The BLM conducted two public meetings in Rio Blanco County this week, with a third virtual meeting set for Wednesday after press time, regarding the Wolf Creek Reservoir projects. Key findings from the Situational Assessment were shared.
RBC | The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) conducted two public meetings in Rio Blanco County this week to present the findings of a Situation Assessment Report prepared by The Langdon Group. The Langdon Group serves as the BLM’s designated “neutral facilitator” for the Rio Blanco Water Conservancy District’s (RBWCD) and a federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) permitting process.
Meetings held in person Monday and Tuesday, and a virtual meeting held Wednesday after press time, were part of the ongoing preparation and planning stage of the NEPA process, which will include further research and data collection to gauge public sentiments and opinions regarding the project. The BLM defines a Situational Assessment as a method to identify relevant stakeholders, listen to their perspectives, address their concerns, and seek their advice.
The Langdon Group drafted the report following more than 70 discussions with individuals and groups earlier this year. It includes information about general public perceptions, as well as practical steps the district and participating entities can use to reach residents in the future. Topics, questions, concerns and key points noted in the report include:
– Evaporative Loss: potential for evaporative loss of water from the proposed reservoir, and whether this loss has been quantified and considered in the project
– Alternatives: alternative methods of water storage, such as underground storage and infiltration galleries, and whether these alternatives are being explored.
– Dredging and Sediment: the maintenance and dredging of existing reservoirs and how sediment management is addressed in the project proposal.
– Public access: how the public will access the reservoir and whether access points have been identified, particularly in relation to highways.
– Power generation: whether the reservoir project includes plans for hydro electric power generation
– Power consumption and cost: what the logistics of pumping large quantities for extended periods of time of water will be, how much will it cost?
– Timeline and details: Requests for information regarding the timeline for providing more detailed project plans and the schedule for addressing community concerns
– Water Rights: questions about water rights and the complexities surrounding them, seeking clarification on how these rights will be managed
– District transparency/access: problems with addressing constituent complaints who want the board activities and information to be more easily accessible
DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT AND SAFETY
For operations as small retail transactions to those with regional and even national significance as a 66K acre-foot reservoir, businesses and public entities alike need to practice consistent file management and security methods to maintain transparency and protect sensitive information. Best case scenario for these kinds of efforts include practices like version/access control, clear archiving and retention policies, and a user-friendly experience for any constituent (young or old) attempting to access information.
Due to a large theft of funds that were recently recovered, Rio Blanco White River Conservancy District staff say they’ve taken new security measures with their investment bankers. In the broader context of transparency, the RBWCD board of directors are asked regularly to consider improving access to meeting minutes and agendas by uploading them somewhere, adding in a single phone to meetings to allow a call-ins for those who need accommodation.The the group has discussed modernizing these practices but hasn’t done so as an official agenda item.
ENGAGEMENT
Moving on from public perceptions about the project, the meeting focused on how public entities like the Rio Blanco Water Conservancy District and other entities can engage community members in processes like providing feedback for major capital expenditure projects and grant application work, among others. A note was made specifically about how Tribal communities whose ancestors were indigenous to the area where the proposed reservoir would sit need to be given the ability to view the area as part of this ongoing engagement process.
METHODOLOGY
The Langdon Group spent time Tuesday further detailing the way they reached their conclusions. They note that they conducted 73 conversational interviews between March 13 and April 7, and have identified at least 31 more interviewees to help flesh out the ultimate goal of getting a good cross section of the community.
The Langdon Group’s conclusions drawn regarding public perceptions may be looked at as valuable insights, but Langdon representatives reiterated these findings do not show a representative sample or a formal vote on support or opposition to the proposed Wolf Creek Reservoir, though they could offer good insight into trends and developments.
WOLF CREEK INFO:
https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2021544/510)
DOCUMENTS:
