1. Science & Monitoring Team Meeting Sept 23rd

2. Agenda Introductions Overview of CPRW & CO Conservation Exchange Review draft charter/workplan Watershed Analysis – Issues, Questions, and Goals Watershed Analysis – Available Information Follow up tasks/next steps

3. Aim for Meeting Today Identify missing key stakeholders Preliminary list of values and issues Preliminary questions/goals Identify key information gaps (spatial layers, basic research, etc)

4. Overview - Exchange Upper Poudre Watershed pilot criteria/approach for Big T.

5. Overview - CPRW Mission: to improve and maintain the ecological health of the Poudre River Watershed through community collaboration Community watershed plan Implementation informed by stakeholder planning

6. Representation Are we missing anyone?

7. Draft Charter PURPOSE Advise on critical issues, values at risk Recommend goals & objectives Conduct watershed analysis Identify priority areas for treatment Develop monitoring protocols linked to return on investment GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE Upper Poudre Big Thompson

8. Draft Charter PEOPLE Open to anyone Ongoing participation PROCESS Meetings facilitated by CPRW and TNC; meet every 6-8 weeks 80-20 consensus rule

9. Work Plan Watershed Restoration Planning Identify key questions to be addressed through landscape analysis Determine what analyses have already been done Identify necessary data Determine criteria and process for prioritizing restoration areas Develop a plan for monitoring effectiveness of treatments

10. Watershed Analysis – Issues/values Ecosystem services Healthy riverine habitat Upland wildlife habitat Delivery of water supply ? ?? ??? Watershed Issues/threats Wildfires (out of historical range) High fuel loads in forests Insect related tree mortality ? ?? ???

11. Watershed Analysis – Criteria Components that may frame the analytical approach Values at risk – where is important water delivery infrastructure (diversions, lakes, etc) located? Wildfire hazard – if we were to have a fire, where would burn severity be highest due to topography, continuous canopy cover, and fuel loads? Soil erodibility and debris flow – what are the flow paths for sediment and debris were a high-severity wildfire to occur? Feasibility – what areas are accessible based on existing road networks and slopes? Existing treatment areas – where can we leverage the effect of previous treatments? ? ??

12. Key Questions What forested areas are out of their historical range of variation (wildfire)? Are there areas of the watershed that are in their range but have ecosystem services at high risk? (what tod about them?) Is HRV an appropriate criteria? What areas are critical for generating water supply? ?

13. Available Information – Regional & Beyond USFS Condition Framework USFS lands at national scope but analysis of 6 th HUC Classifying ‘functioning properly’ to ‘function impaired’ based on 12 env indicators Upper Monument Creek Sustain important landscape values and ecological function through restoration Landscape, ~70,000 acres Information used: Values at risk, burn probability maps, forest types, Landscape Conservation Forecasting decision support tool Rio Grande, Mokelumne, Latin American Water Funds

14. Available Information – Poudre Watershed JW Associates 2010 Assessment USFS CFLRPCO-WRAPCSFS Action Plan? Goalid & prioritize sixth-level watersheds based upon their hazards to water supplies & collaboration Restore lower- montane forest structure; reduce wildfire hazard; protect communities Identify wildfire risks Conserve working forest landscapes, Protect forests from harm, enhance benefits Spatial scaleupper Poudre WatershedFront Range – USFS lands (A.R. and Pike) Statewide; multi-scalar State-wide spatial layers Info. UsedWildfire Hazard Flooding or Debris Flow Hazard Soil Erodibility Water Supply Ranking >Colorado Watershed Protection Data Refinement Work Group (2009) Forest types, elevational gradients, WUI Forest types, surface fuels, WUI, fire occurrence information LANDFIRE veg Drink. water sources Wildlife (econ & imperiled) Rec WUI Wildfre susceptibility & intensity ……

15. Available Information Examples – Poudre Watershed USFS Fuels Reduction Planning

16. Gaps/constraints/questions What has changed since key analyses were completed? Are there known data gaps/layers? Do we have fine enough spatial resolution to meet our data needs? Can or should we fill gaps/constraints? What approach to use for prioritization? ? ??

17. Next Steps Data team Solicit post-fire ‘task force’ Field tour? Next meeting date  Review feedback, summarize, and share