Support Restoring and Reconnecting the Upper Colorado River!

The Windy Gap Reservoir was placed on the mainstem of the Upper Colorado River in 1984, blocking the passage of fish and aquatic insects, reducing water quality and habitat, and blocking natural river maintenance processes. Now, Trout Unlimited is working with Grand County and Northern Water to reconnect the Colorado at Windy Gap and create positive changes to the river’s health and the entire ecosystem. These efforts will improve downstream fisheries, enhance riparian condition, and create a new mile of public fishing access on the re-establshed river channel.

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has issued a Draft Plan and Environmental Assessment for the project and is accepting public comment through March 10. If the project is approved, work can begin this May and be completed by November 2023.

You can support restoration and reconnection of the Colorado River at Windy Gap by submitting supportive comments to the NRCS through our simple online action center.

Your Voice Matters for Colorado's Rivers!

As leaders across the state in nine "Basin Roundtables" work to update their local water and river management plans, or "Basin Implementation Plans (BIPs)", they're taking public comment from community members. It’s time to make your voice heard: What do you think needs to happen in your local watershed for the health of your local rivers, the environment, and water supply? To help you do this, Water for Colorado is collecting comments, which will then be submitted on your behalf to your local Basin Roundtable once the public comment period ends on Nov. 15.

WATER FOR COLORADO HAS COMPILED SIX KEY RECOMMENDATIONS YOU CAN USE IN YOUR COMMENTS:

• Ensure healthy, flowing rivers

• Prioritize resilient watersheds

• Center equity

• Support for irrigated agriculture

• Include water conservation and efficiency

• Plan for sustainable Funding

Learn more about these recommendations here.

Get to your your river basin here.

Take action to protect trout fisheries and watersheds from the impacts of climate change

Photo courtesy of Trout Unlimited/Josh Duplechian

We are at a critical moment. Congress is now considering major infrastructure and spending bills that would have far-reaching impacts on America’s rivers and streams, wild and native trout and salmon, and all of us who care about them.

Trout Unlimited is asking you to take action today by contacting your elected officials and urging them to responsibly address the risks posed by a changing climate. Legislation under discussion this month could shape how our country responds to the threat facing rivers, communities, and fish and wildlife. Please urge your lawmakers to prioritize policies that address the root causes of climate change, as well as legislation that funds projects to help our lands and waters adapt to warmer temperatures and more frequent drought, wildfire, and floods.

In Colorado and throughout the west we’ve seen these impacts first hand, from the ongoing serious Colorado River basin drought to last year’s record wildfire season in Colorado. Now is the time to act, and targeted investments in watershed stewardship and promoting clean energy can help secure a future for our imperiled fisheries.

Trout Unlimited has set up a page where you can learn more and take action at tu.org/climate. Please take a moment to visit the site and use the action alert to reach out and convey your interests to your members of Congress.

Thank you for engaging on this vital issue, and for all you do for Trout Unlimited!

Submit your opposition to the Zephyr gold mine near Grape Creek

DEADLINE: Wednesday, September 1, 2021

To learn more about the proposed gold mine please read The Colorado Sun article.

For the latest information on this issue please visit https://www.savefremontcounty.org/. That is the website for the main group opposing the application for a new gold mine near Grape Creek, by Canon City. Our chapter has filed an opposition letter with the Fremont County Commissioners and also with the DRMS.

Sample letter:

I am writing to voice my opposition to the Zephyr Minerals application for a gold mine near the Grape Creek wilderness. I am concerned that this proposed mine poses too high of a risk to the neighboring creek and river. As an avid angler, I fish the Arkansas river below the Grape Creek confluence, and am worried about any possible water contamination and pollution. A few of my particular concerns:

WATER: The mine site, at 6,500 feet elevation, is 1,000 feet higher elevation than Grape Creek and the Arkansas river. It is upstream from the water plant intake for Fremont County. Any discharge from mining operations will find its way to the aquifers underground and/or the water flows. The mining operation would use approximately 65 million gallons of water per year and an unspecified amount of chemicals. With the site just 1,000 feet above the Grape Creek and Arkansas River area, this creates the potential for pollution of the water for present and future generations. The demand on underground aquifers has been estimated in the permit as “insignificant” but there is no monitoring or measures to be sure that the demand is having an “insignificant” impact.

FIRE RISK: Zephyr claims: “Not a single forest fire in the USA has been traced back to or been attributed to a modern mining operation.” and “The mine operation will manage process water and storm water. The mill process water will flow through a closed recycling system with very little discharge if any.” How many unexpected disasters have resulted from mining? It is certainly possible that the proposed Dawson Gold Mine could be yet another disaster in the making.

The permit is non-specific in the amount of water reserved for fire mitigation. It states “sufficient.” There is no Fire Protection plan associated with the current application. How could government entities approve the permit without an assurance of being able to mitigate a fire before it becomes a wildfire? The mine location is in a juniper forest, semi-arid climate which is essentially a tinder box. There would be “approximately 13,000 pounds of explosives onsite for up to a week of blasting activity… replenished weekly”. Adding explosives to an area already a tinder box for a wildfire could create a wildfire that wipes out the entire region particularly without an established fire protection plan. Why incur this risk?

RECLAMATION FUNDS: Only $261,813 has been reserved for reclamation of the “affected area” when the mine shuts down. For 82 acres? With no inflation factored into the figures? Even without structures, concrete pads, holding ponds, etc., 82 acres could not be professionally landscaped for $261,813. The reclamation allocation is too small and is not adjusted for inflation.

EMERGENCY FUNDS: There is no allocation funds to address an unexpected fire, explosion, pollution leakage, or power outage. Zephyr has to seek additional funding to operate a mine or sell off to a larger concern. Without a requirement for a “problem reserve”, where would money come from to mitigate a significant problem?

The application does not have sufficient assurances that a long-term disaster will not happen or that short term significant problems can be resolved. I am strongly opposed to it. I respectfully request that you deny this application.

To submit the letter, you’ll need to follow these steps:

1. Go to the DRMS website: https://dnrlaserfiche.state.co.us/Forms/DRMS_Comment

2. set “Contact Type” to “Individual”

3. enter your name in “Persons Represented” field

4. enter your name, address, email, phone number in the appropriate fields

5. set “Connection to Operation” to “Concerned Citizen”

6. In the “Comment/Objection Narrative” enter the sample text above and edit as desired.

7. “Permit Number” is M2021046

8. “County” is “Fremont”

9. “Site Name” is “Dawson Gold Mine”

10. Permittee/Operator Name” is “Zephyr Gold USA Ltd”

11. Select “Objection”

That’s it — click “Submit” and you should receive an email confirmation that your object was submitted.

It should look like this:

Action Alert: Support Colorado State Parks!

Action Alert: Trout Unlimited Fights Water Quality Rollback

South Platte River, Denver, CO

For nearly 50 years, the Clean Water Act has been a tool for improving the quality of waters in Colorado and nationwide – reducing degradation from discharges of pollution into our waterways. Unfortunately, the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission is now considering a rollback of its anti-degradation rules that could allow for increased pollution discharges into many Colorado waters. Urban rivers like the South Platte in Denver or Arkansas in Pueblo would be especially at risk - but mountain streams could also see their protections weakened.

You can sign our petition to oppose the water quality rollback here.

Colorado’s long-standing anti-degradation rules limit pollution dischargers on how much they can degrade existing water quality for most rivers, even when current quality is above minimum standards. Those minimum standards work as a floor, not as a target. This has helped Colorado maintain and improve the quality of its waters over time.

More specifically – Colorado’s antidegradation rule provides for three levels of antidegradation protection. At one end of the spectrum, the Commission can designate waters that are so pristine that no degradation is allowed. These are called “outstanding waters” and must meet a rigorous water quality test and exhibit special qualities that merit the strict designation (e.g., they support conservation populations of native trout, or are in a unique site such as National Park).

At the other end of the spectrum, the rule provides for the designation of streams which allow for waters to be polluted down to the floor level established by water quality standards, whether or not there are compelling reasons for doing so. These are the so-called “use-protected” waters.

Waters that are not designated outstanding or use-protected are called “reviewable waters.” Degradation of these waters is allowed, but only to accommodate important economic or social development. Currently, most Colorado streams enjoy the middle level of protection afforded to reviewable waters.

The antidegradation rule implemented by the Commission for the past 33 years has narrowly limited the weakest use-protected designations to instances where the quality of the designated waters is already fairly poor. Under the proposed rule, the Commission may designate the stream use-protected even if it is of good quality but fails to meet standards for a single pollutant. For example, under the new rule, a stream that supports a good fishery but has occasional high stream temperatures could now be designated as use-protected, allowing additional degradation of the stream by polluters – and not only for temperature, but for any other contaminant, such as nitrates and metals.

Worse yet, increased pollution would be allowed even if the reason the stream fails to achieve higher quality in the first place is because of the pollution caused by the entity now asking for the weaker use-protected designation – so that they can be allowed to pollute even more.

Many likely waters for this weakened protection will be in urban areas, creating an environmental justice issue as well, where pollution can be disproportionately worsened in already disadvantaged communities. Indeed, the Commissioner proposing this change has previously suggested that “crystal clear mountain streams” should be protected from degradation, not our Front Range urban waters. Major urban river restoration investments (like those from Denver TU and its allies along the Denver South Platte) also will be at risk from increased pollution if those waters are moved to the weaker “use protected” status.

Instead of promoting further improvement in water quality, the proposed rule would allow far more waters to have the weakest anti-degradation protection – a lowest-common-denominator approach to water quality protection that will lead to declining water quality. Making matters worse – this proposal was initially buried in the rulemaking notice as a “clarification and correction.” Fortunately, TU and other allies were alerted to the proposal and have become parties to the rulemaking; we will fight vigorously against this rollback of water quality protection. You can read our coalition’s Prehearing Statement on the rule here. Those who want to speak out against this measure can help by signing a petition we have launched on our website. The Commission will be taking this issue up for action at its hearing on June 14th – stay tuned for additional updates as we work to stop the rollback!

Take Action: Ensure Responsible Energy Development with safeguards for wildlife, fish and their habitat

Please take a moment to give your voice and urge the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) to ensure responsible energy development through providing safeguards for wildlife, fish and their habitat. Both the outdoor economy and our Colorado quality of life depends on it.

Help protect streams and wetlands: Support the Clean Water for All Act

The Clean Water for All Act is an effort to ensure that our headwaters - many of which are ephemeral or intermittent streams that do not flow year round - retain the Clean Water Act protections they’ve enjoyed for more than 40 years but that would be lost under a recently announced rule changing Clean Water Act definitions. If we don’t protect the sources of our larger rivers, we can’t protect those rivers or the fisheries and communities that rely on them!

Below is an excerpt from Steve Moyer, TU’s vice president for government affairs, read the full blog here.

The Clean Water for All Act would repeal the Trump administration’s harmful rule and direct the agencies to start over in a manner that protects America’s waterways—all of them—consistent with four decades of Clean Water Act precedent.

Research by Trout Unlimited suggests that the administration’s new rule will end Clean Water Act protections for more than six million miles of streams—half the U.S. total. These streams contribute to the drinking water supplies of 117 million Americans and provide essential fish and wildlife habitat that supports a robust outdoor recreation economy worth $887 billion.

The rule will also erase protections for more than half of the nation’s wetlands, a critical part of functioning watersheds. Wetlands help recharge groundwater, filter pollution and protect communities from flooding.

The EPA’s new rule was justifiably criticized by many state and local government agencies, fish and wildlife conservation organizations and hundreds of thousands of citizens during the rule-making comment period.  It is a real threat to trout and salmon watersheds nationwide.

The Clean Water for All Act would help protect the rivers of southwestern Oregon, and streams across the nation. Please take a moment today to help us urge House members to work with their colleagues to pass this bill into law.

Support Public Lands - the Great American Outdoors Act

Please take a moment today to ask your elected officials to support S.3422 and help secure funding for public lands and outdoor recreation.

Help protect Colorado rivers - ask your Senator to support HB1157!