3 April 2012Allie ScholanMegan CondonMic BugoshAaron Cholewa

NFCLPW MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES

Alternative 1: Ecologically Focused Management• Synopsis: Focus on ecological health of watershed by

limiting development and preserving areas of high biodiversity and fire danger

• Development:• Minimization of development• RLUP scenario• Encourage conservation

easements• Exclude areas of:

• Potential wolf habitat• Preble’s habitat• High biodiversity • High fire danger

Photo courtesy of The Nature Conservancy

Alternative 1:Ecologically Focused Management

•Fire:• Limit development • RLUP buildout• Support restoration• Restore historic fire regimes• Educate through extension services

•Water:• No expansions• No new projects• Water conservation education• Incentive program

Alternative 1:Ecologically Focused Management • Wildlife:• Development limitations• Reduce fragmentation• Viable wolf habitat

Picture courtesy of High Country News website www.hcn.org

Alternative 2: Integrated Ecosystem Management• Synopsis: Meld of responsible environmental practices and economic pragmatism. • Maintain biodiversity while understanding need of water development and community expansion

• Development:• Responsible development• RLUP scenario• Encourage conservation

easements• Exclude areas of:• Preble’s habitat• High biodiversity

Photo courtesy of govacation.com

Alternative 2: Integrated Ecosystem Management

• Fire:• Minimal restoration• RLUP scenario• Educate through extension services

• Water:• Expansion of Halligan and Seaman

Reservoirs• Conservation education• Incentive program

• Wildlife:• Reduce habitat fragmentation• Development limitations

Alternative 3:Development Focused Management• Synopsis: focus on community and water storage development for a maximum fiscal return

• Development:• Maximum development

• Current zoning• No development limitations • Discourage easements• Suggested zoning change from Open (O) to Estate (E)

• 1 house for every 2.5 acres

Alternative 3:Development Focused Management

• Fire:• Increase municipal fire resources• Revise WUI and CPZ• Fire suppression policy• Education through extension

services

• Water:• Expansion of Halligan and Seaman

Reservoirs• Support new water projects

• NISP

• Wildlife:• Minimum standards as estb. by EIS

or ESA

Management Alternative Comparisons

Management Alternative Comparisons

Ecolog

ically

Focus

ed Mana

gemen

t Alte

rnativ

e

Interg

rated

Ecosy

stem Man

agem

ent Al

terna

tive

Develo

pmnt

Focuse

d Man

agemen

t Alte

rnativ

e0

4,0008,000

12,000

Additional Number of Houses Under Alter-native

Num

ber

of H

ouse

sManagement Comparisons

Management Comparisons

Ecolog

ically

Focuse

d Mana

gemen

t Alte

rnativ

e

Interg

rated

Ecosy

stem Man

agem

ent A

lterna

tive

Develo

pmnt

Focuse

d Man

agem

ent A

lterna

tive

$0$50,000,000

$100,000,000$150,000,000$200,000,000$250,000,000

Value of Ecosystem Services

Management Comparisons

Management Comparisons

 

Ecologically Focused

Management Alternative

Intergrated Ecosystem

Management Alternative

Developmnt Focused

Management Alternative

Number of Acres Available for Development 75,014 109,367 109,552New Acres of Easements Under Alternative 34,538 66,328 0Additional Acres Protected from Future Development 69,152 66,561 0Additional Number of Houses Under Alternative 4,140 8,752 12,217Additional Miles of Road 99 162 1,127Estimated Cost to County $464,427  $435,884   $1,336,534Estimated Value to Colorado Residents for Ecosystem Services

$105,185,310 $201,998,970 0

Management Comparisons

Based on 3 point scale, each row assigned a 1,2,and 3. 1 Worst, 3 Best

Management ComparisonsRating Scale for Determining Which Alternative to Pursue

 Ecologically Focused

Management AlternativeIntergrated Ecosystem

Management AlternativeDevelopmnt Focused

Management AlternativeNumber of Acres Available for Development 1 2 3Max Number of Houses Under Alternative 1 2 3Increased Fire Risk 2 3 1Additional Miles of Roads 3 2 1Connectivity of landscape 3 2 1Aditional Acres Protected from Future Development 3 2 1Estimated Cost to County 2 3 1Value of Ecosystem Services 2 3 1Total 16 17 9

Choosing Alternative #2 Integrated Ecosystem Management Alternative

Preferred Management Alternative:

2Integrated Ecosystem Management