1 10 28 https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/53df56ca3e4b16c77817b8d28be372e1.pdf 311c4631cbefbd0a2d33a1258b6cfa54 PDF Text Text C O L O R A D O P A R K S & W I L D L I F E Big Game Hunting Quick Guide Planning Your License Purchase and Hunt Start With Hunter Education Hunter Education certification is required before buying or applying for any hunting license if you were born on or after 1/1/49. Plus, Hunter Ed provides an excellent overview of Colorado hunting. The course covers the basics of hunting safety, wildlife identification, outdoor skills, regulations, and includes a live fire session. Online classes, traditional classroom classes and Bowhunter Ed (specialized archery classes) are offered. Colorado also honors all other state Hunter Ed certifications. The calendar of available classes is online. Elk Mule Deer Choose Your Species First, decide which of the nine big-game species you’d like to hunt and the gender of the animal you’ll pursue. The hunting regulations for each big-game species are published in the regulation brochures released each February: • Big Game (elk, mule deer, white-tail deer, pronghorn, moose and bear) • Sheep and Goat: (Rocky Mountain and desert bighorn sheep and mountain goat) Pronghorn Decide Where to Hunt Colorado divides the state into distinct hunting areas called Game Management Units or GMUs (see map). To prevent over harvesting, a limited number of licenses by species are assigned to be sold in each GMU. The number of limited licenses available in each GMU is called the quota. The GMU map and unit descriptions are published in the regulation brochure(s). Colorado boasts 23 million acres of public land with easy hunting access. Private land only licenses are also available. Select Your Method Colorado offers distinct seasons for archery, muzzleloader and rifle hunting. Requirements for the various methods and for transporting them in the field are listed in the brochures. Archery Rifle Muzzleloader Pick Your Hunting Season Archery season offers the earliest big-game opportunities, starts in late August and lasts almost a month. Muzzleloader season overlaps the archery season and starts towards the middle of September. Colorado offers four distinct rifle seasons with the opportunity to hunt from October until January. The second and third rifle seasons are the longest and these seasons span two weekends. (See the brochures for specifics and hunt codes.) Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Desert Bighorn Sheep Mountain Goat COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE • 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80216 • (303) 297-1192 • cpw.state.co.us Photos © CPW, unless noted Moose © DonaldMJones.com © Tyler Baskfield Bear © Ken Archer White-Tail Deer �When to Apply and/or Buy a License APPLY for the DRAW Early April—Limited Licenses • Limited Licenses—(set numbers available by unit) • Public & Private Land Only (PLO) Licenses • Ranching for Wildlife Licenses—CO residents only Application Deadline—1st Tuesday in April each year BUY Early August—All licenses on sale • Leftover Limited Licenses—no application needed to purchase any limited license remaining after the Draw • Over-the-Counter (OTC) Licenses—(Unlimited availability or with a cap) Elk, pronghorn, bear and limited whitetail. Where to Buy or Apply • Online—cpw.state.co.us • By Phone—800-244-5613 • In Person—License Agents & CPW Offices • By Mail*—Applications published in the brochures *Note-Non-resident moose, sheep and goat applications must use paper applications to apply and be postmarked by the deadline. Hunt Preparation Colorado big game hunting is a curiosity for many and venturing out into the field to pursue game for the first time requires a little planning to be successful. Obtaining your big-game license, building the skills to harvest an animal, making sure you have the right gear, scouting for game and physically preparing for the hunt are all part of the preparation process. Planning Resources • Big Game Brochures: Online with helpful videos or print • Colorado Hunting Atlas: Online virtual scouting • Skills Building Classes and Seminars: Class calendar online • Regional Hunt Guides: Unit detail by Region • Enews: Reminders delivered straight to your inbox • Elk Hunting University: Online articles and advice • Colorado Outdoors magazine: Timely recreation articles • Hunt Planner Webpage: Planning checklist and helpful links • Shooting Ranges: Over 100 ranges for practice and sight-in • Outfitter Directory: Outfitters offering guided hunts Call (303) 297-1192 or (303) 291-PLAN (7526) Hunt Elk Every Year—no application needed Colorado offers an unlimited number of OTC Bull Elk Rifle tags during the second and third seasons. That OTC license allows you to hunt in any of the units shaded in gold below during the season. Current OTC maps are available each February. 2014 OTC BULL ELK UNITS | 2nd & 3rd RIFLE SEASONS Please check the 2014 Colorado Big Game Hunting brochure for unit specific regulations | Colorado Parks and Wildlife | cpw.state.co.us | (303) 297-1192 COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE • 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80216 • (303) 297-1192 • cpw.state.co.us 5/2014 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Big game hunting quick guide Description An account of the resource Planning your license purchase and hunt Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource <span>Colorado Parks &amp; Wildlife</span> Subject The topic of the resource Hunting Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2014-05 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Colorado Parks and Wildlife https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/5e8c3e42b4fdd973ec616ca8654b6a98.pdf 3e4fc8b4b0cff67214bc0aa22b853a1e PDF Text Text Whitewater Park Projects Guidance for Reviewing 404 Projects �COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE Dan Prenzlow, Director LEADERSHIP TEAM Reid DeWalt, Assistant Director for Aquatics, Terrestrial and Natural Resources; Heather Dugan, Assistant Director for Field Services; Justin Rutter, Assistant Director for Financial Services; Lauren Truitt, Assistant Director for Information and Education; Jeff Ver Steeg, Assistant Director for Research, Policy, and Planning; Brett Ackerman, Southeast Region Manager; Cory Chick, Southwest Region Manager; Mark Leslie, Northeast Region Manager; JT Romatzke, Northwest Region Manager STUDY FUNDED BY Colorado Parks and Wildlife SUGGESTED CITATION Kondratieff, M. C., K. R. Bakich, E. E. Richer, D. A. Kowalski, and B. F. Atkinson. 2020. Whitewater Park Projects: Guidance for Reviewing 404 Projects. Colorado Parks and Wildlife Aquatic Research Section, Fort Collins, CO. 26 pp. �Introduction Colorado Parks and Wildlife’s (CPW) statutory mission is to perpetuate the wildlife resources of the State, to provide a quality State Parks system, and to provide enjoyable and sustainable outdoor recreation opportunities that educate and inspire current and future generations to serve as strategic stewards of Colorado’s natural resources (C.R.S. § 33-9-101 (12) (b)). As CPW is responsible for the management and conservation of aquatic resources within the State, we are asked to review projects that may affect aquatic habitats or populations. Specifically, CPW staff is often engaged by the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to review permit applications related to the design, construction, and monitoring of whitewater parks (WWPs) regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. WWP projects typically fall under the following permits:   NWP 27 - Aquatic Habitat Restoration, Establishment, and Enhancement Activities IP - An individual, or standard permit, is issued when projects have more than minimal individual or cumulative impacts, are evaluated using additional environmental criteria, and involve a more comprehensive public interest review. Recreational in-channel WWPs (Figure 1) are gaining popularity throughout the United States with Colorado being the epicenter for WWP development. Although WWPs provide economic and recreational benefits for local communities (Hagenstad et al. 2000; Loomis and McTernan 2011), they can have unintended impacts on aquatic biota, habitat, and river functions. This is especially true when the hydraulic conditions formed by the WWP differ substantially from those naturally found in the surrounding river. Natural unmodified river channels are not good candidates for locating WWPs (American Whitewater 2007). Rather, WWP projects should be located in areas that have already been substantially modified by past human activities. A B Figure 1. Two typical whitewater park structures include chute-type (A) and drop-type structures (B) CPW recommends that adequate environmental safeguards be included in the design and construction of WWPs to assure that impacts to river functions (Harman et al. 2012), fisheries, and recreational angling opportunities are minimized. The intent of this document is to provide USACE with uniform guidance from CPW with regard to project review to assure that the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) is followed when WWPs are proposed, designed, constructed, and maintained over time. CPW offers the following guidelines to maximize the benefits of recreational WWP opportunities while 1 �minimizing adverse impacts to fisheries and river functions. These are general recommendations and each project should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis prior to issuing permits. Failure to demonstrate that the following guidelines were implemented with due diligence will result in categorical opposition to the project from CPW. General Recommendations WWPs are constructed in a wide variety of stream locations utilizing a diverse array of design elements that are unique to the particular design firm and project engineer, project goals and expectations, and river conditions. General recommendations for all WWP projects should include: 1) Early Consultation with CPW: Contact the local CPW Area Aquatic Biologist as early as possible in the design process to obtain information regarding the species presence, fish populations, and fisheries management objectives for a proposed project site. CPW conducts hundreds of fish population surveys on streams and rivers throughout Colorado annually and uses survey results to inform fisheries population management. Instructions for submitting formal requests for CPW fisheries data are available at the CPW Aquatics Data Management webpage. A map of CPW management areas with contact information for Aquatic Biologists is included in Appendix A and available at the CPW Aquatic Management webpage. 2) Monitoring and Adaptive Management: Monitoring efforts may focus on physical aspects of habitat, biological aspects of fish populations, or a combination of both. Monitoring efforts should be tailored specifically with the goal of detecting undesired or unintended impacts to the aquatic environment or community. CPW recommends a minimum monitoring period that includes two years of baseline and five years following project construction. Data collection should focus on documenting baseline conditions, as-built conditions, and project effectiveness with at least two monitoring events occurring during the five year post-construction monitoring period. Adaptive Management provides a framework that incorporates measurable, relevant monitoring criteria and predetermined thresholds for acceptable change to assess and address undesired or unintended impacts to the aquatic environment and communities (Bouwes et al. 2016). Every WWP design package should include a detailed Adaptive Management Plan (AMP). An AMP should identify quantifiable monitoring criteria and anticipated impacts to the aquatic environment that incorporates review and input from CPW and other management agencies to the USACE. A robust AMP will include a remediation strategy that identifies stakeholders, resolution processes, and funding sources to engage if project objectives are not met and thresholds are exceeded. 3) Thresholds for Mitigation Actions: As part of the permitting process prior to issuing permits and project implementation, regulators should work with CPW to establish the level of allowable impairment to the natural resource and develop objective thresholds to trigger mitigation actions, such as requiring structural modifications or off-site mitigation. Objective and measurable thresholds for changes to river condition and function will provide enforceable triggers for mitigation or remediation actions. 4) Cumulative Impacts: The potential for cumulative impacts exist when a WWP has two or more structures. Projects consisting of multiple structures should be reviewed as having the potential for cumulative impacts. Cumulative impacts should be viewed as more serious than impacts from a single structure. WWPs have the potential to cause 2 �cumulative impacts to fish passage, fish habitat or both within a single project location or when a project is located in proximity to other existing manmade river structures (e.g., diversion structures, dams, etc.). Some examples of cumulative impacts from WWP development include: degradation of State-identified high priority habitats and creation of fish movement obstacles or barriers that limit access by fish to critical forage, refugia, or reproductive habitats. Popular whitewater park recreation activities on a Colorado stream. A CPW fact sheet that provides an overview of WWP research, impacts on fisheries, and design guidelines has been included as Appendix B. Fish Passage WWP structures have the potential to negatively affect fish by fragmenting populations, reducing migratory ranges, and limiting access to habitat for spawning, feeding, and refuge (Schlosser and Angermeir 1995). Aquatic habitat fragmentation is ubiquitous throughout Colorado, contributing to the decline of native aquatic species diversity and abundance (CPW 2015). The elements that create and maintain a desirable play wave (hydraulic jump, increased velocity, decreased depth, steep-sloping long chutes, abrupt vertical drops, and grouted smooth stream channel) can create hydraulic conditions that can impede or prevent upstream fish passage. Suppression of upstream fish movement has been documented at WWP structures, but the degree of impact varies by fish species, fish size, depths, velocities, characteristics of individual structures, and variability in flow conditions (Stephens et al. 2015; Fox et al. 2016; Richer et al. 2018). As trout are among the strongest swimming and jumping species found in Colorado, small-bodied and weaker-swimming fish native to Colorado streams are even more susceptible to suppression of upstream movement at WWP structures. Migratory populations of native Colorado suckers, minnows, and trout are also adversely affected by habitat fragmentation, with some individuals moving long distances (25 or more miles) during upstream migrations to access spawning habitat (Kondratieff et al. 3 �2017; Thompson et al. 2019). To minimize loss of fish passage functions, CPW recommends the following guidelines be incorporated into the design of WWP projects: 1) Target Species and Life Stages: Design WWP structures to allow upstream fish passage for all species present at the project site, unless there are specific management objectives that warrant exclusion of particular fish species. Fish passage elements are expected to pass juvenile and adult life stages (Forty et al. 2016). 2) Design Flows: Fish passage design elements of WWP structures should be designed to provide passage across a range of typical flows, including flows corresponding with the timing of critical life history movement events such as spawning migrations or access to refugia. The average daily discharge that is exceeded 95% and 5% of the time should be selected for the low and high fishway design flows, respectively (NMFS 2008). 3) Fishway Invert Elevations: Fishways are engineered pathways specifically designed to accommodate fish movement around or through WWP structures. Fishways should provide passable conditions over a range of flow conditions. Fish passage design elements should be constructed so that the upstream invert of the fishway exit is located at a lower elevation than the upstream invert of the WWP recreation structure crest to ensure that the fishway functions during extreme drought or low flow conditions. 4) Instream Flows: Fishways should have sufficient capacity for carrying either: 1) the decreed instream flow (if a Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) instream flow water right exists for the stream or river in question), or 2) where no decreed instream flow exists, a minimum flow volume that is reasonably necessary for maintaining fish passage in the stream or river in question. 5) Attraction Flows: Sufficient attraction flows at the downstream fishway entrance is a critical factor that will affect efficiency of the fish passage structure. The hydraulic conditions (i.e., velocity, depth, and turbulence), quantity, and location of attraction flows are all important design considerations. In general, increasing the amount of attraction flow relative to the total river flow will increase the effectiveness of the fishway for providing upstream passage. The minimum attraction flow necessary to provide adequate attraction conditions for fish is 5-10% of the total river flow (NMFS 2008). 6) Passage Criteria: WWP designs should provide comparisons of hydraulic conditions within the fishway to species-specific design criteria for identifying limiting swimming speeds, water depths, and vertical drops that ultimately provide evidence for the effectiveness of fish passage conditions. Hydraulic modeling results should include depths, velocities, and locations of hydraulic jumps for existing and proposed conditions so that fish passage hydraulic conditions can be evaluated before the project is implemented. Fish passage criteria including the swimming speeds and jumping heights for Colorado fishes are included in a CPW fact sheet on Fish Passage at River Structures (Appendix C). 7) Incorporation of Natural Channel Forms and Processes: Fish passage design elements should function to enhance, maintain or mimic the pre-existing natural stream conditions (gradient, depth, velocity, and channel roughness) found at the proposed site of each recreational drop structure. This is especially important when there is a lack of speciesspecific swim passage criteria. 8) Monitoring Fish Passage: Various methods have been used to evaluate fish passage at instream obstacles or barriers. Fish passage efficiency through WWPs has been monitored 4 �using hydraulic modeling by 3-dimensional hydraulic models (Stephens et al. 2016), 2dimensional hydraulic modeling (Hardee 2017), and a least-cost path approach combining known swim speeds and 2-dimensional hydraulic modeling (Brubaker et al. 2018). Fishway evaluations can also be conducted by marking individual fish and monitoring their movements over time (i.e., PIT tag or Mark-Recapture studies; Fox et al. 2016). A combination of hydraulic modeling and validation studies using marked fish provide the strongest support for monitoring fishways by utilizing multiple lines of evidence. Ideally fish passage evaluations collect fish passage data from a) the pre- project reach, b) a nearby control site (up or downstream of the project reach) that is representative of a natural condition, c) the post-project reach, or d) a combination of some (Before/After or Control/Impact) or all sites (i.e., a full BACI study design). Project objectives should be measureable and monitoring of pre- and post-project conditions should be used to evaluate project effectiveness and inform adaptive management. CPW recommends a minimum monitoring period of one year of baseline and three years following WWP project construction, with an emphasis on documenting baseline conditions, as-built conditions, and project effectiveness with at least two monitoring events during the postconstruction three-year period. 9) Adaptive Management: AMPs should evaluate proposed and post-project changes to hydraulics and topographic conditions including water depth, velocities, hydraulic jumps, and bed drops at each constructed WWP feature over the range of design flows. These criteria should be used to evaluate project objectives and thresholds for requiring mitigation actions. AMPs should be included as part of the design package for each WWP project. Whitewater park structure with engineered fish bypass Fish Habitat WWP structures and their placement within a stream channel have the potential to degrade aquatic habitat quality. Many factors influence aquatic habitat quality and should be 5 �incorporated into WWP designs. The placement of WWPs in channels should follow published geomorphic criteria for physical relationships related to channel width, pool spacing, and riffle lengths to minimize the potential for channel instability and habitat impairment (Leopold et al. 1964, Dunne and Leopold 1978). The valley type, process domain, stream gradient, stream hydrology, and substrate characteristics should be used to inform WWP designs and the placement of structures within the proposed reach. Fish behavioral traits, life history characteristics, physiological tolerances, and swimming and jumping capabilities are directly related to the physical habitat characteristics found in the natural channels which they occupy. Low gradient stream channels in unconfined valleys or plains are typically occupied by fish species that are incapable of jumping over vertical obstacles and have resident fish with weaker swimming capabilities. High gradient mountain streams are typically occupied by fish species that are capable of jumping and have swimming capabilities that enable them to burst through high velocities and turbulence. Some weaker swimming, smallbodied fishes have behavioral traits that cause them to avoid swimming over deep pools where they are vulnerable to predation. Instead, they utilize the lateral edges of stream channels (Swarr 2018). Research has shown that impacts of WWPs on rivers and fisheries is very specific and will depend on the specific conditions at a river site as well as the fish populations present (Kowalski 2019). Ultimately, design and construction of WWP structures should provide for fish and aquatic invertebrate habitat; such structures must take account of the preservation of functional riverine and aquatic processes and maintain the natural aesthetic qualities of the river to the greatest extent possible. CPW recommends the following guidelines be incorporated into the design of WWP projects: 1) Minimize Extreme Hydraulic Conditions in WWP Pools: Natural pools located in unconfined valleys with low channel bed slopes are characterized by predictable and relatively stable hydraulic conditions that provide a balance between feeding and resting for fish. Fish feed on aquatic prey drifting into pools from upstream riffles and find low velocity resting areas close to the bed within pools that minimize energetic demands for fish swimming and maintaining equilibrium. Although WWPs create deep pools, observed fish densities and biomass were higher in natural pools than in WWP pools for trout and native fish (Kolden et al. 2015). A combination of hydraulic modeling and direct field measurement of hydraulic conditions present in WWP pools found higher turbulence (6×), vorticity (2×), velocity (3×), surging (40×), and depth (2×) were observed in WWP pools as compared to natural pools. Habitat suitability scores incorporating depths and velocities for Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) were higher for pools located in WWP reaches than natural pools. However, fish abundance estimates (biomass and densities) for WWPs were lower, providing evidence that the use of habitat suitability scoring to quantify habitat conditions for pools located in WWPs may be inappropriate. Direct measurements of fish abundance (biomass and densities) are preferred over habitat suitability modeling for evaluating WWP pool quality until more research can be done to incorporate additional information to improve model performance. Lower fish abundance may be explained by conversion of food producing riffles to impervious grouted drops over WWP structures, increased hydraulic variability (turbulence, vorticity, velocity, and surging) characteristic of WWP pools, or a combination of these factors. Based on results from Kolden et al. (2015), habitat suitability scoring through use of hydraulic models for pools may not be as reliable an indicator of overall habitat quality as direct estimation of fish abundance. Additional studies in Colorado have indicated that impacts to fish populations are site-specific and can be subtle (Kowalski 2019). If structures are designed and spaced properly, impacts to fish populations can be reduced. In some rivers, WWP structures have been shown to increase habitat suitability and density of non-native and 6 �non-game fish species like White Sucker (Catostomus commersonii) and Longnose Sucker (Catostomus catostomus) while large scale impacts to trout populations can be minimized. 2) Design Pool-to-Pool Spacing to Match Expected Ranges from Geomorphic Relations: Pool to pool spacing within WWPs are often outside the range of natural variability found in natural channels of the same valley and stream type (Leopold et al. 1964, Dunne and Leopold 1978). Most often, pools in WWPs are more closely spaced than what would be found in natural stream reaches of the same geomorphic context. This can result in increased channel instability from accelerated erosion or deposition with pools filling with sediment and the need for frequent maintenance and removal of sediments from WWP pools. Pool spacing also can have an impact on aquatic invertebrate populations. Improperly designed and spaced WWP structures can remove natural riffles from river reaches and reduce the diversity of aquatic invertebrates (Kowalski 2019). Designing river channel features that are in balance with the stream flow and sediment supply of each specific site is important in preserving natural hydraulic and biological functions of riffles. 3) Preservation of Riffle Habitats: WWP structures are commonly constructed using concrete grout, pre-cast concrete blocks, and large boulders used to direct flow and manipulate hydraulics. The materials used for WWP structures either fill-in or replace interstitial spaces normally found in coarse riffle habitat where macroinvertebrates reside, juvenile trout find refuge, and native fish such as Mottled Sculpin (Cottus bairdii), dace, and suckers live out most of their life cycles. Large, grouted WWP structures have been shown to support less diverse aquatic invertebrate communities then natural riffles (Kowalski 2019). WWP designs should preserve some riffles within the project reach instead of converting all riffles to WWP drops. Individual WWP structures require a drop in elevation to function optimally and thus WWP drop structures often replace natural riffle features. As a consequence, WWP reaches typically have proportionally less riffle habitat as compared to adjacent natural stream reaches within the same valley and stream type. A reduction in overall riffle habitat (area) could result in less macroinvertebrate habitat and consequently less food for fishes residing in WWP reaches. Research has shown that in some rivers in Colorado, improperly spaced structures degrade riffle habitat and reduce the diversity of aquatic invertebrates while properly designed structures that include riffle habitat can be as diverse and productive as natural riffles (Kowalski 2019). Riffle habitat converted to impervious, grouted structures may result in a loss of interstitial habitat critical for providing habitat for macroinvertebrates, native benthic fishes like sculpin and dace, and juvenile rearing habitat for trout. 4) Monitoring Fish Habitat: A variety of methods have been used to evaluate fish habitat at WWPs including 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional hydraulic modeling of the natural (control) and project reach incorporating habitat suitability criteria (Kolden et al. 2015). Fish habitat conditions can also be evaluated by directly surveying fish populations (fish density and biomass) before and after project construction and/or within and outside of the constructed WWP reach. Ideally fish habitat evaluations collect data from a) the preproject reach, b) a nearby control site (up or downstream of the project reach) that is representative of a natural condition, c) the post-project reach, or d) a combination of some (Before/After or Control/Impact) or all sites (i.e., a full BACI study design). Project objectives should be measureable and monitoring of pre- and post-project conditions should be used to evaluate project effectiveness and inform adaptive management. CPW recommends a minimum monitoring period of two years for baseline and five years following construction, with an emphasis on documenting baseline conditions, as-built 7 �conditions, and project effectiveness with at least two monitoring events during the postconstruction five-year period. 5) Adaptive Management: AMPs should evaluate proposed and post-project changes to the river environment including pool-to-pool spacing, hydraulic variability (turbulence, vorticity, velocity, and surging), changes to the proportion of riffle habitat, changes in fish population or habitat suitability, and riparian area. These criteria can be used to inform and develop project objectives and thresholds. Sediment Deposition The placement of WWPs in river channels should follow established geomorphic criteria (Leopold et al. 1964; Dunne and Leopold 1978) for physical relationships of channel width, pool spacing, and riffle lengths to minimize the potential for channel instability, habitat impairment, as well as decrease the frequency of structure maintenance and in-channel disturbance. Sediment characteristics and related processes will vary by valley type, process domain, stream gradient, and stream hydrology. These factors should be incorporated WWP designs and inform the placement of structures within the proposed reach. 1) Minimize Sediment Deposition: WWP structures should not disrupt or curtail sediment transport by inducing sediment deposition upstream or downstream of the structure. Sediment deposition can eliminate preferred fish and benthic macroinvertebrate habitats, as well as create favorable conditions (finer substrate) for the spread of whirling disease in trout. Sediment deposition could also result in reduced channel capacity which could increase flooding risk to surrounding areas. Sediment deposition will likely be inevitable at WWP due to the loss of energy over the structure, so maintenance plans to periodically remove excess sediment are needed. 2) Avoid Rapid Contraction and Expansion in WWP designs: WWPs can create a sequence of rapidly contracting and expanding riverbank conditions that lead to problems of sedimentation in pools and a need for more frequent maintenance to remove the excess sediment. WWP designs should incorporate knowledge of channel maintenance flows (bankfull conditions) and the potential for contraction/expansion to induce sediment deposition within WWP reaches. 3) Adaptive Management: AMPs should evaluate proposed, pre-, and post-project changes to the river environment in the longitudinal profile and representative cross sections including changes to streambed substrate characteristics. Monitoring should document areas of sediment deposition, fine sediment deposition areas, and bank erosion. Projects should consider seeking Colorado 401 Water Quality Certification from the Colorado Water Quality Control Division and conduct pebble counts at critical cross sections before and during the post-project monitoring period. Pre-project monitoring data should be used to inform project objectives and establish thresholds. 8 �Sediment deposition in whitewater park pools Site Selection Properly locating WWPs within river systems is one of the best ways of minimizing physical, ecological, and social impacts to rivers and streams including channel stability, sediment deposition, fish passage, fish habitat, and recreational angling. Site locations that have been identified as existing barriers to fish movement (e.g. diversion structures or dams) and that been heavily modified by past human activities are preferred locations for WWPs. 1) Step-Wise Hierarchical Decision Making Framework for Site Selection: CPW proposes the following steps be carried out in a step-wise fashion according to the following hierarchical framework to ensure that the LEDPA is selected during the site selection and design process. The level of risk with respect to impairment of fish passage and habitat increases with each successive step. Therefore, more intensive monitoring evaluations should be commensurate with increasing levels of risk. WWP designs must provide justification for the following: a. High Priority Habitat and Special Management Reaches: WWP projects proposed in the following designated river reaches will result in categorical opposition from CPW including the following: 1) Designated Cutthroat Trout Waters, 2) Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species as well as reaches identified as sensitive habitat for State Species of Concern, and 3) Gold Medal Waters. b. Geomorphic Setting: Provide justification for a WWP design alternative that is located in an unconfined valley setting (unconfined valleys have an Entrenchment Ratio (ER) >2.2) and stream channel slopes that are 2 % or less. Geomorphic settings consisting of artificially or naturally confined valleys and Rosgen A, B (step-pool), F, and G stream types have hydraulic characteristics more similar to those produced by WWP structures and therefore contain fish species and assemblages that are adapted to living in similar hydraulic conditions as those commonly associated with WWPs. c. Partially Channel-Spanning Structure: If a site location cannot be identified within the appropriate geomorphic setting, provide justification for a WWP design alternative 9 �that requires full channel-spanning structures. Partially channel-spanning structure designs should be used unless project goals or site constraints dictate that a fully channel-spanning structure is required. d. Natural Channel Split: If a partial channel-spanning structure is not possible, provide justification for a WWP site location on a single-thread channel site. Channel splits can serve dual functions with one split providing WWP recreation while the other channel split is left as natural and unmodified. A split branch of an existing channel (side channel or one side of an existing island) should be used unless project goals or site constraints dictate that a single-thread channel site is required. e. Artificial Channel Split: If a suitable site location cannot be found on a natural split branch of an existing channel, provide justification for a WWP site location on an artificially-constructed split branch channel (constructed side channel or one side of an artificially-constructed island). Artificial channel splits can serve dual functions with one split providing WWP recreation while the other channel split is designed to mimic natural, reference-like conditions. An artificially-constructed split flow channel (constructed side channel or one side of an artificially-constructed island) should be used unless project goals or site constraints dictate that a single-thread channel site is required. f. Technical Fishway: If the site location is constrained such that an artificiallyconstructed split flow channel is not possible, technical fishway concepts (such as a constructed bypass channels or riffles, rock ramps, or vertical slots) must be incorporated into WWP structure designs. g. No Fish Passage Elements: WWP designs that do not incorporate fish passage elements into structures are not acceptable and will result in categorical opposition from CPW. 2) Minimize WWP Recreation Conflicts with Anglers and Non-Whitewater Recreation Boaters: WWP sites should be located to avoid recreational conflicts with anglers and nonwhitewater recreational boaters (i.e., drift boats and canoes). Hydraulic conditions formed by WWP structures can impede safe boat travel for non-whitewater recreational boaters. Within WWPs there is an increased potential for whitewater recreational boaters to displace stream anglers, especially during the summer months. Incompatibilities between stream anglers and recreational boaters exist. Creel survey data from Colorado and Wyoming suggest that stream anglers prefer to fish in locations that are uncrowded, provide pleasant conditions close to nature, and are relaxing. The conditions commonly encountered at and in the vicinity of WWPs include artificially armored and terraced banks with minimal vegetation and encourage spectating crowds. 3) Mitigation for Lost Angler Opportunity and Access: Mitigation should be considered to replace lost angler access, infrastructure, and fishing opportunity. There is a history of new WWP construction within or replacing existing Fishing Is Fun (FIF) habitat projects funded through Federal sportfish dollars at sites in Colorado including Pagosa Springs, Basalt, Ridgway, and Montrose. When new WWPs are proposed within heavily used urban fishing areas, intensively managed fisheries (those with special harvest restriction regulations), Gold Medal designated fisheries, FIF-funded habitat projects, or locations with existing amenities (such as parking access, trails, boat launches, picnic areas, etc...) funded by Federal sportfish dollars or other fishing interest groups (i.e., Trout Unlimited), 10 �reasonable mitigation is necessary. Mitigation may consist of replacing lost or degraded infrastructure and amenities, increasing infrastructure to accommodate the new users, and providing reasonable additional access points or developing alternative locations for anglers nearby. 4) Off-Site Mitigation: Mitigation locations for offsetting loss of fish habitat from WWP development should not occur within WWP project reaches, but should occur in separate locations up- or downstream within the same river watershed if possible. Mitigation possibilities include developing new areas open to fishing access or enhancing fish habitat in an area that is not heavily impacted by recreational boating. Fish passage cannot be mitigated off-site and must be accommodated through a WWP project. Whitewater Park Project Applications CPW will only provide technical design review for projects that submit complete applications. Requests for design reviews must include complete permit applications with all pertinent information, including project goals and objectives, a design report and plan set, assessment of existing conditions, list of river stakeholders, revegetation plan, monitoring plans, and a description of how the project will be maintained over time. 1) Early Consultation with CPW: Contact the local CPW Area Aquatic Biologist as early as possible in the design process to obtain information regarding the species presence, fish populations and fisheries management objectives for a proposed project site. CPW conducts hundreds of fish population surveys on streams and rivers throughout Colorado annually and uses survey results to inform fisheries population management. Instructions for submitting formal data requests are available at the CPW Aquatics Data Management webpage and contact information for CPW Aquatic Biologists is included in Appendix A. 2) Project Goals and Objectives: Applications must clearly identify project goals and objectives, and describe the context and analysis leading up to the established LEDPA (if already developed). The applicant should address the potential for fishery and ecological impacts from the project and how they relate to the project goals and objectives. 3) Design Report and Plan Set: The design report should include a comparison of WWP project alternatives that were used to inform the selection of the proposed WWP design. The design report and plan set should clearly detail existing conditions of the proposed WWP reach, description and layout of the proposed WWP reach, detailed description of fish passage design elements proposed for each structure, description of existing hydrology and design flows as they relate to fish passage design elements, and modeled hydraulic conditions through each WWP structure and fish passage design elements. 4) Assessment of Existing Conditions: An assessment of existing conditions within the proposed project reach should be conducted in order to determine the level of anthropogenic impacts at the proposed site. What is the level of departure from a reference or historic condition with respect to existing hydrology, hydraulics (floodplain connectivity), geomorphology (sediment supply), physicochemical, and biological condition? Consider application of the Colorado Stream Quantification Tool (SQT) (CSQT SC 2019) as a means to assign proposed project reach as Functioning, Not Functioning, or Functioning at Risk. CPW advocates installation of WWPs in reaches that rate as Not Functioning or Functioning at Risk to minimize impacts to “natural, unmodified” river 11 �channels. Ultimately, is the proposed site located in a natural or already significantly modified site? 5) Other River Users and Stakeholders: A complete list of river user groups (stakeholders) should be provided with the project application materials, or at least made aware of the proposed WWP project. 6) CPW Consultation and Supervision: Early consultation with CPW area staff including a description of the longitudinal extent of the project, whether or not water rights are a part of the project (i.e., RCID), and a complete list of project goals. WWPs almost always involve significant instream structures; both CPW and the CWCB believe that these structures should be designed and their construction supervised by a Colorado registered professional engineer and/or a professional hydrologist in consultation with both agencies. 7) Grout: Minimize the use of grout for construction of WWP structures except as needed to maintain recreation function, human safety, and fish passage elements associated with the WWP and as part of the criteria for selecting the LEDPA. If grout is used, recess the grout elevation so it is not flush with the top of the structure elements, leaving spaces between boulders or blocks for increased roughness and cover for small aquatic organisms. Recessing grout and spacing boulders to create continuous pathways in the wing walls may improve conditions for upstream fish passage at WWP structures. 8) Revegetation Plans: Riparian vegetation composed of native species is the primary control for bank stability in many stream types and should be used to improve long-term stability of the project. Revegetation plans should be included with the plan set for the project, including success criteria, planting protocols, irrigation needs, weed control, and postconstruction stewardship. Designs should utilize biostabilization techniques to stabilize disturbed streambanks as outlined in Living Streambanks: a Manual for Bioengineering Treatments for Colorado Streams (Giordanengo et al. 2016). 9) Grade Control other than WWP Structures: If grade control is needed for proper function of the WWP structure, hardened riffles comprised of boulder sills buried in native substrate is suggested as an alternative to in-channel grout. Hardened riffles can also be used to protect downstream riffle heads. All proposed structures (recreational or otherwise) within a project that are necessary to the successful function of the proposed WWP project are expected to meet LEDPA criteria in the project reach. We expect USACE to consider all structures associated with a WWP project to be regulated as part of the project and not subject to exemption. 10) RICDs: Recreational In-channel Diversion (RICD) water rights can be acquired for WWPs in Colorado to provide recreational experiences in and on the water. RICDs should be designed, constructed, and managed to minimize or avoid impacts to native and sport fish. Flows deviating from the natural flow regime, such as water calls during spawning periods or when young-of-the-year fish are emerging from spawning gravels, could have adverse impacts on stream ecology (Poff et al. 1997). Meeting with CPW should be conducted prior to applying for a water right tied to a specified location in the river system (i.e., RICD). RICD proponents are strongly encouraged to contact USACE to conducting a feasibility assessment for WWP development at a specific site location prior to pursuing a water right. Federal regulations do not account for or prioritize permitting of RICD water rights. This will improve efficiency of State resources and time for a project 12 �that is not federally permittable due to either location or design that does not meet LEDPA criteria. 11) Post-Construction Site Visit: Require a post-construction site visit prior to rewatering of structures when possible to verify as-built design and include CPW to identify any aquatic resource concerns prior to rewatering. 12) Monitoring and Evaluation: Develop monitoring objectives that are measureable and use objective monitoring criteria for pre- and post-project conditions to evaluate project effectiveness and inform adaptive management. Comparisons between the proposed and as-built conditions should be made to define allowable impacts and without exceeding thresholds for requiring mitigation action. 13) Maintenance and Stewardship: WWP design plans should address structure maintenance, sedimentation, and debris removal as part of stewardship considerations for at least five years following project completion. Whitewater park kayakers on a popular Colorado mountain river Best Management Practices 1) Spawning Periods: Construction activities that cause streambed disturbance should not be scheduled during periods when adult spawning migrations, egg incubation, or fry swim-up are occurring. Fish eggs and fry may die if construction activities mobilize fine sediment that smothers the streambed in which they reside. Repetitive and cumulative streambed disturbances during critical reproductive periods can significantly affect population dynamics and resiliency of local fisheries. In general, instream construction should be 13 �targeted for the months of August and September when flows are lower and impacts to spawning fish and incubating eggs are less likely. Early communication with CPW is encouraged as this suggested window could vary based on local considerations such as elevation, environmental variability, and fish species present. 2) Invasive and Nuisance Species: To prevent the spread of invasive and/or nuisance species (e.g., Asian Clam, Green River Mud Snail, New Zealand Mud Snail), we strongly encourage that heavy equipment be cleaned prior to and after construction if the equipment was previously used in another stream, river, lake, pond, or wetland within ten days of initiating work. The following methods are recommended for preventing the spread of invasive aquatic organisms: a. Disinfection with QAC: Remove all mud and debris from equipment (tracks, turrets, buckets, drags, teeth, etc…) and spray/soak equipment with a disinfection solution containing quaternary ammonia compound (QAC). Treated equipment must be kept moist for at least 10 minutes. The recommended concentration for any commercially available QAC product used to disinfect equipment is 6 ounces of QAC solution per gallon of clean water. The following QAC products have been tested by CPW and are listed in order from highest to lowest concentration of active QAC: Green Solutions High Dilution Disinfectant 256, Super HDQ Neutral, Quat 4, Vedco 128, and Quat 128. b. Disposal of QAC: Wastewater treatment plants are capable of processing water containing small amounts of QAC. Therefore, rinsing used QAC solutions down a sanitary sewer is a safe method of disposal. However, QACs should be kept out of storm sewers and other waterways. Always dilute old product before rinsing down sanitary sewers directly from the container, and follow MSDS and label recommendations regarding rinsing and disposal of empty containers. Small amounts of QAC from spray disinfection may come in contact with the environment with few negative effects. However, it is not recommended to dump large amounts of QAC solutions directly on the ground. More detailed instructions for disinfection with QAC products can be provided upon request. c. Disinfection with Hot Water: Spray/soak equipment with water heated to a temperature greater than 140 degrees Fahrenheit for at least 10 minutes. 3) Turbidity: Instream construction should be conducted in a manner that will minimize turbidity of the water in the work area. 4) Petroleum Products and Chemicals: No petroleum products, chemicals, or other deleterious materials should be allowed to enter or be disposed of in such a manner in which they could enter the waterway or adjacent wetlands. Accordingly, we recommend that oil absorbent “booms” be installed downstream of the project site during construction activities. References American Whitewater, 2007. Whitewater parks-considerations and case studies. https://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Wiki/stewardship:whitewater_parks Bouwes, N., S. Bennett, and Joe Wheaton. 2016. Adapting adaptive management for testing the effectiveness of stream restoration: An intensively monitored watershed example. Fisheries, 41:2, 84-91, DOI: 10.1080/03632415.2015.1127806. 14 �Brubaker, A., E. E. Richer, D.A. Kowalski, and M.C. Kondratieff. 2018. Making waves: The effects of whitewater parks on fish passage. 43rd Annual Meeting of the Western Division of the American Fisheries Society. Anchorage, Alaska. May 22, 2018. Colorado Stream Quantification Tool Steering Committee (CSQT SC). 2019. Colorado Stream Quantification Tool and Debit Calculator (CSQT) User Manual, Beta Version. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds (Contract # EPC-17-001), Washington, D.C. CPW (Colorado Parks and Wildlife). 2015. State Wildlife Action Plan. Denver, Colorado. Dunne, T., & Leopold, L. (1978). Water in environmental planning. San Francisco, California: W.H. Freeman and Company. 818 pp. Forty, M., J. Spees, and M. C. Lucas. 2016. Not just for adults! Evaluating the performance of multiple fish passage designs at low-head barriers for the upstream movement of juvenile and adult trout Salmo trutta. Ecological Engineering 94:214-224. Fox, B.D., B.P. Bledsoe, E. Kolden, M.C. Kondratieff and C.A. Myrick. 2016. Ecohydraulic evaluation of whitewater parks as a fish passage barrier. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. DOI: 10.1111/1752-1688.12397. Giordanengo, J. H., R. H. Mandel, W. J. Spitz, M. C. Bossler, M. J. Blazewicz, S. E. Yochum, K. R. Jagt, W. J. LaBarre, G. E. Gurnee, R. Humphries, and K. T. Uhing. 2016. Living streambanks: A manual of bioengineering treatments for Colorado streams. Colorado Water Conservation Board, Denver. Hagenstad, M., J. Henderson. R. S. Rauncher, J. Whitcomb. 2000. Preliminary evaluation of the beneficial value of waters diverted in the Clear Creek whitewater park in the city of Golden, Stratus Consulting. Hardee, T.L. 2017. Evaluating fish passage at whitewater parks using a spatially explicit 2D hydraulic modeling approach. M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State University. 107 pp. Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A function-based framework for stream assessment and restoration projects. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006. Kolden, E., B.D. Fox, B.P. Bledsoe, and M.C. Kondratieff. 2015. Modelling whitewater park hydraulics and fish habitat in Colorado. River Research and Applications. DOI: 10.1002/rra.2931. Kondratieff, M. C. and E. E. Richer. 2017. Stream Habitat Investigations and Assistance. Federal Aid Project F-161-R23. Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Aquatic Research Section. Fort Collins, Colorado. 15 �Kowalski, D.A. 2019. Colorado River aquatic resource investigations. Federal Aid Project F237-R26. Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Aquatic Wildlife Research Section. Fort Collins, Colorado. Leopold, L., Wolman, G., & Miller, J. (1964). Fluvial processes in geomorphology. San Francisco, California: W.H. Freeman and Company. 544 pp. Loomis, J., and J. McTernan. 2011. Fort Collins whitewater park economic assessment. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University. NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2008. Anadromous salmonid passage facility design. NMFS, Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon. Poff, N. L., J. D. Allan, M. B. Bain, J. R. Karr, K. L. Prestegaard, B. D. Richter, R. E. Sparks, and J. C. Stromberg. 1997. The natural flow regime: a paradigm for river conservation and restoration. BioScience 47(11): 769-784. Richer, E.E., E.R. Fetherman, M.C. Kondratieff and T.A. Barnes. 2017. Incorporating GPS and Mobile Radio Frequency Identification to Detect PIT-Tagged Fish and Evaluate Habitat Utilization in Streams. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. DOI: 10.1080/02755947.2017.1374312. Richer, E. E., A. B. Brubaker, D. A. Kowalski, and M.C Kondratieff. 2018. Making waves: the effects of whitewater parks on fisheries. Sustaining Colorado Watersheds Conference, Avon, Colorado. October 10, 2018. Schlosser, I. J., and P. L. Angermeier. 1995. Spatial variation in demographic processes for lotic fishes: conceptual models, empirical evidence, and implications for conservation. American Fisheries Society Symposium 17:392-401. Stephens, T. A., B. P. Bledsoe, B. D. Fox, E. Kolden, and M. C. Kondratieff. 2015. Effects of whitewater parks on fish passage: a spatially explicit hydraulic analysis. Ecological Engineering 83: 305–318. Swarr, T.R. 2018. Improving rock ramp fishways for small-bodied Great Plains fishes. M.S. Thesis, Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University. 89 pp. Thompson, K.G., and Z.E. Hooley-Underwood. 2019. Present distribution of three Colorado River Basin native non-game fishes, and their use of tributary streams. Colorado Parks and Wildlife Technical Publication 52. 16 �Appendix A CPW Aquatic Biologist Contact Information �MOFFAT a Ya mp River Tory Eyre Meeker (970)878-6074 JACKSON LARIMER Steamboat Springs Office ROUTT Meeker Office GRAND 70 EAGLE mp Unco e River a hgr n el gu Mi Ri ve SAN MIGUEL r OURAY TELLER SW Jim White Durango (970)375-6712 Ri o Grande Ri v CUSTER er RIO Monte GRANDE Vista i ve Conejos R OTERO HUERFANO COSTILLA i Purgatoire R Miles 25 50 LAS ANIMAS 25 AQUATIC BIOLOGISTS COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE 0 KIT CARSON Smoky H il CHEYENNE l River 75 100 NATIVE AQUATIC SPECIES BIOLOGISTS NORTHEAST REGION Boyd Wright (970)472-4366 BENT PUEBLO o rf an Hue r NORTHWEST REGION Lori Martin (970)255-6186 SOUTHEAST REGION Josh Nehring (719)227-5224 r i ve Lamar Office PROWERS Jim Ramsay Lamar (719)336-6607 SE mo s aR i ve r NORTHEAST REGION Jeff Spohn (303)981-3634 KIOWA Carrie Tucker Pueblo (719)561-5312 ALAMOSA CONEJOS ARCHULETA nR LINCOLN Office Ala Durango Office Durango Regional LA PLATA Administrative Office Cory Noble Colorado Springs (719)227-5222 ub a lic CROWLEY Estevan Vigil Monte Vista (719)587-6908 MI NERAL t S ou -Lake Pueblo -Pueblo Office SAGUACHE SAN JUAN DOLORES EL PASO iver ree R p Re ork hF SENIOR AQUATIC BIOLOGISTS SOUTHWEST REGION John Alves (970)375-6721 ARA PAHOE ELBERT DOUG LAS Dan Brauch Gunnison (970)641-7070 HINSDALE WASHINGTON 70 r iv e i ver es R l or Sa YUMA Mike Atwood Salida (719)530-5525FREMONT Salida Office Gunnison Office G unn ison Ri ver NE Brush Office a Arik Littleton Administrative Office as R ans Do MONTROSE MONTEZUMA JEFFERSON CHAFFEE Montrose Office 76 Paul Winkle Denver (303)291-7232 Colorado Springs Office GUNNISON Eric Gardunio Montrose (970)252-6017 er Ri v Headquarters A rk DELTA th Pla tt e ADAMS PARK Grand Junction Office S ou PHILLIPS Mandi Brandt Brush (970)842-6330 Denver Administrative Office Northeast Regional Office Tyler Swarr South Park (720)576-9782 LAKE PITKIN MESA CLEAR CREEK S UMMIT Kendall Bakich Glenwood Springs (970)947-2924 MORGAN BOULDER GILPIN e River Blu GARFIELD Ben Felt Grand Junction (970)255-6126 Glenwood Springs Office Fort Collins Office Ben Swigle Fort Collins (970)472-4364 Hot Sulphur Springs Office r o Rive Colorad LOGAN WELD Thompson Riv er Bi g Jon Ewert Hot Sulphur (970)725-6214 r e Rive RIO BLANCO 25 Poudre River ve r Whit er Ri en River Bill Atkinson Steamboat Springs (970)870-2868 SEDGWICK Kyle Battige Fort Collins (970)472-4396 ian Gr e d na Ca NW Ri v NORTHWEST REGION Jenn Logan (970)947-2923 SOUTHWEST REGION Dan Cammack (970)275-9617 SOUTHEAST REGION Paul Foutz (719)227-5217 BACA r ve CPW Region Boundary Created by CPW GIS 2/12/2020 314 W. Prospect St Fort Collins, CO 80526 G:\Projects\Publications\Boundaries\AquaticBoundaries\CPW_AquaticBiologists_2020_11x17.mxd �Appendix B CPW Whitewater Park Fact Sheet �C O L O R A D O P A R K S & W I L D L I F E Whitewater Park Studies RESEARCH RESULTS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES Whitewater Park Research With over 30 whitewater parks (WWPs) either completed or in the planning phases, Colorado is the epicenter for WWP development in the United States. Although WWPs provide economic and recreational benefits for local communities (Hagenstad et al. 2000; Loomis and McTernan 2011), they may have unintended impacts on instream biota and stream functions, particularly when the hydraulic conditions formed by the WWP are different from those naturally found in the surrounding river. The impact of WWPs on habitat connectivity and instream habitat quality have been the focus of several recent studies. Although these studies have primarily focused on fish passage and habitat, impacts to aquatic insects and sediment transport may also occur at WWPs. Fish Passage Impacts The elements that create a desirable surf wave (increased velocity, decreased depth, a hydraulic jump, and a stable, often grouted stream channel) create conditions that can impede fish movement. Swimming speeds and jumping ability vary greatly between fish species. Suppression of upstream trout movement has been documented at WWP structures, but the degree of impact varied by fish size and characteristics of the individual structure (Stephens et al. 2015; Fox et al. 2016). As trout are among the strongest swimming and jumping fish species in Colorado, small-bodied and weaker-swimming fish native to Colorado streams are even more susceptible to habitat fragmentation associated with WWP development. Brown Trout Mottled Sculpin Fish Habitat Impacts Although WWPs create deep pools, observed fish densities were significantly higher in natural pools than in WWP pools (Kolden et al. 2015; Kondratieff et al. in preparation). Habitat degradation in WWPs was associated with the unnatural hydraulics created by the recreational features and conversion of riffle habitat to drops over the wave structures. Design Guidelines CPW recommends that adequate environmental safeguards be included in the design and construction of WWPs to ensure that stream functions, fisheries, and recreational fishing are not adversely impacted. Each structure must be examined on a case-by-case basis, and monitoring and adaptive management should be included in the proposed project budget. COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE • 1313 Sherman St., Denver, CO 80203 • (303) 297-1192 • cpw.state.co.us �Site Selection   Design and construction of WWPs should preserve the natural aesthetic qualities of the river. WWPs should be located in degraded reaches when possible and should aim to improve the natural functions of the reach rather than maintain degraded conditions. WWPs should not be constructed in natural, un-modified river channels (American Whitewater 2007). WWP sites should be selected to minimize recreational conflicts with anglers. There is increased potential for boaters to displace anglers at WWP sites, especially during the summer months. If WWP construction affects a popular fishing location, mitigation such as new fishing access or habitat improvements should be considered. Ecological Design Considerations       WWP structures must be designed to allow upstream fish passage for all life stages of native and sport fishes present throughout the annual hydrologic cycle. Fish passage is dependent on water velocity, water depth, vertical height of structures, linear distance of the passage corridor, surface roughness, and attraction flow. Hydraulic characteristics at WWP features generally conflict with ideal conditions for fish passage. Therefore, a fish passage channel separate from the WWP structure may be necessary. The passage channel should meet hydraulic design criteria for target species across a range of flows. Hydraulic modeling of the proposed structure should be conducted during the initial design phase to evaluate potential impacts to fish passage and habitat. Streambed and bank disturbance due to construction activities should be scheduled for a time of year when egg incubation is not occurring. An increase in fine sediment to the stream during incubation can suffocate developing embryos. Erosion control and revegetation plans utilizing native riparian species should be required for each project. WWP structures should not cause sediment deposition upstream or downstream of the structure. Sediment deposition can eliminate fish and benthic macroinvertebrate habitats, create favorable conditions for the spread of whirling disease in trout, and increase flooding risk if sediment deposition decreases channel capacity. Recreational In-channel Diversion (RICD) water rights can be acquired for WWPs to provide recreational experiences in and on the water. These protected flows should be managed to benefit boating recreation as well as conservation and management of native and sport fish. Flows deviating from the natural flow regime, such as water calls during spawning periods, could have adverse impacts on stream ecology (Poff et al. 1997). References American Whitewater, 2007. Whitewater Parks – Considerations and Case Studies. https://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Wiki/stewardship:whitewater_parks Fox, B. D., B. P. Bledsoe, E. Kolden, M. C. Kondratieff, and C. A. Myrick. 2016. Ecohydraulic evaluation of whitewater parks as a fish passage barrier. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. DOI: 10.1111/1752-1688.12397. Hagenstad, M., J. Henderson, R. S. Raucher, J. Whitcomb. 2000. Preliminary evaluation of the beneficial value of waters diverted in the Clear Creek Whitewater Park in the City of Golden. Stratus Consulting. Kolden, E., B. D. Fox, B. P. Bledsoe, and M. C. Kondratieff. 2016. Modelling whitewater park hydraulics and fish habitat in Colorado. River Research and Applications. DOI: 10.1002/rra.2931. Kondratieff, M. C., K. Kinzli, and E. R. Fetherman. In preparation. Eco-hydraulic evaluation of whitewater parks as fish habitat in Colorado. Loomis, J., and J. McTernan. 2011. Fort Collins Whitewater Park economic assessment. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University. Poff, N. L., J. D. Allan, M. B. Bain, J. R. Karr, K. L. Prestegaard, B. D. Richter, R. E. Sparks, and J. C. Stromberg. 1997. The natural flow regime: a paradigm for river conservation and restoration. BioScience 47(11): 769-784. Stephens, T. A., B. P. Bledsoe, B. D. Fox, E. Kolden, and M. C. Kondratieff. 2016. Effects of whitewater parks on fish passage: a spatially explicit hydraulic analysis. Ecological Engineering 83: 305–318. �Appendix C CPW Fish Passage at River Structures Fact Sheet �C O L O R A D O P A R K S & W I L D L I F E Fish Passage at River Structures RESEARCH AND DESIGN GUIDELINES Introduction Instream structures, such as culverts, water diversions and dams, can negatively affect fish by fragmenting populations, reducing migratory ranges, and limiting access to habitat for spawning, feeding and refugia. Many rivers in Colorado contain man-made structures that create partial (obstacles) or complete barriers depending on the fish species and life stage. Habitat fragmentation associated with instream barriers is a serious threat to Colorado’s Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) and sport fisheries. Therefore, it is important that fisheries managers (A) identify and evaluate the influence of instream structures on fish populations. Fish Passage Research Objectives The primary goal of fish passage research is to restore connectivity in fragmented river systems by: (1) evaluating the effectiveness of existing fishways; (2) evaluating the barrierpotential of common river structures; and (3) establishing fish swim performance criteria for native and sport fishes. Current Fish Passage Research Projects Active fish passage research projects include: (1) evaluation of native fish passage at existing fishways located on Front Range transition zone streams; (2) evaluation of fish passage at instream whitewater park structures; (3) laboratory studies to develop fish swim and jump performance criteria for Colorado fishes where data is lacking; and (4) development of new techniques and technologies for investigating fish movement and passage in rivers. (B) Fishway Design Fishways, or “fish ladders”, are engineered structures designed to facilitate passage around an obstacle or barrier. Fishways attempt to incorporate species- and life stagespecific swimming and jumping abilities into designs. Common elements of successful fishways include: (1) low velocity pathways that do not exceed burst speeds or endurance capabilities for target species (Figure A); (2) water depths that do not limit swimming performance (Figure B); (3) vertical drops that do not exceed the jumping ability for target species - note that many species native to Colorado do not exhibit jumping behaviors (Figure C); (4) sufficient attraction flow, or the flow that emanates from a fishway entrance, to ensure that fish can locate the fishway; and (5) maintenance of the above design elements over the expected range of streamflows. (C) COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE • 1313 Sherman St., Denver, CO 80203 • (303) 297-1192 • cpw.state.co.us �Fishway Examples Some examples of successful fishways include engineered rock ramps (Figure D), constructed riffles (Figure E), and vertical slot fishways (Figure F). Each type of fishway has advantages and disadvantages related to which fish species and life stages are present and the conditions of the project site. Engineered Rock Ramp Constructed Riffle Vertical Slot Diversion Crest Piney Creek, Wyoming Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Diversion, Cache la Poudre River (D) Rock Weirs CCC Ditch, San Miguel River (E) (F) Aquatic Habitat Types From the high-gradient, boulder-dominated, step-pool channels of snowmelt fed mountain streams to the lowgradient, well-vegetated, pool-riffle rivers of the eastern plains to the majestic, vertically-confined canyons on the arid Colorado Plateau, aquatic habitats in Colorado are as diverse as the geographic regions where they are found. Native Colorado fishes have unique morphological characteristics that are adapted to the natural conditions found in each aquatic habitat type. These adaptations affect the swimming abilities of fish, influencing how they move through and use diverse habitats. Fisheries managers must take the diversity of fish species into consideration when evaluating river structures and designing fishways. Fish Swimming Performance by Family Family Name Percidae (Perches) SGCN (#) Fundulidae (Topminnows) Cottidae (Sculpin) Ictaluridae (Catfish) Cyprinidae (Minnows) Catostomidae (Suckers) Centrarchidae (Sunfish) All illustrations of fish © Joseph R. Tomelleri 3 Prolonged Speed (ft/s) 0.4 - 1.2 Burst Speed (ft/s) NA - 2.4 Jump Height (ft) 0* Habitat Types EP 1 0 1 13 5 1 1.3 - 1.6 1.4 - 1.7 1.3 - 2.0 1.3 - 2.4 1.3 - 2.5 1.1 - 2.9 2.6 - 3.4 3.3 - 3.9 2.0 - NA 2.4 - 4.4 2.2 - 3.2 2.6 - NA 0.1 - 0.2 0* NA - 0.2 0* - 0.5 NA - 0.8 0.4 - NA EP CP, MS EP, TZ CP, EP, MS, RG, TZ CP, EP, MS, RG, TZ EP Salmonidae (Trout) 3 2.3 - 4.0 4.5 - 7.5 1.0 - 7.0 MS, RG, TZ SGCN = Species of Greatest Conservation Need, # of species/subspecies; * = fish species does not exhibit jumping behavior; NA = data were not available; CP = Colorado Plateau, EP = Eastern Plains, MS = Mountain Streams, RG = Rio Grande; TZ = Transition Zone The values reported above are summarized from multiple species within each family and are intended to support passage for juvenile life stages. Swim speeds and jumping abilities within species are size dependent. Species-specific performance criteria should be used whenever possible. The selection of target species for individual projects should be based on the management objectives for the site in question. Consultation with the local Area Aquatic Biologist at CPW is strongly encouraged during the early planning stages for any fish passage project in Colorado. The information in this fact sheet is based on the best available data and knowledge, but is subject to revision as more information becomes available. COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE • 1313 Sherman St., Denver, CO 80203 • (303) 297-1192 • cpw.state.co.us � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Whitewater park projects: guidance for reviewing 404 projects Description An account of the resource Colorado Parks and Wildlife’s (CPW) statutory mission is to perpetuate the wildlife resources of the State, to provide a quality State Parks system, and to provide enjoyable and sustainable outdoor recreation opportunities that educate and inspire current and future generations to serve as strategic stewards of Colorado’s natural resources (C.R.S. § 33-9-101 (12) (b)). As CPW is responsible for the management and conservation of aquatic resources within the State, we are asked to review projects that may affect aquatic habitats or populations. Specifically, CPW staff is often engaged by the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to review permit applications related to the design, construction, and monitoring of whitewater parks (WWPs) regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. WWP projects typically fall under the following permits: <br /> <ul> <li>NWP 27 - Aquatic Habitat Restoration, Establishment, and Enhancement Activities</li> <li>IP - An individual, or standard permit, is issued when projects have more than minimal individual or cumulative impacts, are evaluated using additional environmental criteria, and involve a more comprehensive public interest review.</li> </ul> Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Kondratieff, M. C., K. R. Bakich, E. E. Richer, D. A. Kowalski, and B. F. Atkinson. 2020. Whitewater Park Projects: Guidance for Reviewing 404 Projects. Colorado Parks and Wildlife Aquatic Research Section, Fort Collins, CO. 26 pp. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kondratieff, Matthew C. Bakich, Kendall R. Richer, Eric E. Kowalski, Daniel A. Atkinson, Bill F. Subject The topic of the resource Whitewater parks Extent The size or duration of the resource. 26 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2020 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">In Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Permitted</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/1f1ef620f6cd84513602d4b86f6379cb.pdf c3d358b7a792034bdce6e44b045b37bd PDF Text Text ������������������������������������ Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Student's guide Colorado snowmobile training course Description An account of the resource Outdoor sports have always been a way of life to Coloradans. So it will be, in the future, if every participant of every outdoor sport strives to enjoy his liking in a responsible manner. One of the best ways to insure our right to the nonrestricted use of Colorado's outdoor wonderlands for any purpose, is the education of all sportsmen toward responsible recreation, conservation and safety. Print copy: CPW Library - FILE S Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource The Colorado Division of Game, Fish and Parks Colorado Association of Snowmobile Clubs Subject The topic of the resource Snowmobile training Extent The size or duration of the resource. 36 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 1971 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/058545ee495183e1a8d73723af246bdd.pdf 32923e10acab292967f1caded72058ab PDF Text Text C O L O R A D O D E PA R T M E N T O F N AT U R A L R E S O U R C E S Tips for Handling Live Aquatic Bait What’s the Big Deal about Live Aquatic Bait? Live aquatic bait, such as minnows, crayfish, leeches, and mud puppies, can ruin fishing and introduce diseases to the fish already in the lake. Mussels and their microscopic larvae or plants can be transported in water held in the bait buckets or live wells. Once the boat is transported to another body of water, the Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) can be deposited into the new water. Anglers and boaters must take care not to move plants, animals, or water to a new lake or stream. • The transportation of live crayfish is prohibited on the west slope and from Sanchez Reservoir. • It is unlawful to transport live bait across state lines without an import permit. What Happens to Live Aquatic Bait During ANS Inspections? Depending on the location and type of bait, the inspection or treatment will vary. If you have bait in a container or in a well with standing water, you will be allowed to proceed and launch with the bait as is if: • Your receipt is from a Colorado bait dealer and What Do the Regulations Say about Live Aquatic Bait? Colorado Division of Wildlife and Colorado State Parks ANS regulations require that all live aquatic bait must be purchased from an authorized Colorado bait dealer and must be accompanied by a dated receipt. The receipt is valid for ANS inspections for seven days. • Live fish are only allowed for use as bait on the East Slope below 7,000 feet and at Navajo Reservoir. • In those areas, the transportation of live fish as bait is prohibited between waters unless it was purchased from a Colorado bait dealer, as described above. • Fish harvested in the wild for use as bait can only be used in the water in which it was caught and an no longer be transported and stored for later use. • The receipt is dated no more than seven days and • Matches up with the bait in question. If the receipt is older than seven days, the inspector will perform a bait treatment to remove the threat of ANS in the bait-water. You will be asked to remove the bait from the vessels live well or container and place it into a holding container. The live well or container must be drained and decontaminated using standard decontamination procedures (hot water rinse) before the bait is returned. The container or well water will be replaced with water from a sealed container or non-chlorinated source. If you DO NOT have a receipt the live aquatic bait will not be permitted for use and will have to be properly disposed of in the trash. However, if the bait is not fish and was harvested within 1⁄2 mile of the reservoir from man-made ditches or canals, the inspector will perform a bait treatment as described above. The exception to this is bait harvested within Bent, Crowley, Kiowa, Otero, or Prowers counties, which can be transported and used only within those five counties. Out of state bait is not permitted for use. COLORADO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE • 6060 Broadway • Denver, CO 80216 • (303) 297-1192 • www.wildlife.state.co.us �What is Considered Live Aquatic Bait? Anything that needs to be kept in water to stay alive is considered live aquatic bait. This may include, but is not limited to: Tips for Speedy Inspections We are continually working on ways to facilitate the inspection process for our visitors, and we recommend these options: • Crayfish, crawdads, crawfish • Do not buy live aquatic bait over the internet; only buy from authorized Colorado bait dealers. While you can order just about anything from the internet and it may seem convenient, consider what could happen to your boating, sport fish, native frogs, snakes, and other animals if you introduce a new competitor or a potential disease carrier to your lake! • Frogs • Keep your receipt and check that it has been dated. • Water dogs, mud puppies, salamanders • Keep your bait in the container from the dealer. Anything that does not need to be kept in water is not live aquatic bait. Examples include: • Only take bait on the boat you plan to use that day. • Minnows • Use bait within seven days of purchase. • Remove the heads of crayfish before transporting. • Worms • Grasshoppers • Grubs • Crickets How Do I Properly Dispose of Unused Live Aquatic Bait? Dispose of unused live aquatic bait in the trash. Do not release in the water! You Can Make a Difference! You can help stop the spread of Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) in Colorado and the West! Before entering and when leaving any waters always: Clean: Remove all plants, animals and mud. Thoroughly wash everything: boats, trailers, vehicle hitches and motors. Aquatic plant fragments and animals can hide in mud and survive many days out of water. Be sure to clean all fishing equipment including waders and boots. Drain: Completely drain every space or item that could hold water, including live wells, bait containers, ballast and bilge tanks, and engine cooling systems. Remove plugs, drop motor, and use sponges and/or towels to absorb all water from bilges, live wells, ballast tanks, and motors. Dry: Allow sufficient time for boats and equipment to dry completely before launching in other waters. What Happens if I Release Live Aquatic Bait or Plants? Because ANS are not native to Colorado habitats, they have no natural competitors and predators. Without these checks and balances, introducing non-native plants or animals into Colorado lakes and streams can be detrimental to the entire habitat. Nonnative frogs and toads eat and out-compete native species and can be poisonous to raccoons and foxes. Plants can out-compete native species and eliminate food sources for native and sport fish. Predators that eat fish, such as eagles and other birds, may also be harmed. Zebra mussels smother crayfish and native animals. They compete with them for food by removing plankton that young fish and other animals need to survive. ALL PHOTOS © DOW UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED RUSTY CRAYFISH PHOTO © PHIL MYERS, MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN QUAGGA AND ZEBRA MUSSELS PHOTO © MICHIGAN SEA GRANT 5/2011 – 75,000 Dispose: Properly dispose unused live bait into trash containers, not into the water. Properly dispose of aquarium or classroom animals or plants, do not place them in any body of water or natural setting. For more information call the Colorado Division of Wildlife at (303) 291-7295 or Colorado State Parks at (303) 866-3437. Please Clean, Drain, and Dry your boat and gear to keep boating open in Colorado. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Tips for handling live aquatic bait Description An account of the resource Live aquatic bait, such as minnows, crayfish, leeches, and mud puppies, can ruin fishing and introduce diseases to the fish already in the lake. Mussels and their microscopic larvae or plants can be transported in water held in the bait buckets or live wells. Once the boat is transported to another body of water, the Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) can be deposited into the new water. Anglers and boaters must take care not to move plants, animals, or water to a new lake or stream. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Colorado Department of Natural Resources Subject The topic of the resource Aquatic nuisance species ANS Fishing Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2011-05 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Colorado Division of Wildlife Colorado State Parks Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/a45164fba0e899c5e2df57e590d0b3fc.pdf ccfea5bedcf6b925094fc0748eae4d2e PDF Text Text COLORADO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE Stop the Spread of Invasive Species What are Aquatic Nuisance Species? Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) are a significant and rapidly growing threat to Colorado’s water supply and to boating and fishing recreation. ANS are invasive animals, plants, and disease-causing pathogens that are “out of place” in Colorado’s rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands. They are introduced accidentally or intentionally outside of their native range. Because they are not native to Colorado habitats, they have no natural competitors and predators. Without these checks and balances, the invaders are able to reproduce rapidly and out-compete native species for space and nutrients. ANS have harmful effects on natural resources, water supply systems and recreational opportunities. Once introduced, most invasive species cannot be eradicated and cost millions of dollars to manage. Preventing the introduction and spread of ANS is critical! PHOTO BY MICHIGAN SEA GRANT Zebra and Quagga Mussels Zebra and quagga mussels grow and reproduce quickly and have significant economic, ecological and recreation impacts. They degrade water quality. They attach to most underwater structures, clog water supply pipes and encrust and smother native species. As filter feeders they eat most of the food at the bottom of the food chain, leaving little or nothing for native aquatic species. They are transported to uninfested waters on trailered watercraft, or in bait buckets, live wells, bilge water, motors, gear, and equipment. RUSTY CRAYFISH PHOTO BY PHIL MYERS, MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN NEW ZEALAND MUDSHELL PHOTO BY MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL PHOTO BY MICHIGAN SEA GRANT Rusty Crayfish Rusty crayfish eat small fish, insects, and fish eggs. They also eat aquatic vegetation, damaging underwater habitat that is important for fish spawning, cover, and food. They are aggressive and displace native crayfish. They have been introduced to uninfested water by anglers who use the crayfish as bait and throw unused bait into the water or illegally stock them as a prey base for fish. New Zealand Mudsnail New Zealand mudsnails (NZMS) compete with native invertebrates— native mussels, mayflies, caddisflies, and other aquatic insects—for space and food. NZMS reduce these prey sources for fish and are not a good food source themselves. Their hard shell allows them to pass through a fish gut unharmed. NZMS are carried to uninfested waters on fishing gear. They can survive up to 50 days on a damp surface and several days on a dry surface. Eurasian watermilfoil Eurasian watermilfoil forms dense mats that restrict swimming, fishing, and boating and clog water intakes. The mats shade and choke out native aquatic plants. The decaying plants foul beaches and decrease oxygen levels in the water, destroying habitat and food needed by fish and birds. The mats slow the flow of water in ditches, rivers, and streams and create ideal mosquito habitat. Eurasian watermilfoil reproduces by seeds, fragmentation and winter buds. Any plant fragment can start a new infestation. COLORADO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE • 6060 Broadway • Denver, CO 80216 • (303) 297-1192 • www.wildlife.state.co.us �PHOTO BY BRAD HENLEY Clean Boats and Gear Can Stop the Spread of Invasive Species! Attention Anglers! Anglers who use waders should scrub the bottom of waders and boots with a wire brush and remove all mud, plants and organic materials in between each and every use. Anglers should then perform one of the following disinfection recommendations before going into the next body of water: DRAIN—Completely drain every conceivable space or item that could hold water, including live wells, bait containers, ballast and bilge tanks, and engine cooling systems. OPTION 1—Submerge waders and gear in a large tub filled with 50% Formula 409 and water for at least 10 minutes, scrubbing debris and visually inspecting waders and gear for snails before rinsing. Rinse water must be from a New Zealand mudsnail-free source (to avoid re-infection) and the chemical bath must be properly disposed of away from the water body. DRY—Allow sufficient time for boats and equipment to dry completely before launching in other waters. OPTION 2—Submerge waders and gear in a large tub filled with 1:15 of Sparquat 256 institutional cleaner (3.1% concentration) and water for at least 10 minutes, scrubbing debris from the gear, and visually inspecting the gear for snails before rinsing. Rinse water must be from a New Zealand mudsnail free source (to avoid re-infection), and the chemical bath must be properly disposed of away from the water body. PHOTO BY ELIZABETH BROWN, DOW Attention Boaters! CLEAN—Remove all plants, animals and mud. Thoroughly wash everything: boats, trailers, vehicle hitches and motors. Aquatic plant fragments and animals can hide in mud and survive many days out of water. Be sure to clean all fishing equipment including waders and boots. DISPOSE BAIT—Properly dispose unused live bait into trash containers, not into the water. NEVER DISPOSE—Of aquarium or classroom animals or plants in any body of water or natural setting. REPORT—If you find anything that you think is an invasive species on your boat or in a water body, report it to the DOW by emailing ReportANS@state.co.us or call (303) 291-7295. OPTION 3—Spray or soak waders and gear with water greater than 140º Fahrenheit for at least 10 minutes. OPTION 4—Dry your waders and equipment completely for a minimum of 10 days in between each use (remember that mudsnails can survive several days out of water). OPTION 5—Place waders and boots in a freezer overnight between each use. The Colorado Division of Wildlife is the state agency responsible for protecting and managing wildlife and its habitat, as well as providing wildlife-related recreation. The Division is funded by hunting and fishing license fees, federal grants and Colorado Lottery proceeds through Great Outdoors Colorado. 2/2011 – ??,000 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Stop the spread of invasive species Description An account of the resource Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) are a significant and rapidly growing threat to Colorado’s water supply and to boating and fishing recreation. ANS are invasive animals, plants, and disease-causing pathogens that are “out of place” in Colorado’s rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands. They are introduced accidentally or intentionally outside of their native range. Because they are not native to Colorado habitats, they have no natural competitors and predators. Without these checks and balances, the invaders are able to reproduce rapidly and out-compete native species for space and nutrients. ANS have harmful effects on natural resources, water supply systems and recreational opportunities. Once introduced, most invasive species cannot be eradicated and cost millions of dollars to manage. Preventing the introduction and spread of ANS is critical! Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Colorado Division of Wildlife Subject The topic of the resource Aquatic nuisance species ANS Fishing Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2011-02 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Colorado Division of Wildlife https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/ae9dd9856bf48cec27373a4d2da7726e.pdf 3911c2d00d7c28eb4d03d2319492b1cc PDF Text Text State of Colorado Zebra and Quagga Mussel Management Plan LAST REVISED August 24, 2009 �Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Partners ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 State Government ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Federal Government .................................................................................................................................. 5 Local Governments .................................................................................................................................... 5 Recreational User Groups / Non-Governmental Organizations ................................................................ 5 Early Detection .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Statewide Sampling and Monitoring .......................................................................................................... 6 Equipment Decontamination ..................................................................................................................... 7 Preserving and Shipping Samples ............................................................................................................ 7 Identification of Samples ........................................................................................................................... 7 Notification of Infested Water .................................................................................................................... 7 Reporting ................................................................................................................................................... 8 Containment and Prevention: watercraft inspection and decontamination Program ................................... 9 Containment at Infested Waters .............................................................................................................. 11 Prevention Targeting Out of State Boats ................................................................................................. 14 Prevention Targeting High Risk Waters .................................................................................................. 14 Roving Watercraft Inspection and decontamination Patrol ..................................................................... 18 Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Standards, Training, Certification & Quality Control ............. 19 Legal Authority ............................................................................................................................................ 21 State of Colorado ANS Act (SB08-226) .................................................................................................. 21 State ANS Regulations ............................................................................................................................ 21 CDOW Aquatic Health Regulations: ........................................................................................................ 21 State Fish Hatchery Program ...................................................................................................................... 22 ANS Technology/Tracking .......................................................................................................................... 22 Watercraft Inspection Seals..................................................................................................................... 20 Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Tracking Database ............................................................ 23 Sampling and Monitoring Database ........................................................................................................ 24 Communication and Information ................................................................................................................. 24 Education .................................................................................................................................................... 25 Research ..................................................................................................................................................... 26 Volunteer Opportunities .............................................................................................................................. 27 Staffing Requirements................................................................................................................................. 28 Summary of Plan Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 28 Implementation Table .................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................... 34 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 34 Appendices Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... 35 2 �Executive Summary The Colorado Zebra/Quagga Mussel Management Plan (ZQM Plan) outlines a statewide collaborative effort to detect, contain, and substantially reduce the risk of the spread and further infestation by zebra/quagga mussels in Colorado. The Plan is coordinated by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) as part of the State Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) Program. The Plan’s primary components are early detection and rapid response, containment, prevention and education/outreach. The backbone of the ZQM Plan is mandatory watercraft inspection and decontamination to prevent the spread of mussels overland on recreational watercraft. The watercraft inspection and decontamination component focuses primarily on the highest risk watercraft coming from out-ofstate, regardless of residency, and those that have recently been in infested waters. According to State ANS Regulations, it is mandatory for all watercraft coming from out-of-state and those leaving an infested water to get an inspection and, if necessary, get decontaminated prior to launching in any waters of the state. Standardized watercraft inspection and decontamination protocols have been implemented at a variety of inspection stations throughout the state to provide ample opportunity for watercraft owners to comply with the mandatory inspection regulations. Inspection and decontamination station locations will include, but are not limited to, (1) infested lakes and reservoirs, (2) state offices convenient for entry into Colorado, (3)private industry locations such as marine dealers, (4) high risk non-infested waters and (5) mobile roving watercraft inspection and decontamination units targeting random lakes and reservoirs. Each station placed at high risk waters will be multi-purpose, offering preventative or containment inspections to those entering or leaving that specific water body, and inspections and decontaminations for out-of-state watercraft. Bodies of water, and water-based recreation, are often managed by multiple interests: federal, state, county and municipal agencies, marina operators and private entities. A goal of the ZQM Plan is to ensure watercraft inspection and decontamination stations placed at lakes and reservoirs are operated by the recreational manager with support from CDOW (law enforcement, training, certification, educational materials, signage, forms, etc). Due to the highly invasive nature of zebra and quagga mussels and their limited distribution in Colorado and the western United States, it is of critical importance that these entities cooperate to achieve the ZQM Plan's goals for waters of the state, regardless of jurisdiction. ANS, especially zebra and quagga mussels, can result in severe impacts to water supply and distribution infrastructure for municipal, industrial and agricultural uses. These mussels negatively impact fisheries and all forms of water-based recreation (particularly boating and fishing interests). ANS can cause damage to watercrafts, motors and inhibit access opportunities. The economic impacts associated with mussel invasions can be devastating. In a survey of Eastern U.S. and Canada water users in 1995, Oneill found 339 facilities reported total zebra mussel related expenses of $69,070,780 (Oneill, Jr., C.R. 1997). 3 �The CDOW places a high importance on preventing and controlling zebra and quagga mussels in Colorado to protect not only our invaluable wildlife resources, but also our recreation and tourism industry, water storage and distribution systems, agricultural production and the state’s overall economy. The CDOW encourages the larger water community to conduct facility assessments and implement preventative measures to reduce the risk of transportation through, and invasion of, water distribution systems. There are currently few, if any, proven control methods to mitigate the downstream movement of juvenile veliger mussels in natural environments. However, there are preventative and control measures that can be taken in water distribution systems. References outlining specific control measures are listed in the Appendices. CDOW encourages all partners and citizens to take every precaution to stop the spread of zebra and quagga mussels and other aquatic nuisance species. The ZQM Plan is a working document and will be updated regularly as implementation progresses and new information becomes available. Partners Preventing the spread of zebra and quagga mussels and other aquatic nuisance species requires a high level of cooperation and coordination between federal, state, county and municipal agencies, marina operators, private entities and recreationists. Many of these entities have partnered together to form the Zebra and Quagga Mussel Task Force (ZQM Task Force) to develop and implement the ZQM Plan and to periodically review and update it. The ZQM Task Force is an ongoing collaborative work group that acts as a permanent zebra and quagga mussel management team and shares information and coordinates on field projects, educational efforts, protocol development, public relations, trainings and obtaining resources. Detailed information concerning the roles and jurisdiction of each entity is provided in Appendix A. Due to the multijurisdictional nature of Colorado waters, the ZQM Plan recommendations apply to all partners; for no single entity is responsible for, or capable of, implementing all of the necessary actions needed to protect Colorado waters from invasive mussels or other ANS. State Government The Colorado Department of Natural Resources (CDNR) has authority to manage wildlife, recreation, and water resources in Colorado. The two CDNR divisions that manage for zebra and quagga mussels are the Colorado Division of Wildlife and Colorado State Parks. The Colorado Water Conservation Board and the Colorado Division of Water Resources are integral partners in the zebra and quagga mussel program. Additional state entities involved in the ZQM program include the Colorado Wildlife Commission, the Colorado Parks Board, the Colorado Fish Health Board, Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, Colorado Department of Agriculture, Colorado Department of Revenue, Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade, and the Colorado Tourism Office. 4 �Federal Government No single federal agency has clear authority over all aspects of ANS management, but many agencies have programs and responsibilities that address aspects of the problem, such as importation, interstate transport, exclusion, control, and eradication. Federal ANS management activities are coordinated through the ANS Task Force created by the National Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 and amended in 1996 as the National Invasive Species Act. In February 1999, President Clinton signed Executive Order (EO) 13112, which requires all federal agencies to collaborate in developing a national invasive species management plan to include terrestrial and aquatic species. Federal partners for the Colorado ZQM Program include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), National Park Service (NPS), and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Local Governments Cooperation from Colorado cities and counties is critical to the success of the ANS Program. Many waters in the state are owned and/or managed by local governments. Several Front Range municipalities have taken a pro-active approach to the zebra/quagga mussel problem by implementing watercraft inspection and decontamination at their reservoirs and lakes in 2008. Those governments are City of Aurora, City of Boulder, City of Denver, and City of Westminster. CDOW will continue to work with local governments to mitigate the spread and impacts from ANS, including zebra and quagga mussels. By working together to implement the ZQM Plan, we greatly increase the probability of preventing the spread of ANS in Colorado. Recreational User Groups / Non-Governmental Organizations There are many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that have an interest in preventing the spread of invasive species. In 2005, the Colorado Women Fly-Fishers located a new population of New Zealand mudsnail in the South Platte and was integral in rapid response. In 2007, The Nature Conservancy and Trout Unlimited played crucial roles in the development of the State ANS Management Plan and continue to serve on the State ANS Task Force. In 2008, private industries such as the two marinas at Lake Dillon, Red Mountain RV at Wolford Reservoir, and marine dealers, such as Tommy’s Slalom, Inc. took an active role implementing watercraft inspection and decontamination at their locations. These entities are crucial to the success of the ZQM Plan and the CDOW hopes that more partnerships can be formed to expand programs and reach a larger percentage of Colorado’s residents and visitors for education, communication, volunteerism and early detection and rapid response. The CDOW will direct its messages to the following recreationists and special interest groups; marinas, marine dealers, boating clubs, fishing guides, anglers, waterfowl hunters, Trout Unlimited, Ducks Unlimited, BASS, CO Walleye Association, Muskies Inc, 5280 Bass Hunters, Federation of Fly Fishers, The Nature Conservancy, and many more. 5 �Early Detection Statewide Sampling and Monitoring CDOW is the lead agency for statewide ANS Early Detection Sampling and Monitoring. Beginning in 2005, ANS sampling and monitoring was focused on collecting baseline data on all species present at survey locations, while specifically checking for over 35 plant and animal species. Following the discovery of zebra mussels at Lake Pueblo in 2007, the ANS early detection program was redesigned in 2008 to focus on an intense ZQM sampling program with temporary full-time technicians utilizing three sampling methods. First, plankton tows were performed to sample for veligers (the planktonic larval form of zebra and quagga mussels). Second, artificial substrates were deployed at set locations and were checked for attached adult mussels. Third, shoreline surveys were performed to look for adults and other ANS. Protocols for standard sampling methods can be found in Appendix B-C. Waters are sampled based on a risk assessment conducted specifically for zebra and quagga mussels. The risk assessment was completed in June 2008 and identified 19 very high risk waters, 17 high risk waters, 58 medium risk waters, and 64 low risk waters (Appendix D). Technicians visited very high and high risk waters bi-weekly, medium-risk waters monthly and low-risk waters periodically (Appendix F). The sampling season and schedule was determined by surface water temperatures which influence plankton productivity. Research has shown that plankton productivity is positively correlated with veliger production. The sampling began as soon as the surface temperature reached 50⁰ F, the temperature conducive to the highest plankton productivity and continued until the temperature dropped below that level. CDOW technicians conducted all three sampling methods and also performed the microscopy analysis on plankton tow samples. In 2009, aggressive sampling will continue according to specifications determined in 2008 and revisions to protocol as recommended by the Colorado Blue Ribbon Panel Report (February 2009) and the 100th Meridian Initiative’s Interagency Dreissena Monitoring Plan for Western Waters (May 2009). CDOW technicians will sample all 158 “at risk” waters specifically for zebra and quagga mussels. Technicians will also resume activities begun in 2005 to sample for all ANS while collecting baseline data. Identification of specimens will be conducted at the AAHL. The State ANS Regulations require all persons conducting sampling for aquatic nuisance species, including zebra and quagga mussels, to be permitted by CDOW. Due to the prohibited nature of ANS, the CDOW Special Collections Permit for wildlife species collection does not apply. Any entity intending to conduct sampling for aquatic nuisance species must request a permit in writing to the CDOW ANS Program. Only the Director of the Division of Wildlife can approve the permit request. Entities requesting permits should attend the State ANS Sampling and Monitoring Training School taught annually by CDOW and Reclamation in April and August. 6 �Equipment Decontamination Every precaution is taken to ensure that efforts made to sample and monitor for ANS do not further endanger the state’s waters. All persons, including DNR employees, conducting work activities in Colorado waters are required by the ANS Act to decontaminate their watercraft and all field equipment between water bodies. Work activities include sampling, scientific collection, infrastructure maintenance, filling water trucks, pumping equipment for wildfire fighting or mineral extraction, and all other water-based activities. Disinfection is especially important between sampling efforts in different reaches of the same stream, or between individual waters in order to minimize the chance of spreading zebra and quagga mussels and other ANS such as whirling disease, weeds and/or parasites to uninfected areas. Preserving and Shipping Samples Standard procedures to collect, preserve, and ship samples of adult and veliger larvae have been developed by AAHL (See Appendix B-C). These procedures ensure that the specimens can be positively identified and that accurate information can be conveyed between agencies. There are many entities performing water quality monitoring in Colorado. Those entities are encouraged to cooperate with CDOW to expand the reaches of the state sampling program to more waters. Identification of Samples The CDOW is able to provide identification services to partners for all ANS. ZQM identification relies on a three-stage process for positive confirmation of zebra or quagga mussel veligers in plankton tow samples. The first phase is a visual identification using a microscope or FlowCAM (digital video scanning/recording plankton identification instrument). Following the visual identification of a suspected veliger, the sample is then analyzed by a laboratory for DNA analysis. The lab first performs polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing to determine if there is zebra/quagga mussel DNA in the sample. If the PCR test is positive, the laboratory performs gene sequencing to determine the specific mussel species. For veliger identification, a single positive ID with microscopy, PCR and gene sequencing is required to declare a body of water positive for zebra or quagga mussels. Adults are identified visually by trained scientists. DNA verification may or may not be required to confirm the identification of an adult mussel. Notification of Infested Water The CDOW will declare a water positive for zebra or quagga mussels based on one set of positive test results on a single sample from the multi-tier 3-phase identification process (microscopy, PCR and gene sequencing - both ocular and molecular) or adult identification. If disparaging results are encountered, a body of water may be declared suspect for zebra or quagga mussels until confirmation can be obtained. Once a body of water is declared positive for mussels, genetic confirmation of future monitoring samples containing veligers is may no longer 7 �be required. However, sampling will increase after detection to monitor growth rate and spread of the invasion. Historically, CDOW communicates with the land and water managers throughout the mussel sampling and identification process. CDOW notifies both internal staff and critical partners (land owner, water owner, recreation manager, facilities manager, etc.) at the conclusion of the second testing phase, if there is a positive PCR result. Notification is prior to the third and final phase, speciation via gene sequencing. Early communication aids in preparing rapid response plans and drafting communication documents, such as a joint press releases, to speed up public notification. The public is notified directly after the final test results through a CDOW press release (see Appendix G). Reporting Any person who knows that an ANS is present or suspected at a specific location is required by the ANS Act to immediately report the sighting to the Division of Wildlife Invasive Species Program, 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80216. Within 10 days, the Division will notify the reporter of the identification results, or the status of the identification process. All authorized agents and qualified peace officers performing watercraft inspection and decontamination are required to send suspect samples or known ANS taken from a watercraft or water body to AAHL immediately. Any persons or agencies performing sampling or monitoring for ANS must first obtain an ANS sampling permit from CDOW. Permit holders are required to report according to rules set forth in the State ANS Regulations. There are four options for reporting: a. Federal ANS Hotline: 1-877-STOP-ANS b. State ANS Hotline: 1-303-293-6531 c. Email: ReportANS@state.co.us d. Website: www.colorado.gov/wildlife Reports should be accompanied by standard CDOW forms, supplied on the website and by request. If they are not available, useful data to be included in a standard report is: 1. Date/Time that specimen was found 2. Exact location of sighting (water body and specific location on water body) 3. Suspected species 4. Name and contact information of the collector 8 �Containment and Prevention: Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Program The best method of protection against an invasive mussel introduction is through preventative measures. Prevention is much less expensive than containment or control efforts. Although containment at infested waters is the top priority, CDOW recommends that focus be placed on prevention through field watercraft inspection and decontamination, in conjunction with education and information efforts. The goal of the State ANS Program in CDOW is to coordinate and implement seamless and consistent watercraft inspection and decontamination stations statewide. The priorities are based on the risk assessment conducted by CDOW in June 2008, which focuses on the risk of mussels being introduced by both the recreational and downstream vectors, in addition to placement in the watershed. A revised risk assessment is recommended. The goal is to complete two risk assessments, with the first focused on risk of introduction due to recreational pressures or geographic approximation to infested waters, and the ability for the mussels to establish based on water chemistry parameters. The second should be focused on the risk of high negative impact if a sustainable mussel population were to be established. Currently, there is not enough data to complete these assessments. In order to accurately assess risk, water samples must be collected, analyzed and compiled to determine habitat suitability. Assessment Probability of ZQM being introduced and able to establish Probability of high negative impact if mussels were to be established Assessment Criteria Susceptibility Habitat Suitability Potential impact to water infrastructure Potential impact to fisheries Criteria Description Probability of an introduction due to recreational pressures or geographic approximation to infested water. The probability of ZQM being able to sustain a viable population if introduced based on water chemistry parameters. Risk of impacts to facilities, location in watershed and impact to municipal, industrial and agricultural water storage and supply. Risk of impact to fisheries. The goal of the watercraft inspection and decontamination program is to ensure a seamless program across jurisdictions, which enable out-of-state and resident boaters a convenient process to ensure ANS are not being transported on watercraft. These stations will be located at infested waters, high risk waters and convenient locations so that it is relatively easy for boaters to prevent the spread of ANS by complying with the inspection requirement. Watercraft inspection and decontamination stations that are not located at a specific water body will be operated by the owner (for example, CDOW will operate stations at CDOW offices; marine dealers may operate stations at their dealership, etc). 9 �Site-specific plans will be written for each body of water on the risk assessment. These plans will be written in phases over many years beginning with the highest risk waters. The site specific watercraft inspection and decontamination stations will be founded on partnerships between CDOW and the land, water, recreation owners and managers at each specific body of water. The watercraft inspection and decontamination station will be operated by the recreational manager, owner or a private entity; with support from CDOW in the form of law enforcement support, training, certification, sampling/monitoring, educational materials, signage, standard forms and outreach. Although CDOW will be the coordinating agency for each sitespecific effort, it will require the collective efforts and resources from all direct partners to implement the field watercraft inspection and decontamination program. Watercraft inspection and decontamination stations will be multi-purpose, offering preventative or containment inspections to those entering or leaving that specific water body and inspections/decontaminations for watercrafts coming from outside of Colorado. The inspection and decontamination stations, regardless of management entity, will operate according to the Official State of Colorado Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Procedures (adopted into regulation on February 20, 2009 and published in March 2009.). The watercraft inspection and decontamination program will provide a large network of opportunities for boaters to minimize the risk of an introduction of zebra and quagga mussels, and other invasive species into state waters. The inspection and decontamination program has four components, listed below: Component Containment at Infested Waters Prevention Targeting Out-of-State Watercrafts Prevention at Uninfested Waters Roving Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Patrols Definition No trailered watercraft will leave infested water without an inspection. All persons with trailered motorized watercraft must submit to an inspection and if necessary decontamination prior to exiting an infested water. If an inspection station is inoperable or not available, the boat must get an inspection and if necessary decontamination at a state certified location prior to launching in any other water of the state. All trailered watercraft registered in a state other than Colorado, and all Colorado registered watercraft that have been in out of state waters within the last 30 days, are prohibited from launching on any water of the state without a prior inspection and if necessary, decontamination. When required by the lake or reservoir, all trailered watercraft must submit to an inspection and if necessary decontamination prior to entering a high, medium or low risk water that is negative for ANS to prevent an introduction. CDOW roving inspection patrols will randomly set up watercraft inspection and decontamination stations at the waters without a permanent inspection program in place (typically medium and low risk waters). Boaters should expect to be inspected prior to launching on any water of the state. 10 �Containment at Infested Waters It is critical to prevent contaminated watercraft from spreading ZQM veliger or adults from infested waters to uninfested waters. There are currently no effective methods to control the downstream movement of veligers in the natural flow of water. We can, however, mitigate the potential overland spread from watercraft. It is essential that boats recreating on infested waters be inspected and, if necessary, decontaminated prior to launching in any other waters. As of April 2008, there are seven positive waters and one suspect water in Colorado, summarized below. It is the highest priority that no watercraft leaves these waters without being inspected by a state authorized agent and decontaminated, if necessary. The majority of reservoirs in Colorado are owned and managed by federal, state, local and private entities. Typically, there are a minimum of three to five entities involved in creating and implementing a site-specific field response. It is critical that all entities involved work together to contain infestations. Positive Water Pueblo Lake Granby Shadow Mountain Willow Creek Grand Lake Tarryall Reservoir Jumbo Reservoir Owner Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation Town of Grand Lake CDOW Julesburg Irrigation District Recreation Manager State Parks, CDOW U.S. Forest Service U.S. Forest Service U.S. Forest Service U.S. Forest Service CDOW CDOW Date Tested Positive January 17, 2008 July 10, 2008 September 26, 2008 September 26, 2008 September 26, 2008 October 8, 2008 October 8, 2008 Suspect Water Blue Mesa Reservoir Owner Recreation Manager Date Tested Positive Bureau of Reclamation National Park Service February 19, 2009 1. Pueblo Reservoir – Positive for zebra mussels on January 17, 2008. Positive for both zebra and quagga mussels on September 26, 2008. This reservoir is owned and operated by the Bureau of Reclamation, with recreational management by State Parks and CDOW. State Parks is the lead agency on Pueblo watercraft inspection and decontamination station. In 2008, parks operated the watercraft inspection and decontamination program twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week, for approximately nine months each year. The program began in March 2008 utilizing a $1M grant from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB). Since July 2008, the program has been funded by the ANS Act allocation. In 2009, parks is operating the watercraft inspection and decontamination station sixteen hours per day, seven days a week 2. Lake Granby – Positive for quagga mussels on July 10, 2008. Owned by the Bureau of Reclamation, managed by the U.S. Forest Service, water interests owned by Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. CDOW was the lead agency on the watercraft inspection and decontamination program in 2008 and 2009. Beginning August 15, 2008, CDOW hired temporary FTE to perform watercraft inspection and decontamination at the 11 �boat ramps, Friday through Sunday through October 15th. In 2009, the inspection stations were operated by CDOW beginning May 15th from 6:00 am – 8:00 pm at Sunset and Stillwater Ramps. Both ramps remain open at night and Arapahoe Bay remains open without inspection in 2009. Additional educational and watercraft inspection and decontamination opportunities are provided in September and October to private slip owners and marina operators to assist with boats leaving that have been in the water all season. 3. Grand Lake – Positive for quagga mussels on September 26, 2008. Owned and managed by the Town of Grand Lake. Connected to Lake Granby. CDOW hosted a watercraft inspection and decontamination day on September 27, 2008 to check watercrafts leaving for the season and to educate homeowners and marina slip renters. In 2009, the CDOW operated an inspection station on the public ramp beginning May 15th from 6:00 am – 8:00 pm. The public ramp remains open at night without inspections. Additional educational and watercraft inspection and decontamination opportunities are provided in September and October to private slip owners and marina operators to assist with boats leaving that have been in the water all season. In August 2009, the Greater Grand Lake Shoreline Association (GGLSA) adopted the zebra/quagga mussel “drop a brick” program to voluntarily assist the CDOW effort to monitor for mussels. Homeowners deployed state provided bricks as substrate for mussel sampling and pledged to check the bricks and their infrastructure for mussels and send any suspects to the AAHL. 4. Shadow Mountain Reservoir – Positive for quagga mussels on September 26, 2008. Owned by the Bureau of Reclamation, managed by the U.S. Forest Service, water interests owned by Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Connected to Lake Granby and Grand Lake. In 2009, the CDOW operated inspection stations on the Green Ridge Ramp beginning May 15th from 6:00 am – 8:00 pm. Hilltop Ramp was closed by the USFS to assist with this effort. The ramps remain open at night without inspections. Additional educational and watercraft inspection and decontamination opportunities are provided in September and October to private slip owners and marina operators to assist with boats leaving that have been in the water all season. 5. Willow Creek Reservoir - Positive for quagga mussels on September 26, 2008. Owned by the Bureau of Reclamation, managed by the U.S. Forest Service, water interests owned by Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Connected through a pipeline to Shadow Mountain Lake. Willow Creek is closed to trailered watercraft use in 2009 by the USFS to assist with containment. 6. Tarryall Reservoir - Positive for quagga mussels on October 8, 2008. Owned and managed by CDOW. Beginning July 17, 2008, CDOW temporary FTE inspectors staffed the boat ramps from dawn until dusk Thursday through Monday. The reservoir was closed to boating for the season on October 31, 2008. In 2009, the reservoir opened when boat inspections began May 1st at the north boat ramp from 6:00 am – 10:00 pm, Thursdays through Mondays. Overnight beaching of boats is prohibited. The reservoir is 12 �not accessible to trailered watercraft when inspectors are not present. The reservoir will once again close to boating on October 31, 2009. 7. Jumbo Reservoir - Positive for quagga mussels on October 8, 2008. Owned by the Julesburg Irrigation District and managed by CDOW. At the time of positive test results, Jumbo was closed to boating due to potential safety issues and conflicts between anglers and waterfowl hunters. Only permitted hunters were allowed to launch watercraft and they were given strict instructions to clean, drain, dry. In 2009, boat inspections began May 1st at the east boat ramp (near the outlet tower) from 6:00 am – 10:00 pm, seven days a week and will conclude October 1st. All other ramps will only be open to handlaunched boats. All boat ramps will be closed at night. The reservoir is not accessible to trailered watercraft when inspectors are not present. Overnight beaching of boats is prohibited. Boat inspections and the general boating season will end on October 1st. Boating is prohibited Oct. 1 through last day of regular goose season, except handpropelled, non-motorized, craft used to set and pick up decoys and retrieve downed waterfowl. 8. Blue Mesa Reservoir – Suspect for Quagga Mussels – National Park Service collected plankton tow samples for analysis at Reclamation in 2008. On February 19, 2009, Reclamation reported inconclusive results which indicated there were positive microscopy results but negative DNA results from a single sample in March 2008. Subsequently, a single sample collected in May 2008 also showed inconclusive results which indicated there were negative microscopy results but positive DNA results. Sampling will increase in 2009 to determine if mussels are present in the reservoir or not. NPS and CDOW have partnered to implement both containment and prevention protocols for the 2009 boating season. Boat inspections began May 8th at Elk Creek, Stevens Creek and Lake Fork Boat Ramps from 5:30 a.m. – 9 p.m., 7 days a week. All other boat ramps are closed to trailered watercraft. Ramps will be closed to nighttime use; however, overnight beaching will be allowed. A multi-agency team coordinated by CDOW will determine the future management agreement for the above infested bodies of water to be implemented in 2010. This sitespecific planning effort is scheduled to be concluded before March 2010. The implementation of site-specific plans are dependent on funding and available resources. If waters are found to be positive for zebra or quagga mussels in the future, and a watercraft inspection and decontamination program is not already in place, CDOW will lead a response team consisting of the recreational managing agency, the infrastructure owner, the water owner, the land owner, local governments, concessioners and all interested parties to determine the containment strategy and necessary resources to implement the strategy. Each site-specific management plan will be a collaborative effort and outline the implementation strategy for that specific body of water. Implementation of those plans will be dependent on funding and resources. 13 �Site-specific mussel management plans are strongly encouraged on all bodies of water with trailered motorized watercraft, especially those high in a watershed, as a preventative measure. CDOW coordinated 22 site specific management plans in 2009 and is willing to coordinate the site-specific management planning process for additional waters in 2010. Prevention Targeting Out of State Watercraft All trailered motorized watercraft coming into Colorado from outside of the state, regardless of residency, must be inspected and, if necessary, decontaminate prior to launching on waters of the state, according to state regulations. Watercraft inspection and decontamination stations will provide ample opportunity for compliance. This option puts the responsibility on the recreational user to minimize the potential for spread by their watercraft. Fixed watercraft inspection and decontamination stations will be located near Colorado’s borders or in high population density locations. Watercraft inspection and decontamination stations located at high or medium risk waters will also provide inspections for out-of-state watercraft. These watercraft inspection and decontamination stations form a network for the highest risk watercraft (out-of-state watercraft and Colorado-registered watercraft leaving and returning) to be inspected and if necessary, decontaminated, at locations throughout the state. The following prioritized list details the steps to implement this segment of the program. Items 1 through 4 will be implemented in 2009. Items 5 through 7 will be phased in over time and are expected to be fully implemented during the 2010 boating season. 1. Regulations requiring all out-of-state registered watercraft and in-state registered watercraft returning to Colorado to be inspected, decontaminated (if necessary) and tagged prior to launch in Colorado waters • Completed February 20, 2009 2. Establishing and enforcing penalties for violation of the regulations • Completed February 20, 2009 3. A notification campaign directed at local and out-of-state boaters • Initiated April 2009 4. A standardized watercraft tagging/seal system • Implemented May 2009 5. A method to identify individual watercrafts (e.g., providing barcodes for all Colorado registered watercrafts, utilizing a smart tag, or logging the registered Colorado license (CL) number) 6. Development of a real-time database to be shared by all entities supervising watercraft inspection and decontamination, including on-site computer capabilities for staff. Possible watercraft inspection and decontamination Station Locations: • CDOW and other state offices • Visitors Centers • High, Medium and Low Risk Waters • Marinas • Marine Dealers • Private Industry Locations 14 �• Highway Rest Stops Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Stations managed by CDOW in 2009: • Denver CDOW Office • Grand Junction CDOW Office • Hot Sulphur Springs CDOW Office (established in 2008) • Lamar CDOW Office Proposed Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Stations for future years: • Antonito Visitors Center • Burlington Visitors Center • Colorado Springs CDOW & State Parks Office • Cortez Rest Stop • Craig CDOW CWD Office • Delta – Escalante SWA • Dinosaur Visitors Center • Fort Collins Visitors Center • Limon Visitors Center • Meeker CDOW Office • Trinidad Visitors Center • Trinidad – I25 Mile Marker 14 or 18 Rest Area • Walden Highway Location Out-of-state registered trailered watercraft owners will be notified prior to, or at, arrival in Colorado of inspection requirements through a variety of informational outlets listed on page 2223. The watercraft will be inspected and decontaminated if necessary at a watercraft inspection and decontamination stations, by state authorized agents. Upon successful inspection, watercraft will be sealed to the trailer and the owners will be given a receipt authorizing launch in state waters. Prevention at High Risk Waters This component details a preventative measure using watercraft inspection and decontamination stations at high risk waters across the state. High risk waters are identified by the ongoing collaborative risk assessment (page 8-9). At multi-jurisdictional reservoirs it will take a partnership of the owner and managing entities to plan and implement the site-specific programs. The majority of recreational water bodies in Colorado are not owned or operated by the Divisions of DNR. CDOW is willing to coordinate collaborative site-specific management plans for all high risk waters, however the implementation of these plans rely heavily on the recreational manager to supervise the program or contract with private industry for inspection services. These plans significantly reduce the risk of contamination of uninfected waters. Inspections and decontaminations will be conducted near boat ramp access. It is preferable that watercraft inspection and decontamination stations be multi-purpose offering preventative inspections to those entering that specific water body, and 15 �inspections/decontaminations for out-of-state watercraft. This will provide a large network of opportunities for boaters to minimize the risk of an introduction of ZQM and other ANS into state waters. 16 �High Risk Waters Preventative Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination List (Based on June 2008 risk assessment and pending management agreements. Subject to change.) High Risk Water Owner Recreation Manager 25 State Parks Various Owners State Parks Antero Denver Water Denver Water Aurora Res City of Aurora Boulder Res City of Boulder City of Aurora City of Boulder National Park Service (NPS) Larimer County U.S. Forest Service Blue Mesa Carter Lake Dillon Reservoir Douglas Lake Green Mountain Horsetooth Lake Nighthorse McPhee Prewitt Quincy Rampart Sanchez Stanley Lake Taylor Park Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation Denver Water North Poudre Irrigation Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation / NCWCD Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation North Sterling Irrigation City of Aurora Colorado Springs Utilities Sanchez Ditch & Irrigation Co. City of Westminster Bureau of Reclamation Twin Lakes Bureau of Reclamation Turquoise Lake Bureau of Reclamation Vallecito Pine River Irrig District Inspection and Inspection and 2008 Decontamination Decontamination Program Paid for By Supervised By State Parks Denver Water & CDOW City of Aurora State Parks Yes CDOW Yes City of Aurora Yes City of Boulder City of Boulder Yes NPS & CDOW NPS Yes CDOW Larimer County No Denver Water Dillon and Frisco Marina Operators Yes CDOW CDOW CDOW No U.S. Forest Service U.S. Forest Service Heeney Marina No Larimer County CDOW Larimer County No Unknown Not Fully Built Yet U.S. Forest Service CDOW CDOW No CDOW CDOW CDOW No City of Aurora U.S. Forest Service City of Aurora Colorado Springs Utilities & CDOW City of Aurora CDOW Yes CDOW CDOW CDOW No City of Westminster U.S. Forest Service U.S. Forest Service City of Westminster City of Westminster Yes CDOW CDOW No Rocky Mountain Recreation Co. No Rocky Mountain Recreation Co. No Unknown No U.S. Forest Service Pine River Irrig District City of Aurora and Colorado Springs Utilities City of Aurora and Colorado Springs Utilities Unknown No Yes 17 �Williams Fork Denver Water Denver Water Denver Water CDOW Yes Inspections will be coordinated by CDOW on high risk waters that have multiple responsible agencies and implemented as a partnership effort. Inspections will be conducted on high risk State Wildlife Area waters by CDOW and on State Park waters by State Parks. Inspections will be available seasonally based on the boating season and water temperature. Field operations will be site-specific and will use the state standard procedures for watercraft inspection, seals and decontamination. Inspection times and days of operations will be site-specific and will require collaboration to plan and implement. Decontamination equipment will be available on site. The implementation of collaborative site-specific zebra/quagga mussel management plans is dependent on funding and available resources. Roving Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Patrol It is not possible to have watercraft inspection and decontamination stations on every boat ramp in the state. Therefore, Roving Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Patrols will perform watercraft inspection and decontamination randomly for medium and low risk waters that do not have a permanent watercraft inspection and decontamination station. A Roving Patrol will have a mobile watercraft inspection and decontamination unit that will set up at different waters each day or several waters in one day, depending on proximity. This field presence, personal education and random watercraft inspection effort will impress upon the boating public the importance of watercraft inspection and decontamination and drive home the “Expect to be Inspected” message. This will further strengthen the education campaign to encourage boaters to always clean, drain, and dry. Roving Patrols will be modeled after the fishing and hunting license programs and will impress upon boaters their responsibility for preventing the movement of mussels to new waters. There should be specific regulations establishing violations for trailered motorized watercraft that are not clean, drain and dry prior to launching in Colorado waters. It is proposed to attach a point system to boating registrations, similar to fishing, hunting and driving. In 2009, there will be a total of 7 CDOW Roving Patrols. Three patrols will work in the SW Region, while one patrol will work in each of the NE, NW, and SE Regions. There will also be a single statewide patrol dedicated to quality assurance and field support. Every watercraft inspection and decontamination station is subject to field evaluation by the quality control roving patrol. Each patrol will consist of two temporary employees trained as stage II authorized agents. These roving crews will operate seasonally and at varied times for 6 months (May-October). CDOW Area and District Wildlife Managers will provide law enforcement support for roving crews and stations located at water bodies. This roving component provides a moderate level of protection for waters or where such a station is not warranted based on the cost and an assessment of risk. It also allows an educational component to educate watercraft owners that it is their responsibility to keep their watercraft free of ANS, regardless of what water they are on. 18 �Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Standards, Training, Certification & Quality Control The overland spread of zebra and quagga mussels by recreational boaters must be controlled or minimized to protect the waters of the state. The ANS Act specifies that only authorized agents or qualified peace officers may conduct watercraft inspections and decontamination operations. Thus, the goal of the training aspect of the program is to increase the number of authorized agents at various locations around the state who are certified to conduct watercraft inspections and decontaminations. The State of Colorado standard protocols for watercraft inspection and decontamination should be implemented at all state waters, regardless of the managing entity or land/water owner. Proper training and the consistent use of standard methods and procedures ensures that watercraft inspections and decontamination effectively reduce the risk of spread. Because watercraft recreationists travel throughout the state and region, it is critical that all managers use the same protocols and watercraft owners have similar experiences at watercraft inspection and decontamination stations. CDOW and Parks have partnered with several non-profits to conduct watercraft inspection and decontamination training annually since 2006. Colorado’s protocols are based on the widely accepted Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) standardized watercraft inspection and decontamination training taught at Lake Mead. The Colorado ANS Watercraft Inspection Handbook was published by CDOW in March 2009. The writing of this document was a collaborative effort between CDOW and Parks, along with many partners in Colorado and other states. The program developed is a specific curriculum for water recreation managers that teach managers zebra/quagga mussel biology, vectors of spread, invasion history and Colorado specifics. It impresses upon managers the importance of watercraft inspection and decontamination programs. The course takes them through the intricacies of inspecting various types of watercrafts for mussels and procedures to decontaminate them. The program walks inspectors through setting up a watercraft inspection and decontamination program, including educational messages, tracking methods, tagging protocols, and so on. Anyone conducting watercraft inspection and/or decontamination in Colorado is required by regulation to attend the state certification course. All partner agencies, water recreation managers, water providers, marina operators, marine dealers, angling and boating groups, etc. are highly encouraged to have staff in attendance. The PSMFC training at Lake Mead inspection and decontamination training is recommended, but does not replace or certify individuals to perform inspections or decontaminations for ANS in Colorado. CDOW and State Parks (Divisions) will conduct trainings, certifications and quality control checks to administer and regulate watercraft inspection and decontamination procedures. Stage III trainers will be individuals designated and approved by both Divisions as experts in the biology, inspection and decontamination of ANS. Stage III trainers should be Level II certified by PSMFC, although it is not mandatory. Stage III trainers must teach Stage II trainings. Stage II trainings must be a minimum of 12 hours long, and must include: 19 �1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Teaching and education methods; Public education methods and messages; Inspection procedures and hands on practice; Decontamination procedures and hands on practice; Procedures for tracking, reporting and collecting samples; Proper application of watercraft inspection and decontamination seals; Background biological information on listed ANS (impacts and identification); Legal constraints; and A written test. Stage II trainers will be individuals who have been through Stage II training, have successfully passed the written test, and are in good standing with the quality control checks. Stage II trainers are permitted to conduct Stage I trainings. Stage II trainers are able to train Stage I inspectors in both inspection and decontamination. Stage I trainings must be a minimum of eight hours long for inspection with an additional 4 hours of coursework for optional decontamination certification. Stage I trainings must include: 1. Public education methods and messages; 2. Inspection procedures and hands on practice; 3. Decontamination methods and hands on practice (if additional 4 hours); 4. Procedures for tracking, reporting and collecting samples; 5. Proper application of watercraft inspection and decontamination seals; 6. Background biological information of listed ANS (impacts and identification); 7. Legal constraints; and 8. A written test. Individuals who have attended Stage I training and have successfully passed the written test will be recognized by the Divisions as authorized agents. The CDOW roving quality control patrol will conduct quality assurance checks at watercraft inspection and decontamination locations to verify proper procedures are being utilized. If the patrol observes failures to use proper watercraft inspection and decontamination procedures, then either a written warning notice will be issued or they may decertify an authorized agent, a location or a level II trainer until they have attended and passed the appropriate training again. If the patrol observes multiple failures within a calendar year, then they may also decertify an agent, a location or a level II trainer for that calendar year. Recertification may occur in the next calendar year after such individuals attend and successfully pass the appropriate training. Upon completion of the training, the student will be certified by the Divisions as a State Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Operator (a.k.a. authorized agent). They will be assigned a unique identifying number. This will be logged in the shared database and will further partnerships, enabling the acceptance of watercraft inspection and decontamination programs across jurisdictional boundaries. This high level of certification and quality control should enable a passed and properly documented inspection or decontamination by one agency to be accepted by another agency. 20 �Legal Authority While the ultimate success of the ZQM Plan requires the collaboration of all of the partners, the statutory and regulatory authority for Aquatic Nuisance Species lies under the DNR umbrella in both the Divisions of Wildlife and State Parks. The following chapter outlines the State of Colorado ANS Act and CDOW aquatic animal health regulations. State of Colorado ANS Act (SB08-226) The ANS Act was passed by the legislature and signed by Governor Ritter in May 2008 (Appendix H). The Act defines ANS as exotic or nonnative aquatic wildlife or any plant species that have been determined to pose a significant threat to the aquatic resources or water infrastructure of the state. It makes it illegal to possess, import, export, ship, transport, release, plant, place, or cause an ANS to be released. It provides authority to qualified state commissioned peace officers to inspect, decontaminate and quarantine watercraft for ANS. It also provides authority for authorized agents to inspect and decontaminate watercraft for ANS. The Act determines that the 1st violation is a class 2 petty offense with a fine of $150. A 2nd offense is a misdemeanor with a $1000 fine. For a 3rd and subsequent offenses, the violator commits a class 2 misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished as provided in section 18-1.3-501 C.R.S. It created in the State Treasury an ANS Fund in both the CDOW and DPOR, designating a first year budget of $3.9M for CDOW and $3.2M for State Parks, and an annual budget of $2.7M for State Parks and $1.3M for CDOW. The Act allocated 7 Permanent FTE to State Parks. The Act delegates the promulgation of rules to the Parks Board. Rules will be presented to the Parks Board for adoption on February 20, 2009 (Appendix I). Rules presented take approximately 45 days to take effect. State ANS Regulations: On February 20, 2009 the Parks Board adopted regulations regarding ANS, specifically watercraft inspection and decontamination. The regulations require all trailered watercraft to be inspected prior to leaving an infested water, or prior to entering any water of the state if coming from out of state waters. These rules set the standards for watercraft inspection and decontamination, certification, sampling and monitoring and reporting. They enable private industries to assist the state with inspection and decontamination services. The rules also created a new AIS list that targets species that can be transported on a boat overland. The animal species listed are New Zealand mudsnail, zebra mussels, quagga mussels, rusty crayfish, and three species of waterfleas. The plant species listed are African elodea, Brazilian egeria, Eurasian watermilfoil, giant salvinia, hydrilla, parrotfeather, yellow floating heart and water hyacinth. CDOW Aquatic Health Regulations: The penalty for violation of CDOW regulations is a $50.00 fine and 1 point off fishing license. • Possession of Aquatic Wildlife Regulation (CRS Title 33, Colorado Wildlife Regulations Chapter 0 General Provisions, Article VII, # 012) 21 �No live aquatic wildlife may be possessed except as authorized in regulations. CDOW has authority over all vertebrate, crustacean, and molluscan wildlife. Importation, transportation, possession, and release of species on a prohibited list can result in particularly heavy fines. This does not apply to possession for aquarium use. • Possession of Aquatic Wildlife Regulation (CRS Title 33, Colorado Wildlife Regulations Chapter 0 General Provisions, Article VII, # 013) The release (stocking) of aquatic wildlife is carefully described by statute. Only certain species of fishes can be stocked and only in certain defined areas. Release of all other aquatic wildlife including vertebrates, crustaceans, and mollusks must be accompanied by written permission from the Director of the CDOW. • Possession of Aquatic Wildlife Regulation (CRS Title 33, Colorado Wildlife Regulations Chapter 0 General Provisions, Article VII, # 014) No live aquatic animals may be imported into Colorado without an Aquatic Species Importation License. No live fish may be imported, transported, transferred, or stocked in Colorado without a current fish health certificate. Salmonid fishes must be certified free of several regulated pathogens. Non-salmonid fishes are required to be inspected for VHSV. State Fish Hatchery Program Preventing ANS Spread in Aquaculture Activities Annually, the Colorado State Fish Hatchery system, which consists of 17 production or rearing units, produces and stocks approximately 3,767,000 catchable and 16,531,000 subcatchable coldwater fish (of which 9,198,000 are from wild-spawn operations), and 76,007,000 warmwater fish. This represents a substantial contribution to the fisheries in the state, but also provides opportunities for dissemination of pathogens and aquatic nuisance species (ANS). With the detection of zebra and quagga mussels in several water bodies in Colorado, proactive and preventative methods have been instituted within the state hatchery system to prevent spread of ANS through aquaculture activities, especially fish stocking and taking of wild spawn. These methods are detailed in Appendix J. ANS Technology/Tracking It is essential that the various agencies collaborating on the ANS program be able to communicate efficiently. There are several technological applications that can aid in this effort. Watercraft Inspection Seals 22 �In 2008, various entities implemented an inspection green seal system (locking tags with wire) at some reservoirs with watercraft inspection and decontamination programs. The seals are placed on watercrafts, locking the watercrafts to the trailer. The seals can only be cut off, so when a watercraft arrives at a reservoir with a seal, the inspector will know that it hasn’t been on any other waters since it was inspected. This system is extremely useful for local boaters that use the same reservoirs repeatedly. A disadvantage of the uncoordinated seal system being used in 2008 was that some agencies using seals weren’t accepting seals from other agencies, further frustrating watercraft owners. A standard GREEN seal system, coupled with the watercraft inspection and decontamination certification and quality control program, should enable acceptance across jurisdictional boundaries. The goal is to engage entities to utilize state watercraft inspection and decontamination standards and participate in Colorado’s certification training. This will make the process easier for watercraft inspection and decontamination staff from each entity and boaters alike. When a watercraft leaves a reservoir, a certified inspection will be performed and if necessary, a decontamination, after which a seal can be placed on the watercraft certifying that the watercraft is cleared to launch in any state water. The state standard is a single seal system. The seal color is green and it will have a unique identifying number on it. (The number will be entered along with the watercraft’s Colorado License (CL) number in the electronic database when that is available.) Seals will be given with a receipt that documents the date, location, authorized agent and procedure completed (inspection or decontamination) to warrant placing the seal. The green seal attaching the watercraft to the trailer means that the watercraft has been inspected by a state authorized agent and is able to launch on any body of water in the state. To get a green seal, watercrafts must have no vegetation, no mud and no water, in addition to meeting the following criteria. Watercrafts will get a green seal if... • the watercraft is from out of state and has undergone and passed an inspection and if needed, decontamination, by a state authorized agent. • the watercraft has left an infested body of water and has undergone and passed a high risk inspection and if needed, decontamination, by a state authorized agent. • the watercraft has left an uninfested body of water and has undergone and passed an inspection and if needed, decontamination, by a state authorized agent. No other colors of seals (only green) are endorsed by the state program and should be accepted across jurisdictions. Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Tracking Database The 2008 seal system performed a critical function and notified the inspector that the watercraft had passed an inspection and what water it was last on. However, the 2008 watercraft inspection and decontamination protocol involved a lot of paperwork in the field and did not enable communication between watercraft inspection and decontamination inspectors and law 23 �enforcement personnel. A high priority of the ZQM Plan is the development of an electronic database to be used by state authorized personnel at watercraft inspection and decontamination stations. When a watercraft undergoes an inspection, the inspector will type in the CL number (or scan a barcode or smart tag) and see an up-to-date history of that watercraft’s interactions with other watercraft inspection and decontamination stations. This database will contain information about watercraft inspection and decontamination efforts and will enable one agency to see when a watercraft was inspected or decontaminated at another agency’s waters. This effort will compliment the current tagging system and will aid in acceptance of inspections across jurisdictional boundaries. Sampling and Monitoring Database Another necessary technological component of the ZQM Plan is a web-based sampling and monitoring database. The goal is to develop a database similar to the chronic wasting disease (CWD) database, which will enable the sampling technicians, microscopist, FlowCAM operator, laboratories and the program manager to save critical data from their step in the identification process in the same database. There will also be “read only” access given to key staff. This will enable CDOW to quickly respond to inquiries about sample status, promoting better communication both internally and externally. The database will be an effective way to engage partners to participate in the sampling program by providing them with the ability to track their samples through the CDOW identification process. The database is under development and scheduled for completion in spring 2011. Communication and Information The CDOW public relations office is the lead on zebra and quagga mussel communication and information efforts. There has been an ongoing communications team established since January 2008, consisting of public information officers from DNR, CDOW, Parks, CWCB, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Forest Service, Water Distributors and local governments. The goals of the multi-agency communication team are to: • Communicate information about zebra and quagga mussels in Colorado • Serve as main liaison between ANS Programs and media contacts • Develop press releases in collaboration with other agencies • Coordinate press contacts, interviews and media events • Develop informational materials such as brochures, rack cards, signs and billboards • Educate the public about what they can do to minimize the spread and about new regulations, laws, procedures Future activities will include but are not limited to the following: • Continue press release and media contacts responsibilities 24 �• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Continue presentations, educational media outlets, sportsmen’s tradeshows participation Parks will send a letter to all registered boaters in Colorado in 2009 and 2010 Implement notification campaign to out of state boaters Send a letter regarding new out of state boating regulations to registered boaters other states, beginning with infested states and neighboring states. Create a Colorado specific brochure about zebra/quagga mussels Create a Colorado specific brochure about aquatic nuisance species Maintain inventory and distribution of brochures and rack cards Coordinate boat ramp sign orders and distribution for medium and low risk waters Coordinate posting of approximately 30 billboards Develop boilerplate letter to shoreline homeowners on infested waters Investigate utilizing truck wraps on hatchery trucks driving around the state Investigate utilizing truck wraps on semi trucks driving around the state Investigate AM radio stations repeated “clean, drain, dry” message and notice of out of state boater regulations, along with associated "tune to xxxx AM" signs on highways Pursue getting articles in mainstream publications (e.g. 5280 Magazine) Pursue information distribution through retail outlets Expand ANS information on websites Coordinate ALERT postcard to be included with water providers monthly bill to increase outreach effort to a majority of the population versus only boaters and anglers. The alert message will be included in mailing three times a year – May, July, September – to correspond with high recreation season. Education Education truly is the most important aspect of the ANS Program. If every boater, angler and professional aquatic worker practices Clean, Drain and Dry, there will be little ANS moving into new waters. Not only is education critical for recreational user groups and the general public, but also for internal staff, partners, legislators and stakeholders. Opportunities for internal education are listed below: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The Annual ANS Workshop (5th year in 2009) Various watercraft inspection and decontamination trainings statewide (16 in 2008) ANS Newsletter to be sent out quarterly A list serve for regular updates on program activities or news Educational Program modeled after Bear Aware SharePoint website The Education Section of CDOW published the State ANS Watercraft Inspection Handbook in March 2009 (Appendix K). The writing of this document was a collaborative effort between CDOW and Parks, along with many partners in Colorado and other states. The target audience is 25 �all recreational managers of waters in Colorado. Those include municipalities, counties, state agencies, federal agencies, marinas, private citizens and HOAs. It will read as a teaching manual, detailing the ZQM problem and the importance of implementing the watercraft inspection and decontamination programs. The manual will teach the standard protocols and the intricacies of managing a watercraft inspection and decontamination program. This standard for watercraft inspection and decontamination was adopted into regulation and is the state standard for inspection and decontamination. It serves as the curriculum for the trainings, certification and quality control program outlined earlier. It is posted online at www.colorado.gov/wildlife. Zebra and quagga mussels and other ANS present a multi-generational problem because there are currently no effective control methods for lakes and reservoirs. Therefore, it is critical that we take the message to the classroom and teach the next generation the importance of preventing invasive species from spreading to new habitats. The Education Section of CDOW is working to develop a curriculum for science, math and geography teachers on Invasive Species, utilizing zebra mussels as the “poster species”. CDOW presented the curriculum concept to Denver School District 6th grade Geography teachers on October 25, 2008 and to the Colorado Association of Science Teachers on November 21, 2008. K-12 educational materials will be developed over summer and tested in the fall of 2010. CDOW will conduct trainings in the spring for teachers. Once tested, the materials will be available in spring 2011. A recommendation for the future is to develop a boater education program specific to ANS on the CDOW and State Parks websites. Parks registers all boats in Colorado and should consider incorporating this tool into the online registration process. A parallel online angler education program can be created specific to ANS within CDOW. Research Although zebra and quagga mussels have been in the U.S. for over 20 years, and extensive research has been conducted in the Eastern U.S., there are still many questions left unanswered. It is apparent that the mussels are behaving much differently in the lower Colorado River than in the Eastern U.S. There is an ongoing and critical need for applied research to aid in the management of these highly adaptable invasive species in Colorado and the West. An evolving list of potential research topics have been compiled for further analysis. It is the goal of CDOW to conduct some research in house, cost share other larger scale projects with partners and engage higher education involvement on others. The list below will continue to evolve as items are completed and new opportunities arise. Prioritization for research will be determined based upon resources, the expertise of the CDOW Aquatic Biology Staff and opportunity for partnerships. Not all projects listed below will be initiated or completed in 2009. Research will be ongoing over many years. Until we understand the mussels’ behavior in the West and have viable cost-efficient control methods, there will be a consistent need for scientific research. 26 �List of Priority Research Topics: 1. Economic analysis – detailed examination of costs associated with variety of management strategies and how those may affect local economies, private industries and state tourism revenue. 2. Veliger survivability in interior boat compartments, such as ballast tanks, live wells, bladders, etc. 3. Use of KCl, chlorine or other control methods in interior boat compartments, such as ballast tanks, live wells, bladders, etc., to kill veligers and adult mussels 4. Efficacy of currently used watercraft decontamination methods 5. Best Management Practices for fish management operations from infested waters or hatcheries (e.g. wild spawn, egg transport, etc) 6. Modeling risk of overland transport through Colorado on recreational watercraft. 7. Modeling risk of downstream dispersal via the natural flow of water, specifically from high altitude lakes and reservoirs (e.g. CB-T, Twin, Turquoise, etc) 8. Rate of spread from high elevation, high gradient, cold mountain rivers 9. Ability to survive and be transported through very large, high velocity water distribution structures such as the Adams tunnel 10. Reproductive capabilities in high altitude lakes 11. Effects on native plankton populations 12. Effects on native western mussels populations 13. Control methods in open water systems Volunteer Opportunities There are numerous opportunities for volunteers to contribute. In 2005-2006, a volunteer work force was created to survey, map and kill Eurasian watermilfoil. This work force was small, but dedicated, and contributed a great deal about what we know to be the current status of Eurasian watermilfoil in Colorado. It is an example of how extremely dedicated and productive volunteers can be. Utilizing volunteers is an effective way to get a large volume of work done with limited resources. However, volunteers do need to be supervised and managed by permanent staff, which requires dedicated labor. There are several opportunities for zebra/quagga mussel program volunteer involvement. Other states have utilized volunteer scuba dive teams for ANS sampling and monitoring, as well as control. Divers can conduct underwater surveys for adult mussels in infested waters and can perform hand removal of adults to slow the rapid growth rate. The watercraft inspection and decontamination program can be staffed with certified volunteers. Volunteers would have to go through the Stage I training and maintain good status on quality control checks, as do other authorized agents. There is a possibility of having Stage II trained volunteers that can teach watercraft inspection and decontamination trainings and operate stations. Sampling and monitoring is also an area that volunteers can prove efficient. Volunteers can expand the reaches and frequency of our sampling program by performing regular checks of 27 �substrate samplers. They can also perform shoreline surveys and sample for other ANS. Opportunities also exist for volunteers to gather baseline data on native aquatic species. Currently, there are several educational projects for volunteers to participate in. Projects include; development of informational materials (i.e. brochures); distribution of educational materials at lakes and reservoirs; staffing trade shows, expo booths and fishing tournaments; and classroom presentations or teacher trainings. Lastly, there are programmatic administrative needs that volunteers could accomplish. Tasks would include basic office work such as compiling mailings, filing, data entry and meeting organization. Staffing Requirements In order to effectively implement the ZQM Plan, at least 4 new permanent FTE are recommended for the DOW Invasive Species Program. Currently the personnel requirements are not in place to oversee the many facets of implementation. To accomplish the actions in the ZQM Plan, a range of 100-150 temporary FTE are needed to conduct sampling and monitoring, as well as operate watercraft inspection and decontamination stations. Those temporary employees and activities need to be managed by permanent personnel. Invasive Species Personnel: • • 4-8 New Permanent Full Time Invasive Species Biologists (WM III) o Implement the State ZQM Plan o Implement the State ANS Management Plan o Oversee watercraft inspection and decontamination operations  Containment at infested waters  Prevention targeting out of state boaters  Prevention at various lakes and reservoirs  Roving Patrols o Hire and supervise a minimum of 37 temporary FTE watercraft inspection and decontamination staff o Oversee watercraft inspection and decontamination training, certification and quality control o Coordinate sampling and monitoring staff o Coordinate with site-specific management planning teams o Coordinate volunteer projects o Rapidly respond in a timely fashion to reports of new ANS sightings o Responsible for distribution of ANS informational materials through Region o Coordinate with AWM and DWM staff o Consult and advise on terrestrial weed and exotic invasive insect issues o Serve as support services for field techs regarding invasive species. 15 temporary full-time early detection sampling and monitoring technicians (6 month temps to cover 10 month sampling window) 28 �• 135 temporary full-time watercraft inspection and decontamination inspectors (6 month temps) Law Enforcement: • • • Utilize existing CDOW Area and District Wildlife Manager Staff o Provide law enforcement at watercraft inspection and decontamination stations o Conduct ANS inspections while performing other duties, such as checking fishing licenses and boating safety inspections Engage participation from qualified peace officers, such as municipal or county officers and federal partners Enforcement Responsibilities o Provide law enforcement support to watercraft inspection and decontamination Stations, including roving patrol o Conduct ANS Inspections and Decontaminations while performing routine enforcement duties, such as checking fishing licenses or boater safety o Provide ANS law enforcement procedural training and continuing education o Implement check stations at key locations that do not have watercraft inspection and decontamination stations o Coordinate with Invasive Species Program Staff and site-specific management planning teams. o Conduct investigations on ANS related matters Summary of ZQM Plan Recommendations Staffing Recommendations 1. Fund, hire and train 4-8 new permanent full-time Invasive Species Biologists 2. Fund, hire and train 12 temporary full-time for sampling and monitoring 3. Fund, hire and train approximately 135 temporary full-time for watercraft inspection and decontamination Early Detection Sampling and Monitoring Recommendations 1. Hire and train temporary full-time sampling and monitoring technicians. a. Ten sampling and monitoring field technicians to conduct surveys and collect samples for ZQM and other ANS statewide. b. Two technicians to work at AAHL (log samples, perform microscopy, operate FlowCAM, coordinate with labs, etc) 2. Purchase a FlowCAM identification tool for the AAHL. a. Increase efficiency in processing by enabling AAHL staff to process more samples much faster. b. Provide scientific documentation on sample analysis by logging prescribed data sets and photographing specimen. 29 �3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. c. Aid with research efforts on effects of invasive mussels on plankton populations by logging and categorizing all plankton in the sample. Perform PCR at AAHL Purchase or utilize existing equipment, where available, for temporary FTE field staff a. Each team of sampling technicians should have their own watercraft to eliminate need for aquatic staff to provide transportation to sampling sites on water. i. Enable more efficient sampling by making technicians self sufficient. b. Each sampling technician will need a vehicle that can trailer a watercraft. c. They must have the ability to decontaminate the watercraft in between uses. d. Five laptops e. Five GPS units and Pathfinder Software f. GIS capabilities Implement a web-based real time database to track samples from the time they are taken to the final DNA results. a. Model after CWD b. Enable the program supervisor, sampling technician, microscopist and independent lab to all update data in the same system. c. Provide up to the minute status reports on samples in various stages of the detection and identification process. d. Document all steps in the process for scientific analysis. Utilize partners to increase number of waters sampled for zebra and quagga mussels a. Federal agencies (e.g. USFS, BLM, NPS), municipal and county parks, water providers and private reservoir managers are among the few entities that should partner with CDOW to increase overall sampling range. b. CDOW can distribute and train entities on sampling protocols. c. Samples should be sent to the AAHL for analysis. Encourage reporting of potential sightings to CDOW. a. Continue to utilize 1-877-STOP-ANS b. Utilize 1-303-293-6531for reporting and information distribution c. Utilize ReportANS@state.co.us email address d. Develop an internet based reporting system on CDOW website to easily allow recreationists, partners and the public to quickly report a suspected ANS sighting in CO. Disinfect all equipment in between waters or between reaches of the same river. a. Watercrafts, Trailers, Water Trucks, Barges and Large Equipment: i. Removing all visible mud, plants, organisms and debris from watercrafts, trailers and equipment ii. Wash with a high pressure (250psi) hot water wash (minimum 140°F); or intense scrubbing if high pressure is not available iii. Drain all water and do not move water between waters, even from different stretches of the same river iv. Thorough and complete drying b. Waders and Gear: i. Immerse waders and gear in a solution of Sparquat 256 and clean water (six ounces of Sparquat 256 per gallon of water) for fifteen minutes prior to, and after, sampling. 30 �ii. This will also protect against moving and transplanting whirling disease or New Zealand Mudsnail c. Plankton Tow Equipment and Substrates: i. Plankton tow equipment and substrates used in an infested water body cannot be used in an uninfested water body. ii. Soak plankton tow equipment and substrates in an approved disinfectant in between each and every use. d. Questions about equipment disinfection can be directed to the CDOW Aquatic Animal Health Lab (122 E. Edison, Brush, CO 80723 - 970-842-6308). 9. Preserve samples properly a. Preserve adults in 70% ethanol b. Keep plankton tow samples alive, when possible, and store in refrigerator for max 3 days c. If plankton tow samples must be preserved, store in 70% ethanol. 10. Ship samples properly a. Ship samples to CDOW Aquatic Animal Health Lab (122 E. Edison, Brush, CO 80723 - 970-842-6308) b. Samples must be accompanied by appropriate forms provided by CDOW and adequately labeled. c. Live plankton tow samples must be shipped cold overnight in leak-proof plastic bottles. d. Preserved adult specimen must be shipped in plastic containers preserved in ethanol. 11. Identification a. Plankton Tow ii. Phase I – ocular identification with a microscope or FlowCAM iii. Phase II – molecular identification with PCR iv. Phase III – molecular identification with gene sequencing 1. One positive ID on all three phases is sufficient evidence to identify positive waters 2. If only a single positive from any method is found, the water will be declared “suspect” until tests confirm or refute the infestation 3. Once a water is identified positive, future DNA analysis may not be required following positive microscopy results. b. Adults v. Phase I – ocular identification by more than 1 trained scientist vi. Phase II – molecular identification with PCR 1. Molecular identification may or may not be required 12. Reporting a. Telephone: 1-877-STOP-ANS or 1-303-293-6531 b. Email to ReportANS@state.co.us c. Website: www.colorado.gov/wildlife. d. Utilize appropriate forms from CDOW 31 �Prevention and Containment: Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Containment of Infested Waters Prevention targeting watercraft coming from out of state Prevention at high or medium risk waters Roving watercraft inspection and decontamination Patrols Watercraft Inspection Handbook, Certification and Quality Control program Green Seal System Technology 1. Electronic Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Tracking Database 2. Early Detection Sampling and Monitoring web-based database Communication and Information 1. 2. 3. 4. Continue press release and media contacts responsibilities Continue presentations, educational media outlets, sportsmen’s tradeshows participation Parks send another letter to all registered boaters in state in 2009 Send a letter regarding new out of state boating regulations to registered boaters other states, beginning with infested states and neighboring states. 5. Create a Colorado specific brochure about zebra/quagga mussels and all ANS 6. Maintain inventory and distribution of brochures and rack cards 7. Coordinate boat ramp sign orders and distribution for medium and low waters in 2009 8. Coordinate posting of approximately 30 billboards in 2009 with Marketing 9. Develop boilerplate letter to home owners on infested waters 10. Investigate utilizing truck wraps on hatchery trucks and semis driving around the state 11. Investigate AM radio stations repeated message, along with "tune to xx AM" signs 12. Pursue getting articles in mainstream publications (e.g. 5280 Magazine) 13. Pursue information distribution through retail outlets 14. Expand ANS information on websites 15. Coordinate ALERT postcard to be included with water providers monthly bill to increase outreach effort to a majority of the population versus only boaters and anglers. Education 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Annual ANS Workshop (5th year in 2009) Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Handbook Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Trainings Colorado Reader for Classrooms Classroom curriculum Website boater education program Website angler education program Expand CDOW invasive species website 32 �9. ANS Newsletter 10. A list serve for regular updates on program activities or news Volunteer Opportunities 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Scuba Divers Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Operators Monitoring Education Administration Sampling and Monitoring Research 1. Economic analysis 2. Veliger survivability in interior boat compartments 3. Use of KCl, chlorine or other control methods in interior boat compartments to kill veligers and adult mussels 4. Efficacy of currently used watercraft decontamination methods 5. Best Management Practices for fish management operations from infested waters or hatcheries (e.g. wild spawn, egg transport, etc) 6. Modeling risk of overland transport through Colorado on recreational watercraft. 7. Modeling risk of downstream dispersal via the natural flow of water, specifically from high altitude lakes and reservoirs 8. Rate of spread from high elevation, high gradient, cold mountain rivers 9. Ability to survive and be transported through very large, high velocity water distribution structures such as the Adams tunnel 10. Reproductive capabilities in high altitude lakes 11. Effects on native plankton populations 12. Effects on native western mussel populations 13. Control methods in open water systems 33 �Acknowledgements Many people have put in a great deal of time to help with the zebra/quagga mussel response in Colorado. Those that contributed to this plan specifically are listed below: Colorado Division of Wildlife Zebra/Quagga Mussel Management Team: Anita Martinez, Aquatics NW Region Bob Thompson, Law Enforcement Unit Craig Workman, Engineering Crystal Peterson, NE Region Doug Krieger, Aquatics SE Region Edward Frazar, Engineering Elizabeth Brown, Invasive Species Greg Gerlich, Aquatic Section Holly Clifford, Financial Jamie Anthony, Water Jeff Rucks, Education Jeff Ver Steeg, Assistant Director Jerry Neal, Information Ken Kehmeier, Aquatics NE Region Lyle Sidener, NW Region Mark Jones, Aquatic Research Michelle Arnold, Contracts Mike Japhet, Aquatics SW Region Mike Trujillo, SE Region Patt Dorsey, SW Region Pat Miks, PBE Rob Lloyd, Technologies Reid DeWalt, NE Region Scott Gilmore, Education Sherman Hebein, Aquatics NW Region Tom Nesler, Wildlife Conservation Tom Remington, Director Vicki Milano, Aquatic Animal Health Lab Wendy Hanophy, Education State Zebra/Quagga Mussel Task Force: Brad Wind, Northern Water Bud O’Hara, Pueblo Board Water Works Carlie Ronca, Bureau of Reclamation Chris Theel, CDPHE Dan McAuliffe, CWCB Dave Winters, USFS Dick Wolfe, DWR Doug Robotham, DNR Eric Howell, Colorado Springs Utilities Erin Williams, USFWS Jay Thompson, BLM Jennifer Gimbel, CWCB Jim Walker, CDOT Kent Vanroosendaal, Bureau of Reclamation Kelly Uhing, CDA Kirstie Nixon, Revenue Linda Dreiss, NPS Matt Malick, NPS Neil Sperandeo, Denver Water Rich Archer, Revenue Rob Billerbeck, State Parks Scott Cuthbertson, DWR Scott Leach, CDA Steve Wolf, DWR Tom McClure, USFS Tommy Phillips, CO Marine Dealers Assoc. Colorado ANS Steering Committee: Chris Theel, CDPHE Curtis Hartenstine, Watershed Network Chris Pague, TNC Dave Nickum, Trout Unlimited Denise Hosler, Bureau of Reclamation Elizabeth Brown, CDOW Greg Brunjak, Private Kelly Cline, City of Westminster Matt Malick, NPS Myron Chase, NPS Rick Mueller, City of Aurora Scott Leach, CDA Tina Proctor, USFWS Vicki Milano, CDOW 34 �Literature Cited Army Corp of Engineers Zebra Mussel Information System. Updated Version March 14, 2002. http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/zebra/zmis/ Army Corp of Engineers Zebra Mussel Chemical Control Guide. January 2000. http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/trel00-1.pdf Benson, A., and Raikow, D. Dreissena polymorpha. USGS Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL. 2006. Revised: 4/24/2006 http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet.asp?speciesID=5 Britton, David. Zebra Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). ANS Taskforce Web site. 2006. http://www.anstaskforce.gov/spoc/zebra_mussels.php Bureau of Reclamation. No date. Collecting water samples for Dreissena ssp. veliger PCR analysis. Bureau of Reclamation, Technical Service Center, Denver, CO. State of California. 2007. California Rapid Response Plan for Zebra and Quagga Mussels. Colorado ANS Steering Committee. 2008. Colorado Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plan – Draft. Denver, CO. Colorado Division of Wildlife. 2008. Regulations. Denver, CO. Colorado State Parks. 2008. Lake Pueblo Zebra Mussel Response Plan. Denver, CO Claudi, Renata and Makie, Gerry L. 1994. Practical Manual for Zebra Mussel Monitoring and CRC Press. ISBN 0873719859, 9780873719858 Control. Culver, D.A., W.J. Edwards, and L. Babcock-Jackson. 2000. Preventing the introduction of zebra mussels during aquaculture and fish stocking activities. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung für Limnologie 27:1809-1811. Edwards, W.J., L. Babcock-Jackson, and D.A. Culver. 2002. Field testing of protocols to prevent the spread of zebra mussels Dreissena polymorpha during fish hatchery and aquaculture activities. North American Journal of Aquaculture 64:220-223. Edwards, W.J., L. Babcock-Jackson, and D.A. Culver. 2000. Prevention of the spread of zebra mussels during fish hatchery and aquaculture activities. North American Journal of Aquaculture 62:229-236. Nalepa T.F. and Schloesser, DW. 1993. Zebra Mussels: Biology, Impacts and Control. CRC Press. ISBN 0873716965, 9780873716963 O’Neill, Jr., C.R. 1997. Economic impact of zebra mussels -- Results of the 1995 National Zebra Mussel Information Clearinghouse Study. New York Sea Grant Institute, NY. Waller, D.L., S.W. Fisher, and H. Dabrowska. 1996. Prevention of zebra mussel infestation and dispersal during aquaculture operations. The Progressive Fish Culturist 58:77-84. 35 �Appendices A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Partners: Authorities and Responsibilities Plankton Tow Sampling Protocol Collection Protocol for watercraft inspection and decontamination Stations Protocol for Preserving and Shipping Samples Original Risk Assessment (June 23, 2008) Sampling List 2007 and 2008 Notification of Positive Results Diagram State of Colorado ANS Act (SB08-226) State of Colorado ANS Regulations State Fish Hatchery Program Methods State ANS Watercraft Inspection Handbook Zebra and Quagga Mussel Overview a. Biology, life cycle, habitat requirements and vectors of spread b. Dreissena mussel Impacts c. Dreissena invasion history in USA and Colorado State ANS Program Accomplishments (2004-2008) Statewide ZQM Planning Team Structure: DOW and Mussel Task Force Statewide ZQM Planning Team Concept, Goals and Objectives ACOE References: Zebra Mussel Control Manual and Zebra Mussel Information System 36 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zebra and quagga mussel management plan Description An account of the resource The Colorado Zebra/Quagga Mussel Management Plan (ZQM Plan) outlines a statewide collaborative effort to detect, contain, and substantially reduce the risk of the spread and further infestation by zebra/quagga mussels in Colorado. The Plan is coordinated by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) as part of the State Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) Program. The Plan’s primary components are early detection and rapid response, containment, prevention and education/outreach. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Colorado Division of Wildlife Subject The topic of the resource Aquatic nuisance species ANS Zebra mussels Quagga mussels Extent The size or duration of the resource. 36 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2009-08-24 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Colorado Division of Wildlife https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/b8168f29feefee86c37694c627182692.pdf 75c02b40cca79755ab07e43ab001d9ba PDF Text Text COLORADO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE ANS Tips for Boats with Ballast Tanks Some wakeboard boats, ski boats and sailboats have ballast tanks which are filled with water to stabilize the boat and allow them to ride lower in the water. Many ballast tanks can’t be visually checked, and many cannot be fully drained. Even after these tanks have been pumped out, they can contain up to two gallons of water. Even a few gallons of water from another reservoir could contain thousands to millions of microscopic zebra or quagga mussel larvae or other Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS)! The more water that is transported in the bottom of ballast tanks, the higher the risk is of introducing zebra or quagga mussels to your favorite lake. Because of the high costs and damage caused to boats, fish, dams and water facilities by mussels we don’t want that to happen. If the inspector finds water in a ballast tank or can’t verify how much water remains in the tanks, the tanks may require decontamination. Boats with more than two ballast tanks will require decontamination. The only tool we currently have to decontaminate enclosed ballast tanks is to flush them out with very hot water that will kill any mussels present. The problem is that there are numerous models of boats with ballast tanks. Some require extremely sophisticated and technical processes to get the hot water in all the necessary places. Wakeboard boats are particularly technical, difficult, and time consuming to decontaminate. Also, some wakeboard boats may have ballast tank pumps which are only rated for 130ºF water. The standard for killing zebra mussels is 140 to 170ºF, which is hotter than these pumps can tolerate. Boats with these lower-temperature rated pumps will be difficult to decontaminate and decontaminations may need to be performed by a certified dealer. © DOW PHOTO, BY CINDY BRADY © DOW PHOTOS, BY CINDY BRADY What Can I Do to Make My Ballast Tanks Safer? © BRAD HENLEY What’s the Big Deal about Ballast Tanks? Ballast Tank Standing Water The Colorado Division of Wildlife is the state agency responsible for protecting and managing wildlife and its habitat, as well as providing wildlife-related recreation. The Division is funded by hunting and fishing license fees, federal grants and Colorado Lottery proceeds through Great Outdoors Colorado. 4/2011 – 30,000 COLORADO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE • 6060 Broadway • Denver, CO 80216 • (303) 297-1192 • www.wildlife.state.co.us �What are My Options for Decontamination? If any ANS is found on a boat during inspection, the inspection staff cannot permit the boat to leave and will perform the decontamination on site. If no ANS is found there are two options available: • Have the inspection staff decontaminate the boat for you. • Take your boat to marine dealer that is certified in ANS inspections. This is not as convenient, but is likely the best course of action for wakeboard and other technically difficult boats. There may be a charge by the dealers who provide this service, but they have marine service specialists who know these boats very well. After the boat is decontaminated, they can apply a green seal between the boat and trailer to document that it was decontaminated properly. When returning to the lake, the boat inspector will check to verify that the seal and receipt are valid, and allow the boat to launch. The following locations are certified, have green seals and can handle wakeboard or other technical boats: Best Marine Service 12098 W. 50th Place, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 423-3311 Nelson Motor Sports 5800 N. Federal Denver, CO 80221 (303) 468-1369 Rocky Mountain Boat Co. 290 S. McCulloch Blvd. Pueblo West, CO 81007 (719) 547-3100 Tommy's Slalom Shop 3740 N. Sheridan Blvd. Denver, CO 80231 (303) 455-3091 Tips for Speedy and Convenient Inspections and Decontaminations We are continually working on ways to improve the inspection and decontamination process and we recommend these options: • Replace any pumps rated to only 130ºF with pumps rated to 180ºF. The higher-heat rated pump will make it easier and less risky to get your boat decontaminated at an inspection station. Keep your receipt for the pump and your owner’s manual on board to help inspectors at the next location. • Get an inspection seal! Every time you boat or get your boat serviced, request a green seal when leaving the water. • Schedule inspections and decontaminations on a weekday. You can get on the water faster by having a green seal prior to entering the water. If you are likely to need a decontamination, getting pre-inspected and decontaminated on a weekday may be more convenient. • Stop by the Colorado Division of Wildlife office in Denver or Grand Junction Monday through Friday for a free professional ANS inspection or decontamination. Check the website for hours of operation or call (303) 291-7295 for more information. You Can Make a Difference! You can help stop the spread of Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) in Colorado and the West! Before entering and when leaving any waters always: Clean: Remove all plants, animals and mud. Thoroughly wash everything: boats, trailers, vehicle hitches and motors. Aquatic plant fragments and animals can hide in mud and survive many days out of water. Be sure to clean all fishing equipment including waders and boots. Drain: Completely drain every space or item that could hold water, including live wells, bait containers, ballast and bilge tanks, and engine cooling systems. Remove plugs, drop motor, and use sponges and/or towels to absorb all water from bilges, live wells, ballast tanks and motors. Dry: Allow sufficient time for boats and equipment to dry completely before launching in other waters. ILLUSTRATIONS BY COLORADO STATE PARKS Dispose: Properly dispose unused live bait into trash containers, not into the water. Properly dispose of aquarium or classroom animals or plants, do not place them in any body of water or natural setting. For more information call the Colorado Division of Wildlife at (303) 291-7295. Please Clean, Drain, and Dry your boat to keep boating open in Colorado. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource ANS tips for boats with ballast tanks Description An account of the resource Some wakeboard boats, ski boats and sailboats have ballast tanks which are filled with water to stabilize the boat and allow them to ride lower in the water. Many ballast tanks can’t be visually checked, and many cannot be fully drained. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Colorado Division of Wildlife Subject The topic of the resource Aquatic nuisance species ANS Boating Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2011-04 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Colorado Division of Wildlife https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/485340793bf6341903ce2082a21c299e.pdf 644bf823addf8ab3cd286cbf469e7c63 PDF Text Text Known Positive Waters for ANS in Colorado – January 2018 Definition from the ANS Act (SB08-226): "AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES" MEANS EXOTIC OR NONNATIVE AQUATIC WILDLIFE OR ANY PLANT SPECIES THAT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED BY THE BOARD TO POSE A SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO THE AQUATIC RESOURCES OR WATER INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE STATE.” Animals: Common Name Scientific Name Status in Colorado Crayfish, rusty Orconectes rusticus Present in CO Mussel, quagga Mussel, zebra New Zealand mudsnail Waterflea, spiny Waterflea, fishhook Dreissena rostriformis bugensis Dreissena polymorpha Potamopyrgus antipodarum Bythotrephes cederstroemi Cercopagis pengoi Location in Colorado Catamount Reservoir, Yampa River, Stagecoach Reservoir, and Sanchez Reservoir Present in CO Green Mountain Reservoir (Suspect) Not Present in CO No known Present in CO Bear Canyon Creek, City of Boulder - Boulder Creek, Dry Creek (2), Chatfield Reservoir, Dinosaur NM – Green River, Gunnison River (East of Delta), Pike NF - South Platte River below Eleven Mile Dam, Eleven Mile Reservoir State Park, Spinney Mountain Reservoir State Park, Charlie Meyer State Wildlife Area (Dream Stream), South Delaney Buttes Reservoir and East Delaney Buttes Reservoir in Delaney Buttes State Wildlife Area, College Lake at CSU Fort Collins, Fountain Creek in Colorado Springs, Uncompahgre River, 4Mile Canyon Creek, Monument Lake No verified presence No Known No verified presence No Known Location in Colorado No Known Jefferson Lake, NTP Ponds, Spinney Mountain Adobe Creek SWA, Arvada Reservoir, Bear Canyon Creek, Bessemer Ditch, Big Dry Creek, Blue Heron Ponds, Boulder Creek, Brush Hollow, Chatfield Reservoir, CU Ponds in Boulder, Bow Mar Lake, Bowles Reservoir, Brush Hollow Reservoir, Charlie Meyer SWA, Douglas Reservoir, Eleven Mile State Park, Gateway Reservoir (Private), Horseshoe and Martin Reservoirs in Lathrop SP, Lake Minnequa, Lowell Ponds, Marston Reservoir, Minnequa Canal (Fremont Canal), Monument Lake, Navajo Reservoir(NM Side), North Poudre Reservoir #4, Panama Reservoir #1, Pathfinder Park Pond, Pavlakis Open Space, Pella Crossing Ponds, Prospect Lake, Pueblo Reservoir, Pueblo Steel Mill, Rio Grande River, Saint Charles Reservoir#2, #3, Saint Vrain Creek, Saint Vrain State Ponds, Sawhill Ponds, Sheets Lake, Skaguay Reservoir, South Platte River, Standley Lake (Westminster), Swift Ponds, Tucker Lake, Tule Lakes, Walden Pond, Ward Road Ponds, Wellington Reservoir #4, West Lake, West Prospect Park Lake, Aurora Reservoir, Cherry Creek Reservoir, Lon Hagler Reservoir Plants: Common Name African elodea Brazilian elodea Scientific Name Lagarosiphon major Egeria densa Status in Colorado No verified presence Present in CO Eurasian watermilfoil Myriophyllum spicatum Present in CO Hybrid invasive watermilfoil Myriophyllum spicatum x Myriophyllum sibiricum Present in CO Cigar Pond in Chatfield State Park, Cherry Creek Reservoir State Park (near swim beach), Golden Pond in Longmont, Saint Vrain State Park-Pelican �Giant salvinia Salvinia molesta No current verified presence Hyacinth, water Eichhornia crassipes Present in CO Hydrilla Hydrilla verticillata Myriophyllum aquaticum Nymphoides peltata No verified presence Alamosa (2006) Centennial (detected and eradicated in 2010) No Known No verified presence No Known No verified presence No Known Parrotfeather Yellow floating heart No Known � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Known positive waters for ANS in Colorado Description An account of the resource Definition from the ANS Act (SB08-226): "AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES" MEANS EXOTIC OR NONNATIVE AQUATIC WILDLIFE OR ANY PLANT SPECIES THAT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED BY THE BOARD TO POSE A SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO THE AQUATIC RESOURCES OR WATER INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE STATE.” Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Colorado Parks & Wildlife Subject The topic of the resource Aquatic nuisance species ANS Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-01 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <div class="element"> <div class="element-text"><a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a></div> </div> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Colorado Parks and Wildlife https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/87e5ed728f4b35c8602055d87c0d7dd8.pdf 8265b70b10b6102426c2584c6ceae5fd PDF Text Text State of Colorado Containment Manual for Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Stations A supplement to the Official Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Procedures Updated – September 2013 �This project was funded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through the Quagga Zebra Action Plan for Western Waters (QZAP) grant. This document furthers the needs identified in QZAP Section B. Prevention: • B.1. – Mandatory Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination at Infested Waters. • B.2 – Continue the development of effective watercraft inspection and decontamination protocols and standards. Protocols in this document are consistent with the Uniform Minimum Protocols and Standards for Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination for Dreissenid Mussels in the United States. 1 �TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Purpose…………….………………………………………………………………………….…………….………………...4 2. Introduction……….………………………………………………………………………………………..…………….…5 3. Legal Basis………….…………………………………………………………………………..……………………….…….6 4. Monitoring………….…………………………………………………………………………..…………………………..10 a. Current status of zebra and quagga mussels in Colorado………….………………………10 5. Elements of a WID Containment Program…………………………………………………..……………...11 6. Education………………………………………………………………………………………………..……..…………..12 7. Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination (WID)…………………………………………………....14 a. Wire Seals and Receipts………………………………………………………………….…………..….15 b. Containment WID Procedures………………………………………………………….…….………19 i. Entrance Inspection Step By Step WID Procedure……………………….…….….22 ii. ZQM Veliger Containment………………………….……………………………………....25 iii. Exit Inspection Step By Step WID Procedure…………………………………..…….26 iv. Adult ZQM Containment……………………………………………………………………..31 v. Infested ZQM Containment ………………………………………………………….…….32 8. Maximizing risk reduction at infested waters when resources are inadequate to implement containment WID procedures…………………..…………………………….……………….…33 a. The Bare Minimum…………………………………………………………………………..…….…….….33 b. Using Exposure Based Risk to Prioritize Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination…………………………………………………………………….………………….…...34 c. Infested Waters Containment Spectrum…………………………………………………………..35 d. A Geographic Approach to Containing Multiple Waters in Close Proximity………………………………………………………..……….………………………………..……..36 9. WID Containment Options for Other Species of ANS……………………….……………………....38 a. Eurasian Watermilfoil and Aquatic Weeds…………………………………………………….38 b. New Zealand Mudsnail…………………………………………………………………...................39 c. Rusty Crayfish……………………………………………………………………………………………....41 d. Waterfleas…………………………………………………………………………………………………....42 10. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…....43 �All photos credited to Colorado Parks and Wildlife staff unless otherwise noted. 3 �Purpose The State of Colorado has implemented a partnership based, multi-jurisdictional, mandatory watercraft inspection and decontamination program to prevent the spread of Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS). The purpose of the State of Colorado Containment Manual for Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Stations (Manual) is to provide standard containment protocols across jurisdictions within Colorado, and potentially across the West. This Manual details the watercraft inspection and decontamination (WID) containment procedures to contain and prevent the overland spread of aquatic nuisance species. These procedures apply to all aquatic nuisance species, both plant and animal, but are strongly focused on zebra and quagga mussels (ZQM). The Manual is an important piece of the broad statewide Quagga mussel encrusted engine being decontaminated training and quality assurance program in place for ANS. This manual provides direction for implementation of containment protocols, as Colorado has done previously for prevention WID stations in the 2009 publication, Colorado Watercraft Inspection Handbook: Official WID Procedures. Since that time, the state has also published the Colorado ANS Watercraft Decontamination Manual, 2011, and Colorado Boat Compendium for ANS Inspectors, 2012. The Containment Manual is the final portion of the regulation referenced “Official WID Procedures” to be published. These four documents combined will provide a comprehensive and consolidated Colorado WID Procedures Curriculum and WID Trainer’s Guide in January 2014. In the past, other states have utilized portions of Colorado’s previous publications. Therefore, it is anticipated that these containment procedures may have broader implementation than in this state alone. We realize the inherent difficulty in implementing a regionally consistent watercraft containment program. Adding to the challenge is that numerous programs are already in place, while others are in the early planning or implementation stages. In some instances, changes to regulations at the local, state and possible federal level may be necessary to implement a comprehensive multi-jurisdictional program. However, because each entity is unique; having different missions, authority, resources, facilities and governing bodies, it is understood that additional or stricter standards may be implemented and that cross-jurisdictional reciprocity should be left to the discretion of the implementing agency/organization (UMPS, 2012). This Manual documents the standard for WID containment that can be rapidly implemented anywhere ANS is detected to prevent the spread overland on watercraft. Implementation of these procedures is, of course, dependent on available resources. 4 �Introduction Invasive species are a threat to the economy, natural resources, outdoor recreation, agriculture, industry, water storage and transportation. Since the discovery of quagga mussels in Lake Mead in 2007, and other aquatic nuisance species (ANS) in the west, ANS have become a high priority for containment and prevention in western waterways. ANS plants and animals threaten native species and interfere with municipal, commercial and agricultural water supply and distribution, and recreational activities. In their native environments, ANS populations are typically held in check and controlled by predators, parasites, pathogens, and competitors. However, when they are transported to a new environment, the natural checks are usually left behind. This gives invasive plants and animals an advantage over native species and makes them very difficult to control. It is generally accepted that mussels cannot move overland without some help (Padilla and others, 1996; Kraft and Johnson, Zebra Mussels at Cheney Lake, Kansas 2000). The catalyst for such Prevention - To stop, or attempt to stop, the introduction of ANS. movement is further accepted and recognized as Containment- To stop, or attempt to stop, ANS from spreading. involving some form of human intervention. This intervention can be in the form of water conveyance (canals, channels, pipes, pumps, etc.), watercraft (various recreational and commercial types) and associated boating equipment (ropes, anchors), direct and/or inadvertent movement of water (e.g. with live bait), or fishing equipment (boots, clothing, gear). Each of these means of transport requires a degree of human activity to provide a mechanism to connect an infested water body to one that is not naturally “connected” (Giusti, 2011). Since the confirmation of quagga and zebra mussels, and other ANS, in many reservoirs and lakes throughout the west, prevention and containment protocols are mandatory in Colorado to prevent the distribution of these harmful species. 5 �Legal Basis The Colorado State Legislature passed the ANS Act (SB08-226) in response to the discovery of quagga and zebra mussel veligers in several Colorado reservoirs in 2008. The legislative goal is written as “…It is the intent of the General Assembly that prevention, containment and eradication of aquatic nuisance species in the waters of the state in which such species have been detected or are likely to be introduced shall be the Divisions (Parks and Wildlife) HIGHEST PRIORITIES.” The ANS Act provides authority to Qualified Peace Officers to inspect, and if necessary, decontaminate or quarantine watercraft for ANS. It provides authority for CPW to certify individuals as “Authorized Agents” (a.k.a. inspectors and decontaminators) to work at “Authorized Locations” (a.k.a. watercraft inspection and decontamination stations or WIDS) for the purposes of inspecting and possibly decontaminating watercraft to prevent new introductions and contain existing detections of ANS. The Parks Board (now Parks and Wildlife Commission) passed regulations required by the Act on February 20, 2009. The ANS Law (SB08-226) and Regulations (Parks-8-801) prohibit the possession and transportation of zebra or quagga mussels, or other listed ANS. #801 – POSSESSIONS OF AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES A. Except as provided in these regulations or authorized by the Divisions or under Title 33 or Title 35 C.R.S., it shall be unlawful for any person to possess, import, export, ship, transport, release, place, plant, or cause to be released, placed, or planted into the waters of the state any aquatic nuisance species. D. It is unlawful for any person to, or to attempt to, launch onto, operate on or remove from any water of the state or vessel staging area any vessel or other floating device if they know the vessel or other floating device contains any aquatic nuisance species. The ANS regulations require mandatory watercraft inspection and decontamination, if necessary, of: • watercraft coming in from out of state • watercraft leaving a containment water body in Colorado • watercraft entering a high-risk water where inspections and decontaminations are required by the owner or a managing entity #803B: All persons transporting a vessel or other floating device from a water of the state known to be infested as determined in regulation #806D, must be inspected prior to leaving the infested water, or if state authorized inspection facilities are not open or otherwise unavailable, must be inspected prior to launch in any other water of the state. 6 �The ANS Regulations also set the standard for training and certification, watercraft inspection, decontamination, impoundment, sampling, monitoring, identification and reporting. Authorized Agents at Containment Waters in Colorado are required to implement this WID Containment Manual Procedure. #802A - The Divisions may certify private inspectors and/or decontaminators. Such persons shall not be authorized to stop, detain, impound a vessel or other floating device, or order a vessel or other floating device decontaminated or quarantined. Such persons, once certified, are only authorized to provide inspections and/or decontaminations in accordance with WID procedures to persons transporting vessel or other floating device who voluntarily request their services. #802B - Authorized agents shall be certified by the Divisions prior to providing any inspection or decontamination services. #802C - Prior to providing any inspection and/or decontamination services, authorized agents and private inspectors and/or decontaminators must successfully complete the Divisions’ training course, must maintain active certification and must comply with all quality assurance requirements as listed herein. #803A - Inspections may be conducted by: 1. Any qualified peace officer; 2. Any authorized agent or private inspector and/or decontaminator who has been properly trained as required by the Divisions, who holds a valid, active certification and who is in good standing with the Divisions’ quality assurance checks. It is imperative that inspectors and decontaminations also strive to prevent or contain introductions of all invasives by ensuring watercraft are clean, drained and dry – no mud, no mussels, no water and no plants – before launching and after retrieval in Colorado waters. Quagga mussels at Lake Pleasant, AZ While this document puts special emphasis on preventing introductions of two species that have the most significant economic, cultural and natural resource impacts, zebra and quagga mussels, or ZQM, the procedures apply to all aquatic nuisance species, both plant and animal. 7 �#800.A.1 - Aquatic nuisance species means exotic or nonnative aquatic wildlife or any plant species that have been determined by the board to pose a significant threat to the aquatic resources or water infrastructure of the state, including, but not limited to, the following: Animals: Common Name Crayfish, rusty Mussel, quagga Mussel, zebra New Zealand mudsnail (NZMS) Waterflea Waterflea, fishhook Waterflea, spiny Plants: Common Name African elodea Brazilian elodea Eurasian watermilfoil Giant salvinia Hyacinth, water Hydrilla Parrotfeather Yellow floating heart Scientific Name Orconectes rusticus Dreissena bugensis Dreissena polymorpha Potamopyrgus antipodarum Daphnia lumholtzii Cercopagis pengoi Bythotrephes longimanus (also known as Bythotrephes cederstroemi) Scientific Name Lagarosiphon major Egeria densa Myriophyllum spicatum Salvinia molesta Eichornia crassipes Hydrilla verticillata Myriophyllum aquaticum Nymphoides peltata Wildlife Chapter 0 Regulations also define prohibited aquatic species and contain a list of prohibited fish, animals and pathogens, which includes the animal species listed above. The Colorado ANS Pocket Guide [CO Division of Wildlife and Colorado Department of Agriculture, 2010] provides a comprehensive list and description of ANS that could negatively impact native species, recreation, or water resources. Additional information about zebra and quagga mussels, New Zealand mudsnails and other native and nonnative mollusks can be found in the Colorado Mollusk Pocket Guide [CO Division of Wildlife, 2011]. NZMS on a rock in Eleven Mile Canyon 8 �Regulation #806D: To initially identify waters infested with aquatic nuisance species, the following standards will be applied before notifying the public of the existence of these aquatic nuisance species: 1. Zebra and Quagga mussel veligers. A multi-phase testing process involving both visual and molecular identification methods will be completed in accordance with the procedural checklist “Multi-Phase Identification of Zebra/Quagga Veligers” available from the Divisions. 2. Zebra and Quagga mussel adults or New Zealand mudsnails. Concurring identification by two or more mollusk identification experts. 3. Rusty crayfish. Concurring identification by two or more crustacean identification experts. 4. Waterfleas. Concurring identification by two or more plankton identification experts. 5. Aquatic nuisance species plants. Concurring identification by two or more aquatic botanical experts. The following water body definitions identify water bodies based on early detection sampling methodology: • Negative - sampling is ongoing and nothing has been detected, or nothing has been detected within the time frames for de-listing. • Inconclusive – Temporary status for a water body has not met the minimum criteria for detection. • Suspect – Water body that has met the minimum criteria for detection (regulation #806D-1). o In Colorado, suspect waters must implement containment WID procedures. • Positive – Multiple (2 or more) subsequent sampling events that meet the minimum criteria for detection. o In Colorado, positive waters must implement containment WID procedures. • Infested – A water body that has an established (recruiting or reproducing) population of ANS. o There are currently no infested waters in Colorado. Right: Zebra mussel infestation at El Dorado Reservoir, Kansas 9 �Monitoring Monitoring is an integral part of any ANS program. The State of Colorado Sampling and Monitoring Aquatic Nuisance Species Protocol Manual (2013) contains detailed protocols for monitoring waters for invasive mussels and other ANS. CPW prioritized waters for monitoring based on a statewide risk assessment that specifically evaluated the risk of introduction of ZQM. The risk assessment identified 168 total public lakes and reservoirs divided into 19 very high risk waters, 17 high risk waters, 58 medium risk waters, and 64 low risk waters. The frequency and quantity of annual sampling is risk dependent. CPW monitors streams and rivers on a rotating basis annually by need and priority. The state follows a three-tier sampling protocol and a three-phase identification process for the early detection of zebra or quagga mussels: 1) conducting plankton tows to detect veligers, 2) check substrates to detect “settlers” or adults and 3) conduct surveys along the shoreline and existing structures for settled juveniles or attached adult mussels. Identification of plankton tows includes a cross-polarized light microscopic visual analysis, followed by two-phase DNA analysis (polymerase chain reaction [PCR] and gene sequencing) for verification. Verification of ANS in a water body will trigger an increase in the frequency of sampling events and the quantity of sampling sites within the water body. Enhancements to the state’s monitoring program for suspect and positive waters include volunteer monitoring and SCUBA. Current Status of Zebra and Quagga Mussels in Colorado Pueblo Reservoir, Granby Reservoir, Grand Lake, Shadow Mountain Reservoir, Willow Creek Reservoir, Tarryall Reservoir and Jumbo Reservoir all tested positive for microscopic juvenile zebra and/or quagga mussel veligers in 2008. Since that time there have been no new positive waters listed. Subsequent testing identified veligers in Pueblo Reservoir in 2009 and 2011. In April 2009, Blue Mesa Reservoir began implementing containment procedures due to quagga mussel DNA detection. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation samples from 2011 and 2012 also indicated that quagga mussel DNA was present in Blue Mesa. 10 �Elements of a WID Containment Program Following the detection of ANS, rapid response is essential to contain the invasive species and prevent its spread to other waters. This Manual focuses on containing the overland spread of ANS hitchhiking on trailered watercraft through the implementation of WID procedures. It does not discuss other response topics, such as evaluation of potential control methods, communications or research. The elements of a containment program are education, watercraft inspection and decontamination, and enforcement “The best method of protection against an invasive mussel introduction is through preventative measures. Prevention is much less expensive than containment or control efforts. Although containment at infested waters is the top priority, CDOW [CPW] recommends that focus be placed on prevention through field watercraft inspection and decontamination, in conjunction with education and information efforts.” State of Colorado Zebra and Quagga Mussel Management Plan, 2008 The scale at which these elements are implemented is entirely dependent on the resources available to the state and contributing partners. “Due to the multi-jurisdictional nature of Colorado waters, the ZQM Plan recommendations apply to all partners; for no single entity is responsible for, or capable of, implementing all of the necessary actions needed to protect Colorado waters from invasive mussels or other ANS.” State of Colorado Zebra and Quagga Mussel Management Plan, 2008 The greatest variability with respect to implementation of the containment WID procedures is in relation to not only the resources allocated for containment, but also the ability of managers to control access and traffic, in addition to the volume and complexity of watercraft. “…the ability of containment reservoirs to implement the following protocol is completely dependent on the number of boats at that specific time along with the number of inspection and decontamination points and the complexity of watercraft. As the number of complex boats increase, the ability of the Authorized Location to perform high risk inspections and standing water decontaminations decrease. Therefore, it stands to reason that more boats will get inspected and decontaminated on slower weekdays than on busy weekends – or at smaller reservoirs versus larger reservoirs – or at reservoirs with more ramps than those with less ramps. Prevention waters need to be on high alert for watercraft that have previously been boating in containment waters and have not been decontaminated.” Official Colorado WID Procedures, 2012 11 �Education! Education! Education! Education is the most important part of any ANS Program. There will never be enough money to have inspectors at all waters at all times. Therefore, it is imperative that we engage boaters and educate them so they will inspect and drain their boat after each and every use. If boaters, anglers and professionals clean, drain and dry their boats and gear, we can stop the spread of ANS! A bare minimum containment response is for managers to post signage at all suspect, positive and infested (containment) waters and educate users to clean, drain and dry. It is important to emphasize standard messaging and social awareness to help prevent the spread of ANS. Success of containment and prevention programs depend largely on the cooperation and understanding of the public. There are many outlets that can be utilized in order to spread awareness about ANS including, but not limited to: kiosks, physical signs, highway billboards, radio spots, one-on-one communication, interpretive programs, brochures, and “brand” recognition (e.g. Stop Aquatic Hitchhikers and Clean, Drain, Dry). A communication strategy should be developed as part of response planning for a verified detection of ANS. The following are a few elements that should be included: • • Professional notification of the detection and response strategy Public notification of the detection and management options being implemented o Press release (media - newspapers, television, radio, magazines, etc.) o Signs must be posted at boat ramps, entrance stations and foot access points alerting the public that ANS are present and what they must do to avoid spreading the ANS to new waters. 12 �• • • • • Website information Fact sheets for agency customer service representatives to answer questions Rack cards, handouts or brochures with more detailed information for specific water bodies or specific user groups (e.g. boaters, shoreline homeowners, etc) Outreach to local businesses whose customers frequent the containment water body (e.g. marine dealers, marine service centers, angling shops, etc.) Outreach to local sporting groups that frequent the containment water body (e.g. fishing clubs, ski clubs, sailing clubs, homeowners associations, etc.) For containment programs, informational items should include the following: • ANS name and biology • Description of the ANS impacts to the resource and to specific user groups • Direction on species identification and reporting sightings • Information on how people can prevent the spread of ANS • Requirements for users after recreating in containment waters • Management changes as a result of the presence of ANS Having consistent messaging across jurisdictions is also important to avoid confusing the public and to help streamline inspection and containment programs. A containment program cannot be successful without a strong educational campaign to inform the public and change attitudes and behaviors. Research has shown that people are more likely to respond in a desirable way if they understand how their actions affect the resource rather than emphasizing regulations or fines (Wallace, 1990). While this is most often the case, it is important to have the cooperation and support from local law enforcement in the rare instance that a boater is uncooperative or it becomes necessary to impound a boat. 13 �Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination The Goal for Every Boat: • Clean, Drain, Dry in between each and every use! • No Water. No Plants. No Mud. No Mussels. What are the priorities of a watercraft inspector? 1. Ensure Personal and Public Safety Your safety and the safety of the public is the inspector’s top priority at all times. Many vehicles and boats will be moving around the inspection area. People will be looking under wheels and through the watercraft. All efforts must be made to ensure safety of all involved. 2. Educate Boaters Every contact made with boaters educates them about the importance of controlling zebra and quagga mussels and other ANS. Boaters must realize that ANS are spread by their actions (or inaction). They must understand that they have a lot to lose, in terms of access and recreational opportunities, if they do not help in this effort. The primary education message is Clean/Drain/Dry: Clean―Remove all plants, animals, and mud. Thoroughly wash everything. Drain―Drain every space or item that can hold water. Dry―Make sure your watercraft is completely dry before leaving which means sponging, toweling or pumping all water out. 3. Inspecting Watercraft - Assessing the Risk of the Watercraft By following the inspection procedure detailed later in this section and in the WID Procedures, inspectors are ensuring that the biological risk of the watercraft is reduced prior to launch and after exiting positive waters. Green seals and receipts help inspectors identify watercraft risk much easier and faster. 4. Draining standing water. Colorado’s WID procedures are largely based on mitigating the risks associated with organisms that get transported from one water body to another in standing water. These organisms (e.g. mussel veligers, pathogens or plant fragments) are typically microscopic so it is of the utmost importance that standing water be drained in between each and every use. 5. Decontamination. If there is a known ANS or suspect ANS on a watercraft, or standing water that cannot be drained, sponged, pumped or toweled out, it must be decontaminated. See Decon Manual. 14 �SEAL AND RECEIPT The first step in the entrance inspection procedure is to check for a seal and verify the receipt. The last step in the exit inspection procedure for both prevention and containment reservoirs is to apply a seal and receipt. Therefore, it is critically important to fully understand the seal and receipt system. State of Colorado WID Procedures is to seal and provide receipts to all trailered, motorized watercraft exiting a containment water body. What is the inspection wire seal system? Colorado uses a wire seal, coupled with a receipt, to communicate the location of the boat’s last inspection or decontamination and associated information to the next inspector. The seal is green but the color is essentially irrelevant. The seal locks the watercraft to the trailer indicating to the last inspector it has not launched since the seal was issued. The receipt accompanies the seal and provides documentation regarding date of last inspection, protocol used, type of decontamination, if any and other important information. Boats will get a green wire seal if… A. The watercraft leaves a containment reservoir (suspect or positive) and passes either a highrisk inspection or a decontamination. Ballast tanks intending to go to a different location next must be flushed. NOTE: Containment reservoirs will use a BLUE seal receipt to provide a visual notification to the next inspector indicating that the watercraft is coming from positive/suspect waters. B. The watercraft leaves a prevention reservoir (negative) and passes an Exit Inspection or a decontamination. C. The watercraft comes to an office or business WIDS and passes either an inspection or decontamination. NOTE: It is critical to attach the seal in a way that it will be broken if the watercraft is separated from the trailer. Typically, the wire seal goes between the eyebolt and hard, welded part of the winch. Be advised that some winches can be unrolled completely and separated from the seal without breaking. 15 �SEAL RECEIPTS Seals are only valid with a matching receipt. The seal tells you that the watercraft has not launched since its last inspection. The receipt is very important because it tells you, the inspector, what kind of inspection and/or decontamination was performed at the last site, in addition to when it was performed. This information will tell you what level of inspection or decontamination, if any, is necessary prior to launch. PREVENTION WATERS WHITE SEAL RECEIPT: 16 �CONTAINMENT RESERVOIRS BLUE RECEIPT The receipt for positive and suspect waters is a different color to provide a visual cue and alert inspectors at prevention waters, business locations, or other state’s roadside stations that this boat was last in a containment water body. It also includes an indicator as to whether or not the boater intended to return to the issuing location and instructions for the inspector. 17 �SEAL AND RECEIPT REMOVAL WID PROCEDURE AT CONTAINMENT LOCATIONS A. If one of the following scenarios is true, the protocol is to verify the receipt, ask about live aquatic bait, thank the boater and allow launch. • • • Watercraft is returning to the same lake/reservoir Watercraft has been out of the water more than 30 days Watercraft has been decontaminated for standing water B. If the watercraft is from a different containment location and was not out of the water for more than 30 days AND was not decontaminated for standing water: • Inspect for standing water o Ask the boater to pull the bilge or drain plug and lower motor/engine, and inspect the interior compartments.  If there is water, decontaminate the motor or compartments with any standing water remaining in them.  If there is no water, cut off the seal, ask about live bait, thank the boater and allow them to launch. C. If the watercraft was fully decontaminated because it was an infested mussel boat: • • Perform a high risk inspection Perform a full decontaminate if any mussels are found D. If the watercraft is from a prevention location, verify the watercraft is drained, ask about live aquatic bait, thank the boater and allow launch. Seals and Receipts Explained to the Public: • Green does NOT mean go! • A green seal is proof of prior inspection. • It will speed up entry to the next water. • You still have to stop at the inspection station and have the seal and receipt verified. • You will be allowed to launch if you are returning to the same location, been out of the water for more than 30 days or the watercraft is clean and dry. • If you are not returning to the same location or the boat has not been out of the water for more than 30 days, you may get a quick check prior to launching. • If the watercraft is not clean and dry, you will most likely get re-inspected. • Keep your watercraft clean and dry and get on the water faster! 18 �WID CONTAINMENT PROTOCOLS and STANDARD PROCEDURES It is important to note that slightly different procedures are necessary for containment of different types of ANS, and different life stages, as well as the degree of infestation at any particular body of water. The current procedures enacted at Colorado’s Authorized Locations for containment focus on stopping the spread of standing water that could potentially transport veligers. This is because adult zebra or quagga mussels have never been found in Colorado. The goal is to perform a high risk inspection on all trailered and motorized watercraft, and to issue a green seal and receipt to all boats exiting the lake or reservoir. The protocol places focus for inspection and decontamination on watercraft not intending to return to the same location, and watercraft that cannot be drained. Rules about WIDS at Colorado Containment Waters: 1. Watercraft entering must be inspected – prevention procedures. The primary purpose of performing entrance inspections at positive or suspect waters is to stop the continued inoculation of the known invasive species into the reservoir, and to prevent new invasive species from being introduced. Entrance inspection procedures are detailed in the Official Colorado Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Procedures: Certified Curriculum for Authorized Agents, 2013. There is minimal information about entrance inspections in this document. Please refer to the WID Curriculum for the complete entrance inspection protocols. 2. Watercraft exiting must be inspected – this is mandatory in Colorado! Watercraft must get a Standing Water Decontamination if they have features that cannot be drained (e.g. ballast, I/O, Inboard) and intend to launch somewhere different next. Watercraft with suspect or known ANS must get a Full Decontamination (e.g. adult zebra or quagga mussels). Decontamination Protocols that must be followed by Authorized Agents are detailed in the Colorado Watercraft Decontamination Manual, 2012. These procedures are not repeated in this document. Please refer to the Decontamination Manual for complete decontamination protocols. 19 �The following is a list of 2013 Containment Authorized Locations in Colorado: • Blue Mesa Reservoir - QM • Grand Lake - ZQM • Granby Reservoir - QM • Jumbo Reservoir SWA - QM • Pueblo State Park - ZQM • Shadow Mountain Reservoir - QM • Tarryall Reservoir SWA – QM • Lathrop State Park – EWM • Eleven Mile State Park – EWM and NZMS • Spinney Mountain State Park – NZMS • Standley Lake - EWM NOTE: Not all locations positive for EWM or NZMS are implementing containment procedures or have watercraft inspection and decontamination stations. There are limiting factors that may inhibit the ability to implement containment procedures: 1. Ability to control access and direct watercraft to inspection stations through controlled launch and retrieval points at the water body, and effective traffic management (e.g. elimination of shoreline launching, enacting night ramp closures, or traffic patterns that allow retrieval or exiting the water without passing through inspection station) 2. Providing adequate staff and supervision 3. Providing enough water for decontaminations 4. Providing enough fuel (unleaded gas/diesel/propane) for decontaminations 5. Providing the adequate number of decontamination units 6. Providing for waste water containment or disposal, as required 7. Providing for safe traffic management 8. Providing a staging area for boats Important Notes about Containment Locations: 1. If a boater claimed to be returning to a containment water body and does not, the prevention water body they visit next must decontaminate the boat if they have a ballast tank, an I/O, an Inboard or ANY standing water. 2. There are rare occasions when the weather is unsafe for inspectors to be working (e.g. lightening and hail). During these times boaters can leave containment reservoirs without inspection, draining or decontamination. It is imperative that these boats are intercepted and drained or decontaminated before launching at the next reservoir. 20 �3. There are containment waters in which the access is not controlled. For example, the containment waters within the Arapahoe National Recreation Area (Granby Reservoir, Shadow Mountain Reservoir and Grand Lake) have no ramp closures in place at night when inspectors are not present. Boaters can also launch in the spring before inspectors start (if ice comes off early) and they can launch in the fall after inspections close for the season (if ice comes on late). This is not an ideal situation and it is preferred to have full access control at containment waters. It is the boater’s responsibility to clean, drain, dry their watercraft AND get their watercraft inspected before they launch again if they are leaving a containment water body when inspectors are not present. Inspection and possibly decontamination of these watercraft prior to launching at the next water body is imperative. Shadow Mountain Reservoir Photo by Cindi Frank 21 �STEP BY STEP ENTRANCE INSPECTION WID PROCEDURE All stations regardless of status (positive, suspect or negative) perform entrance inspections for trailered and motorized watercraft before launching onto the lake or reservoir. Step 1 - Ensure personal and public safety - You must ask the driver to turn off the engine, put on the parking brake and step out of the vehicle. Step 2 – Greet and Educate the Boater • Introduce yourself • Provide a brief verbal explanation of the purpose of inspection • Provide the boater with a brochure or educational item • Mention the words Clean, Drain, Dry Step 3 - Initial Assessment • Record on the Activity Log or in the Data Collector the following information o In or Out o Boat Type o Boat Registration Number o Trailer License Plate • Check for a Green WID Seal and Receipt - If present, record data on Activity Log or Data Collectors and follow seal protocol as previously described. Step 4 – Determining Risk Factors 1. Has the boat launched out of state in the last 30 days? If yes, where? 2. Where has the boat launched in state in the last 30 days? • Listen carefully and pay attention if any of the locations are positive, suspect or infested. 3. Visually check the watercraft’s exterior to determine if it is “dirty, crusty or slimy” 4. Identify if the watercraft is a complex vessel (defined in Curriculum as a watercraft that has one or more compartments, or a closed hull, or more than one motor or engine) 5. Visually and physically inspect the watercraft to determine if there is any standing water present. IMPORTANT: If 2 or more of the above 5 risk factors are true (checkboxes on the log or data collector), and then the watercraft must get a High Risk Inspection. Step 5 – Check for Ballast Tanks 1. If the watercraft has no seal and receipt, the tanks should get a standing water decontamination after inspection is completed before allowing launch. 2. If the watercraft has a seal and valid receipt, and was decontaminated  thank the boater and allow launch. 22 �3. If the watercraft has a seal and valid receipt, and was not decontaminated, and is from a prevention reservoir, have the boater run the ballast pumps and get as much water out as possible  thank the boater and allow launch. 4. If the watercraft has a seal and valid receipt from less than 30 days ago and was not decontaminated, and is from a containment reservoir  complete a high-risk inspection and perform a standing water decontamination on ballast tanks. (same is true for I/O and Inboards from containment waters) Step 6 – Ask About Live Aquatic Bait • Ask boaters if they have live aquatic bait. a. If yes, follow bait protocol in the Curriculum Chapter 6. b. If no, continue with inspection Step 7 – Perform the visual and tactile entrance inspection of the watercraft, using the acronym H.E.A.D. to ensure that the watercraft is properly inspected. Hull and Trailer – Rapid Exterior Inspection 1. Look over (visual) and feel (tactile) the entire watercraft on both sides of hull and trailer. 2. Physically inspect the through hull fittings. 3. Check trailer bunks or rollers, tire wells, lights and electrical. 4. Remove any plants or plant fragments that are present. 5. Ask the boater to remove the bilge plug when inspecting the transom. Feel the bilge area with and use a flashlight to visually see if any ANS are present. 6. If applicable, have the boater activate the bilge pump. 7. If the watercraft has an inboard engine, be certain to inspect the prop, prop shaft and rudder. Engine or Motor 1. Ask for the outboard or I/O to be lowered 2. Visually and physically inspect the engine with a flashlight 3. Visually and physically inspect the gimbal area of the outboard or I/O with a flashlight 4. Carefully check the transom or rear of the boat Anchor and Equipment Checked 1. Ask to see the anchor and anchor rope or chain. 2. Visually and physically inspect the anchor and rope or chain for mud, plants and/or ANS. 3. Check any additional equipment such as life vests, buoys, paddles, ropes, nets, etc. 4. Ensure all equipment is clean and dry. 23 �Drain and Check Interior Compartments For larger watercraft, you will need to get into the watercraft to inspect interior compartments that could hold standing water (e.g. wells). For smaller watercraft, you may be able to see without entering the watercraft. 1. Ask permission to board the watercraft and ask the boater to climb in first. Follow the boater into the watercraft in the same way they entered. Be careful to prevent either the boater(s) or inspection staff from falling or getting hurt. 2. Ask the boater to open up compartments so you can see all bait wells, live wells, equipment lockers and verifiable ballast tanks. a. If the watercraft has standing water in the bait well or in any container, the inspector should work with the boater to remove standing water from the watercraft using a pump, sponge, or towel. If the watercraft cannot be drained, it should get a standing water decontamination. b. Ensure that the compartments are fully drained prior to launch. 3. If the watercraft has an inboard engine, be sure to inspect the engine compartment and bilge. Step 8 - Closeout 1. Remind the boater to replace the bilge plug. The boater is responsible to ensure the watercraft is watertight before launching. 2. Ask the boater to raise the engine or motor to ensure no damage to the motor takes place. 3. Ensure all inspectors are finished looking at the watercraft and that nothing was found. 4. Yell “stand clear” to ensure the safety of staff and the public. 5. Remind the boater to get an exit inspection with a green seal and receipt on the way out to make the inspection process quicker the next time around. 6. Thank the boater for keeping their boat Clean, Drain, and Dry and allow them to launch. 7. Complete the WID Activity Log or submit the Data Collector record. 24 �ZQM VELIGER CONTAINMENT The goal of Colorado’s containment WID procedure is to prevent the spread of water in which invasive mussel veligers have been positively identified to other waters. This is challenging because there are many ways water can be transported in a vessel including: raw water systems, outboard motors, inboard/outboard (I/O) and inboard engines, engine compartments, storage compartments, equipment and gear that has had contact with water, bilge areas, ballast tanks, live wells, bait wells, and any other areas that may potentially hold water. These areas must both be drained and dried with sponges and towels, or get a standing water decontamination. Resources are prioritized on trailered, motorized watercraft (specifically those that cannot be drained) and watercraft that are not returning so the same location. If at any point ANS are suspected or confirmed on watercraft, a full decontamination is required. Where is the boat going to be launched next? Back to the SAME water I Don’t Know OR A Different Water High Risk Inspection High Risk Inspection Drain as well as possible Standing Water Decontamination Green Seal & Blue Receipt Green Seal & Blue Receipt 25 �STEP BY STEP EXIT INSPECTION WID PROCEDURE AT CONTAINMENT LOCATIONS Exit Inspections are mandatory at Colorado’s positive and suspect waters, and is important to make an additional educational contact with the boater reinforcing that watercraft should be clean, drain and dry in between each use. It also verifies that the boater has followed the proper procedures to clean off the watercraft and completely drain all compartments prior to leaving. Lastly, it is required to obtain a seal and receipt. Repeat the primary educational message Clean/Drain/Dry and explain why boaters need to do it each time they use their watercraft. Remind the boater of the negative impacts of zebra and quagga mussels and other ANS. Step 1 - Ensure personal and public safety • You must ask the driver to turn off the engine, put on the parking brake and step out of the vehicle. NOTE: Consider putting chocks under the wheels of the vehicle and the trailer. The inspector will have to climb on the watercraft and under the trailer, so it is important to prevent watercraft or trailer from rolling. Step 2 – Greet and Educate the Boater • Introduce yourself • Provide a brief verbal explanation of the purpose of the inspection • Mention the words Clean, Drain, Dry Step 3 - Initial Assessment • Record on the Activity Log the following information o “O” for Out/Exiting o Boat Type (use key) o Boat Registration Number o Trailer License Plate Step 4 – Ask About Live Aquatic Bait • Ask boaters if they have live aquatic bait. o If yes, recommend the boater properly dispose of bait in the trash or follow bait protocol in Chapter 6. o If no, continue with inspection Step 5 - Ask the boater WHERE DO THEY PLAN TO LAUNCH THE BOAT NEXT? o If returning to the same location – perform a high risk exit inspection. o If not planning to return – perform a high risk exit inspection and follow standing water decontamination procedures. 26 �Step 6 – Check for Ballast Tanks • If the boater is going to launch at the same location next, the protocol is to have the boater run the ballast pump(s) as long as it takes until no more water comes out of the ballast tank(s). • If the boater is planning to launch at a DIFFERENT location next, the ballast tanks must get a standing water decontamination. Step 7 – Perform the visual and tactile inspection of the watercraft, using the acronym HEAD to ensure that all high risk portions of the watercraft are inspected. Hull and Trailer – Exterior Inspection • Look over the entire watercraft on both sides of hull and trailer. • Physically inspect the through hull fittings. • Check the trailer bunks or rollers, tire wells, lights and electrical. • Remove any plants or plant fragments that are present. • Ask the boater to remove the bilge plug when inspecting the transom. If applicable, have the boater activate the bilge pump. • If the watercraft has an inboard engine, be certain to inspect the prop, prop shaft and rudder. Engine or Motor • Ask for the outboard or I/O to be lowered twice. • Check engine compartments with a flashlight. • Check the gimbal area of the outboard or I/O with a flashlight. • Carefully check the transom or rear of the watercraft. Anchor and Equipment Checked • Ask to see the anchor and anchor rope or chain. • Visually and physically inspect the anchor and rope/chain for mud, plants and/or ANS. • Check any additional equipment such as life vests, buoys, paddles, ropes, nets, etc. • Ensure all equipment is clean and dry. Drain and Check Interior Compartments For larger craft, you will need to get into the watercraft to inspect interior compartments that could hold standing water (e.g. wells). For smaller craft, you may be able to see without entering the watercraft. • Ask for permission to board the watercraft and ask the boater to climb in first. Follow the boater into the watercraft in the same way they entered. Be careful to prevent either the boater(s) or inspection staff from falling or getting hurt. • Ask the boater to open up compartments so you can see all bait wells, live wells, equipment lockers and verifiable ballast tanks. The inspector should work with the boater to remove standing water from the watercraft using a pump, sponge, or towel. Ensure that the compartments are fully drained to the best of your ability. 27 �• If the watercraft has an inboard engine, be sure to inspect the engine compartment and its bilge and run bilge pump, if applicable. NOTE: If the watercraft cannot be drained, and is not planning to return, it must get a standing water decontamination. Step 8 – Apply Seal and Provide Valid BLUE Receipt • Properly apply a green seal to watercraft and trailer • Hand the boater a copy of the green seal receipt and blue receipt • Explain that the seal is valid only if the receipt is present and the seal is intact Step 9 - Closeout • Ask boater to leave the bilge plug out during transport to ensure extra drain/dry time • Ask boater to raise the engine or motor to ensure no damage takes place • Ensure all inspectors are finished looking at the watercraft and that nothing was found • Thank the boater and remind them the importance of Clean, Drain, and Dry Step 10 - Complete the WID Activity Log or submit the Data Collector record 28 �Exiting watercraft at containment reservoirs gets a minimum of a High Risk Inspection upon exit. A high-risk inspection should be a thorough and complete visual and tactile inspection of all portions of the watercraft, trailer, and any of the equipment or gear, ropes, or anchors. The time it will take to complete a High Risk Inspection may vary greatly depending on the type and complexity of the watercraft. • • • • Feel the entire hull, trailer and transom below the water line focusing on right angles and fasteners. Be extremely thorough with engine/motor and gimbal inspection using a flashlight and your hands. Inspect all equipment that is exposed to water in interior compartments. Ensure all water is drained (if returning) or perform a standing water decontamination (if not returning). If sandpapery bumps, mussels, or other suspect ANS are detected on the watercraft, a full decontamination is required. 29 �WID RULES FOR STANDING WATER Microscopic zebra and quagga mussel veligers are capable of surviving up to 27 days in closed wet interior compartments (Myrick, 2012). It cannot be overstated how important it is that standing water be drained from watercraft to prevent the movement of microscopic mussel larvae or veligers, plant fragments, diseases and other animals from being transported. You must pay careful attention to all trailered watercraft that cannot be completely drained and therefore, contain standing water. There are two types of water on watercraft: Verifiable Water – This is water in compartments that you can see, feel or visually inspect, such as in wells or bilges. This is most of the water on most on the watercrafts you will encounter. Unverifiable Water – This is water in compartments (e.g. ballast tanks) that you cannot see, feel or visually inspect. Rule #1 –Watercraft from Containment Reservoirs that have NOT been decontaminated If the watercraft has been in suspect, positive or infested waters in the last 30 days and has any standing water, it is mandatory to send the watercraft to decontamination. Even in cases where watercraft has an engine (I/O or Inboard) or a ballast tank that cannot be drained completely, it is mandatory to send the watercraft to decontamination and thoroughly flush those compartments. Rule #2 – Watercraft with Verifiable Water Incoming watercraft that is not green sealed and from unknown sources, or from prevention waters must be clean, drained and dry. Sponge, pump or towel out standing water, or decontaminate, prior to allowing launch. Rule #3 – Watercraft with Unverifiable Water Sealed boats with receipts returning to the same location do not need decontamination. Sealed ballast boats with receipts moving between Colorado prevention locations must be fully pumped out and do not require decontamination in between launches. Undocumented boats (no green seal and receipt) will get a mandatory standing water decontamination (I/O, Inboard, Ballast). 30 �ADULT ZQM CONTAINMNENT While there has never been an adult zebra or quagga mussel found in a Colorado water body, it is imperative that procedures are developed in the event rapid response is necessary in the future. In other states where ZQM positive or infested waters exist, it is critical for the protection of all waters, facilities and people in the West, that adult mussels do not leave attached to watercraft. Inspectors working at waters where adult mussel(s) have been detected must follow the same Step-By-Step Exit Inspection Procedures for containment as veliger-detected waters. This will prevent watercraft from transporting veligers in standing water, in addition to ensuring settlers and adult mussels do not leave attached to watercraft. Remember, the ANS Law (SB08-226) and Regulations (Parks-8-801) prohibits the possession and transportation of zebra or quagga mussels, or other listed ANS. Therefore, it is a core value within Colorado’s WID Program that watercraft with suspected or known ZQM or ANS must get a full decontamination. #801 – POSSESSIONS OF AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES Except as provided in these regulations or authorized by the Divisions or under Title 33 or Title 35 C.R.S., it shall be unlawful for any person to possess, import, export, ship, transport, release, place, plant, or cause to be released, placed, or planted into the waters of the state any aquatic nuisance species. If a water body is positive for adult mussels, but there is no confirmation of an established population, it is plausible that there will be very few, if any, watercraft exiting with adult mussels attached initially. The WID procedures for veliger containment will continue to be operationally feasible. As the invasive population advances, there will eventually be an increase in watercraft exiting with Quagga mussels at Lake Pleasant, AZ adult mussels attached needing a full decontamination. Decontaminating watercraft for adult mussels is much more expensive, difficult and labor intensive, than flushing standing water out of watercraft to stop the transportation of veligers. 31 �INFESTED ZQM CONTAINMENT Infested bodies of water are those in which a zebra or quagga mussel population is established. The invasive mussel population has multiple age classes, is reproducing and recruiting. Mussels may be visible at the water body. Mussels have been observed attached to boats. Containment at infested waters is the most difficult, costly and imperfect of all containment scenarios. As populations of ZQM advance and explode, the demands of the containment WID station increases exponentially. Operational feasibility and fiscal resources will have ultimate influence over the ability to implement WID procedures at infested water bodies. The volume of infested boats that will need a full decontamination will increase over time. WID stations must be prepared to perform a full decontamination on a large percentage of complex watercraft leaving the water body. Traffic flow, staffing volume, decontamination equipment, wastewater containment and all other operational facets will have to be bolstered in order to implement WID procedures. Implementing Containment WID Procedures means performing a high risk inspection on every trailered, motorized watercraft entering and exiting, and perform a standing water decontamination on those that can’t be drained, and performing a full decontaminations for those that have adult mussels or other ANS attached. Difficulty implementing WID procedures occurs when the volume of complex watercraft, compounded with adult mussel attachment, exceeds the operational and fiscal capacities of a WID station. Stations at waterbodies with a lower volume of watercraft use, and low risk simpler watercraft, are able to inspect and decontaminate more boats on exit than those WID stations at waterbodies with high volume watercraft use and high risk complex watercraft. Waterbodies with developed infrastructure and existing utilities also have a greater capacity to mitigate limitations for inspection and decontamination than rustic stations. Establishing public-private partnerships is very important when implementing any WIDS! • Marine dealers, service centers and marinas offer an unparallelled connection to educate and inform boaters. • Marinas are often the recipient of commercially hauled watercraft and they offer opportunities for complex watercraft to remain on the water for long periods. • Infested mussel boats often need to be serviced by a trained marine mechanic. Watercraft with infested interior compartments and engines may need service by a professional to restore functionality. 32 �MAXIMIZING RISK REDUCTION AT INFESTED WATERS WHEN RESOURCES ARE INADEQUATE TO IMPLEMENT CONTAINMENT WID PROCEDURES When fiscal resources are not adequate to implement containment WID procedures at infested waters, it is imperative to mitigate the potential for watercraft to move adult mussels to negative waters to the greatest extent possible. THE BARE MINIMUM The minimum management response to a verified ANS detection is to install signage at suspect, positive or infested waters to alert users and educate them to clean, drain and dry. Managers should utilize existing agency personnel to inform boaters to take extra precautions to clean and drain their watercraft after boating in infested waters. Boater education becomes even more critical when resources to implement WID procedures are inadequate at infested waters. Engaging watercraft owners to voluntarily self-inspect and/or self-quarantine to stop the spread of ANS to new waters is top priority. Managers can also mandate boaters self-inspect and/or self-quarantine (utilize a drying time) their watercraft after boating in containment waters. It is very difficult to maintain quality and enforce this approach, but it does provide minimal risk reduction because some boaters will comply once educated. Drying Time The following are the dry times depending on the temperature as determined by the Western Regional Panel (WRP) on the 100th Meridian Quarantine Time Estimator (http://100thmeridian.org/emersion.asp). Maximum daily temperature (Fahrenheit) Minimum days out of water <30 3 30-40 28 40-60 30 60-80 14 80-100 7 >100 3 NOTE: Add 7 days for temps ranging from 30-100 degrees F if relative humidity exceeds 50%. 33 �USING EXPOSURE BASED RISK TO PRIORITIZE WATERCRAFT INSPECTION AND DECONTAMINATION At highly infested water bodies that experience a very high volume of complex watercraft use, resources may be inadequate to implement WID Procedures due to the large amount of complex watercraft needing full decontamination. The Colorado WID procedures for veliger and adult ZQM containment already account for minimal levels of risk acceptance by allowing returning boaters to leave and return to the same place without decontamination, and exempting hand-launched watercraft from inspection. To achieve minimal to moderate risk reduction, managers should consider implementing WID procedures on the highest risk watercraft. This approach prioritizes exit inspections and decontaminations on those with the greatest exposure to the infestation (e.g. length of time on the water body). On the following page, there is a spectrum of containment options for consideration at infested WID locations. The intent of the Infested Waters Containment Spectrum is to provide prioritized options to implement containment WID procedures at infested sites with limited resources. It has been documented that watercraft that has a longer exposure to mussels are at a higher risk of transporting adult mussels. Watercraft that have been moored on the water pose a greater risk than those that have not. • The spectrum begins at the bare minimum response, which requires almost no resources being allocated to education, self-inspection and self-drying time. • At the lowest resource levels, WID Procedures are implemented on only the highest priority watercraft based on exposure – those on the water more than 7 days, more than 3 days or overnight. • To provide greater containment efficacy, staff should inspect all trailered and motorized watercraft on exit, including day use customers. This is the Colorado WID Procedure. • The ideal and most costly option is to inspect all watercraft coming and going with no exceptions. As resources become available, and new partnerships formed, implementation can expand from the minimum to the ideal. 34 �Infested Waters WID Containment Spectrum Minimum $ Education Self-Inspection $$ WID Highest Risk Boats WID Highest Risk Boats $$$ WID Highest Risk Boats Exit Trailered and Motorized $$$$ $$$$$ Maximum Ideal All Trailered and Motorized • Post Signage Alerting Public • Educate Users to Clean, Drain, Dry • Implement Mandatory or Voluntary Self-Inspection • Implement Mandatory or Voluntary Drying Time • Mandatory Inspections for Watercraft Moored 7 days or longer. Follow Containment Exit WID Procedure. • Mandatory Inspections for Watercraft Moored 3 days or longer. Follow Containment Exit WID Procedure. • Mandatory Inspections for Watercraft Moored overnight or longer. Follow Containment Exit WID Procedure. • Mandatory Inspections for all trailered or motorized watercraft exiting. Follow Containment Exit WID Procedure. • Mandatory Inspections for all trailered or motorized watercraft entering and exiting. Follow WID Procedures. Exit All Boats • Mandatory Inspections for all watercraft exiting, including handlaunch. Follow Containment Exit WID Procedure. WID All Boats • Mandatory Inspections for all watercraft entering and exiting, including hand-launch. Follow WID Procedures. 35 �A GEOGRAPHIC APPROACH TO CONTAINING MULTIPLE WATERS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY Scale is an important consideration when implementing containment measures, especially for highly infested water bodies in close proximity or with a high percentage of shared users. In some cases where there is only one infested water body in a given geographic area, the best place to implement the containment program is right at that water access points (e.g. Pueblo Reservoir State Park). In other cases, implementing a roadside containment system to reduce the number of contaminated watercraft leaving a group of containment water bodies may be a more efficient approach. The 100th Meridian Initiative was founded on the principal of creating a broad geographic boundary to contain zebra and quagga mussels to (east of the meridian) and prevent their introduction to (west of the meridian) through education. A similar approach using WID locations could be implemented to create a multi-state geographic boundary to protect negative waters from eastern and southwestern infested waters. Standard training, procedures and quality control measures would need to be enacted as well. Shifting resources from water body access points (e.g. ramps) to outside infestation boundaries (e.g. roadside stations) may be a more cost-effective method of implementing WID procedures for containment within areas that have multiple positive or infested water bodies within close proximity to each other. This approach would require a multi-jurisdictional partnership and law enforcement commitment to implement. A benefit would be that boaters could move between the infested waters without consuming WID resources, but would be required to submit to inspection and decontamination when moving towards negative waters. Similarly, many very large reservoirs cross jurisdictional boundaries including private, city, county, state, tribal, and federal agencies. Some of these also have private boat launches, in addition to shoreline launching sites. In these instances, setting up boat inspection and decontamination checkpoints at roadside points may provide for better containment. The containment reservoirs for veligers in Grand County, Colorado might be a candidate for a shift to this approach in the future (see map on the next page). Capital construction would need to take place to build the roadside stations, and there would have to be commitment from law enforcement personnel to staff the stations alongside inspectors. However, this shift would allow managers to operate two highway checkpoints, instead of the current system of operating stations at five public ramps and two closed public ramps. A secondary benefit is that the public could regain full access to the closed portions of the four reservoirs. 36 �Closed Boat Ramps 37 �OTHER ANS CONTAINMENT EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL (EWM) & AQUATIC WEEDS Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM) is an aquatic noxious weed that is present in Eastern Colorado and neighboring states. Removing plants from the trailer or watercraft is a part of every entrance and exit inspection. Plants should not be transported on watercraft or conveyances. EWM and many other aquatic plants spread by fragments, seeds and winter buds. These aquatic weeds usually form dense mats that restrict swimming, fishing, and boating, and clot water intakes. They alter water chemistry by choking and shading out other native aquatic plants. The decaying plants decrease oxygen levels in the water and foul lakeside beaches. This disrupts the food chain and destroys habitat and food needed by fish and birds. They create standing water in ditches and canals, providing ideal mosquito habitat leading to an increase in mosquito borne illnesses, such as West Nile Virus. WID Procedures for EWM Containment: • High risk exit inspection focusing on the exterior of the boat including trailer bunks, propellers, intakes and any other areas where aquatic plants may be stuck or attached. All plant material must be physically removed. • If plant fragments cannot be physically removed, perform a plant decontamination. 38 �OTHER ANS CONTAINMENT – NEW ZEALAND MUDSNAILS (NZMS) Watercraft inspectors have detected NZMS on boats moving into and out of Colorado’s reservoirs! Mudsnails are able to close their shells to withstand dry conditions and a variety of temperatures. If embedded in mud, they can survive 30 days in dry mud and 50 days in moist mud. They can reproduce asexually; it only takes one to start an entirely new population. As with ZQM, eradicating established infestations is impossible. By following Colorado WID Procedures [no mud, no plants, no water, and no mussels] the movement of New Zealand mudsnails on watercraft can be stopped by following the WID procedures, and educating anglers. If boaters and anglers practice Clean, Drain, Dry, the movement of invasives can be stopped! Wader cleaning stations are an effective tool available for containment of NZMS that is currently being used in western states and evaluated for use in Colorado. Angler Recommendations (for those with no boats): Keep all angling gear free of mud, plants, and organic debris in between each and every use. Unknowingly moving a species from one body of water to another, even within different stretches of the same river, can start a domino effect of invasion, causing irreversible ecological damage. It is especially important to keep waders clean. Anglers should scrub the bottom of boots or waders with a brush and remove all mud, plants, and organic materials in between each and every use. Anglers should then perform ONE of the following options before going into the next body of water: 39 �OPTION 1 - Spray or soak waders and gear with 140º Fahrenheit water for at least 10 minutes. OPTION 2 - Place waders and boots in a freezer overnight between uses. OPTION 3 - Dry your waders and equipment completely for a minimum of 10 days between use. OPTION 4 - Submerge waders and gear in a large tub filled with a mixture of 6 ounces per gallon quaternary ammonia-based institutional cleaner (such as Super HDQ Neutral) and water for at least 10 minutes, scrubbing debris from the gear, and visually inspecting the gear for snails before rinsing. Follow all precautionary label instructions! Rinse water must be from a New Zealand mudsnail-free source (to avoid reinfection), and the chemical bath must be properly disposed of, away from the water body. WID Procedures for NZMS Containment: • High risk exit inspection focusing on the exterior of the boat and any mud or algae on the hull or trailer, carpeted areas, intakes and compartments that may hold standing water. • If NZMS are discovered, remove snails by hand if possible and perform a full decontamination exposing the snails to 140º Fahrenheit water for at least 10 minutes. 40 �OTHER ANS CONTAINMENT – RUSTY CRAYFISH Rusty crayfish are native to the Ohio River Basin. They were most likely introduced as bait or illegally stocked as prey for fish. These crayfish eat small fish, insects, and fish eggs. They also eat aquatic vegetation, damaging underwater habitat important for fish spawning, cover, and food. They are very aggressive and displace or eliminate native crayfish. Invasive crayfish can have inordinately large effects on native aquatic species due to their complex role in food webs as prey and their polytrophic feeding habits (Kerby et al., 2005; Usio et al., 2006; Ilheu et al., 2007). Because crayfish are generally larger, longer lived, and more mobile than most other invertebrates in a given ecosystem, these crustaceans can greatly affect the systems they inhabit (Lorman and Magnuson, 1978; Momot, 1995). The rusty crayfish was believed to be established in only one site west of the Continental Divide in Washington (Olden et al., 2009), however, rusty crayfish now occur in the upper Yampa River within and below Catamount Reservoir (2009), in Sanchez Reservoir (2010) and in Stagecoach Reservoir (2011). A trained boat inspector discovered the population of rusty crayfish at Sanchez Reservoir State Wildlife Area. It is common for boat inspectors to see crayfish being used as bait, harvested for bait or harvested for human consumption. Rapid response to rusty crayfish in Colorado included a regulation to prohibit the live transport of invasive crayfish: • Live transport of crayfish west of the Continental Divide is prohibited. All crayfish caught west of the Continental Divide must be immediately killed by removing the head from the thorax and taken into possession, or immediately returned to the water from which they were taken. • The CPW has issued an order that prevents the transport of any live crayfish from Sanchez Reservoir SWA. WID Procedures for Rusty Crayfish Containment: • Always ask about live aquatic bait when performing entrance and exit inspections, even if the boater has a green seal and receipt. • If crayfish are discovered during an inspection, ask for a receipt and follow bait procedures. 41 �OTHER ANS CONTAINMENT - WATERFLEAS Spiny and fishhook waterfleas are small predacious crustaceans that are zooplankton. Similar to ZQM, both arrived in ship’s ballast water from Eurasia. Waterfleas can reproduce sexually or asexually. They can spread to inland waters when recreational gear is contaminated with egg-laden females. When females die out of water, under certain conditions they produce eggs that resist freezing and drying, and can remain viable. Laid eggs in the benthic zone of lake or reservoir can remain viable for years and hatch when conditions are optimal. Under certain conditions, waterfleas can establish a new generation within two weeks. Eradicating established infestations is impossible. Presently, the best defense against waterfleas is to prevent their transfer to new waterbodies through the current WID procedures. Waterflea eggs and adults can get into bilge water, bait buckets, live wells and coat fishing lines when boating or fishing in infested waters. WID Procedures for Waterflea Containment: • High risk inspection, with a focus on equipment, fishing tackle and nets; and remove any visible plants or animals. • Drain water from all compartments and motor/engines. • Standing water decontamination for compartments that cannot drained (e.g. ballast). • Bait treatment for live aquatic bait, if applicable. • Full decontamination of boat and equipment if waterflea or other ANS are found on the watercraft or trailer. 42 �CONCLUSION In an effort to protect Colorado and regional water bodies, implementation of containment WID procedures to stop the spread of ANS is among the highest priority of the Colorado Invasive Species and ANS Programs. This document not only outlines Colorado’s containment strategy, but is intended to provide options to other managers seeking to respond rapidly to a verified detection and stop the spread of ANS overland on watercraft. Managers should consider the options outlined in the Infested Waters Containment Spectrum and Geographic Approach when implementing WID at infested waters with minimal resources. A comprehensive WID containment program should include entrance and exit inspections on trailered, motorized watercraft. A complementary strong education and information campaign is a high priority for prevention and containment. Monitoring and enforcement are also crucial portions of implementing any WID program. When conducting exit inspections at positive or infested waters, there are five key points for managers and inspectors at containment locations to remember: 1. All boats exiting need to have a high risk inspection. 2. All boats exiting need to be fully drained. 3. If the boater is not returning or is unsure where they are going next, A quagga mussel infested gimbal unit then a standing water decontamination is required for motors and engines, and compartments that cannot be drained (e.g. ballast tank, I/O, Inboards, etc.). 4. If adult mussels are found attached to a boat, a full decontamination is required. 5. A green seal and receipt must be applied to all boats leaving containment locations, in addition to being documented on the WID Activity Log or Data Collectors. With growing regional and national communication, support and partnerships, the future of zebra and quagga mussel containment and prevention in the West continues to evolve and shows promise for a coordinated future strategy. 43 �This page left intentionally blank. 44 �Colorado Parks & Wildlife Invasive Species Program – A.N.S. 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80020 Program Office: 303-291-7295 Fax: 303-291-7104 Elizabeth Brown Invasive Species Coordinator Elizabeth.Brown@state.co.us 45 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Containment manual for watercraft inspection and decontamination stations Description An account of the resource The State of Colorado has implemented a partnership based, multi-jurisdictional, mandatory watercraft inspection and decontamination program to prevent the spread of Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS). The purpose of the State of Colorado Containment Manual for Watercraft Inspection and Decontamination Stations (Manual) is to provide standard containment protocols across jurisdictions within Colorado, and potentially across the West. This Manual details the watercraft inspection and decontamination (WID) containment procedures to contain and prevent the overland spread of aquatic nuisance species. These procedures apply to all aquatic nuisance species, both plant and animal, but are strongly focused on zebra and quagga mussels (ZQM). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Colorado Parks & Wildlife Subject The topic of the resource Aquatic nuisance species ANS Boating Inspections Zebra mussels Quagga mussels Extent The size or duration of the resource. 46 pages Date Created Date of creation of the resource. Updated 2013-09 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Colorado Parks and Wildlife https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/83876152e1c0789022d01c0c2c2f5865.pdf 7063a66b8879d187bd40ad9b23521b14 PDF Text Text � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">In Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Permitted</a> Illustration by Helen Zane Jensen ©2008 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Documents Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Boreal toad coloring page Subject The topic of the resource Boreal toad Wildlife Education Extent The size or duration of the resource. 1 page Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2008 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-NC/1.0/">No Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Only</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource English Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Colorado Parks & Wildlife Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Colorado Parks and Wildlife