, a tributary to the Colorado River main-stem with its confluence at New Castle, CO. The Ware and Hinds diversion structure spans the width of the channel and presents a barrier to spawning fish moving out of the Colorado River main-stem

This project is intended to serve as an additional source of fishes to the Colorado River by providing access to spawning, nursery, and rearing habitats above the dam- roughly 3.3 miles of currently unused spawning habitat. Native and non-native fishes will have the opportunity to recruit both within the Elk Creek drainage and downstream to the Colorado River. The completion of this project would increase public angling opportunities for wild trout, and in doing so, has the potential to benefit local businesses that rely on these increased recreational opportunities and associated revenues.

The total $166 thousand project is slated to be completed in June 2017 with the passage construction beginning this November.

The fish passage project could not have moved forward without the work from the Ferdinand-Hayden Chapter by raising $3,000 that allowed for the preliminary engineering to be completed. "This came at a critical time when I needed to finalize our design drawings," said Richard Van Gytenbeek, Colorado River Basin Outreach Coordinator. "Their contribution allowed me to pay the engineer and complete the drawings which kept the project going."

TU also acknowledges the Fishing Is Fun review committee for funding a project that has a different approach to their stated program goals. "Normally successful grants improve habitat, facilities (ramps, docks, bathrooms, etc.) and public access. The key is that they all have a direct link to public access," said Van Gytenbeek. "In this approach TU made the case that if we could get these fish upstream to spawn that their progeny would, over time, increase population numbers in the Colorado River main-stem; one of the most publicly accessible river sections in the state. The project will effectively create a wild fish hatchery that feeds the main-stem and benefits all anglers."

The Elk Creek passage also demonstrates the growing relationship between TU and agriculture partners. The fish passage is actually cutting through the Ware and Hinds irrigation and diversion structure. "We got the cooperation and unanimous support of the Ware and Hinds Ditch Co. board and shareholders and the underlying agricultural landowners (Burning Mountain Cattle Co. and William Family Partnerships)," according to Van Gytenbeek. "This continues to demonstrate the importance of sportsmen and agricultural interests working together for the betterment of local rivers and streams and the communities that depend on them."