Introducción
El desarrollo a lo largo del río Big Wood (BWR) ha reducido drásticamente la función hidrológica normal del río y ha dañado su hábitat para los peces y la vida silvestre. Los álamos, sauces y otra vegetación nativa y los restos de madera que dieron nombre al río han sido eliminados del río, eliminando la sombra y reduciendo el hábitat. Más de la mitad del río Big Wood desde el límite del Área Recreativa Nacional Sawtooth hasta Stanton Crossing está desconectado de su llanura aluvial. Más del 40% de las orillas del río en áreas desarrolladas han sido blindadas con escollera para proteger las propiedades. Los estudios a continuación muestran que el endurecimiento de los bancos con escollera y la desconexión de la llanura aluvial del BWR es el factor limitante más severo en la reducción de la supervivencia y productividad de las poblaciones de truchas. Esto ha tenido el efecto de aumentar la velocidad del río, alterar el proceso de canalización natural, alterar el transporte y disposición normal de sedimentos e impedir que el río acceda a su llanura de inundación normal, aumentando el potencial de daños por inundaciones. El desarrollo y los incendios forestales también han impactado negativamente al río y sus afluentes, contaminándolo e impidiendo que los peces accedan a sus históricas zonas de desove. Por último, el aumento de las extracciones de agua y las recientes condiciones de sequía han reducido los caudales de verano y han aumentado la temperatura del agua. El BWR es un activo maravilloso para nuestro valle, pero su salud se ha visto gravemente afectada. Necesitamos arreglarlo.
Los resultados esperados de cualquier esfuerzo importante de restauración deben verse atenuados por el reconocimiento de las limitaciones humanas (residencias, caminos, puentes, desvíos de riego y otras infraestructuras) impuestas al BWR por los asentamientos humanos en el valle. Pero aunque nunca podremos restaurar el BWR a la condición prístina que tenía antes de que los humanos viniéramos a disfrutar de este hermoso valle, los estudios recientes indican que hay mucho que podemos hacer para aliviar el daño que le hemos causado al río en términos de restaurar su hidrología natural y hábitat para las truchas y otros animales salvajes y mitigar el mayor riesgo de daños por inundaciones.
Reports and Publications Library
Click on the subject below to view all related publications regarding the health of the Big Wood watershed, and what can be done to mitigate flood damage, provide fish and wildlife habitat, and support natural stream processes:
Fisheries and Aquatic Ecology
Fisheries and aquatic ecology assessments examine status and trends of food webs, biologic health, and factors limiting aquatic resources in the Big Wood basin. Fishery assessments give us information on population trends and species distribution, and examine constraints such as available spawning habitat, habitat preferences, and culvert barriers. Aquatic ecology is an umbrella term that describes the relationship between components of the food web. Primary producers such as algae and diatoms are an integral part of the riverine ecosystem. They can be thought of as the first and most important step in the food chain. Along with decomposers, they make up the base of a food web and together their populations number more than any other part of the web. Primary producers are consumed by primary consumers (macroinvertebrates), which are then consumed by secondary consumers (fish) and so on. Organisms at the top of the chain eventually die and are then consumed by decomposers, which fix the nitrogen levels and provide the organic material necessary for the next generation of primary producers. Evaluating relationships between nutrients, primary producers, macroinvertebrates, and fish, can indicate degradation and or pollution within the Big Wood basin.
Effects of Stream Alterations on Rainbow Trout in the Big Wood River, Idaho, Russell F. Thurow, Fisheries Research Biologist, Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game, 1988.
Thurow’s short (13 pages) study primarily focused on the river as a trout fishery. It relied on surveys researchers from the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) performed at seven reaches above Magic Reservoir, including electrofishing and snorkeling. The study found that, while the BWR “may be a shadow of its former fishery”, it still had a respectable wild rainbow population with growth rates comparable to the Henry’s Fork and Silver Creek. A significant finding was that unaltered reaches contained 8 to 10 times the fish densities of stretches where rock revetments (riprap) had been installed and/or cover and woody debris had been removed. The study recommended restricting further stream alterations (especially riprap which destroy fish habitat diversity and “create adverse hydraulic impacts”), maintaining riparian buffer zones and restoring channel stability and “natural floodway overflow channels”, but did not suggest specific projects. The study concludes that the future of fish populations in the BWR will be dependent on our ability to: (1) halt the continued, insidious loss of habitat and (2) restore degraded areas.
Idaho Department of Fish and Game Fisheries Management Annual Report, Magic Valley Region, Joe Thiesen, Mike Peterson, Morgan Cooper, Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game, 2020.
The Big Wood River is monitored as part of a triennial survey design at the three
uppermost regulation boundaries in the Big Wood River. Local angling constituents and the contentious regulatory history make long-term monitoring on the Big Wood River important for evaluating population trends and ensuring the current fishing regulations are meeting the intended fishery management objectives and producing the desired fishery. The objective of the evaluation was to continue the trend monitoring efforts and to estimate Rainbow Trout, Brown Trout, Brook Trout, and Mountain Whitefish populations to inform management decisions.
Trend monitoring was conducted via electro fishing and mark/recapture population estimates. Collectively, 1,935 fish were collected in the Big Wood River during the mark and
recapture runs in 2018. The mean total length for all trout and Mountain Whitefish in the Big Wood River was 238 (± 4; 90% CI) and 304 mm (± 19), respectively. Species composition consisted of 88% Rainbow Trout, 6% Brown Trout, 5% Mountain Whitefish, and 1% Brook Trout. Total trout (≥ 100 mm) abundance for the Big Wood River was estimated at
1,736 Rainbow Trout/km. Mountain Whitefish (≥ 100 mm) abundance for the Big Wood
River was estimated at 127 Mountain White Fish/km. Collectively, the wild rainbow trout population for the Big Wood River appears to be stable, despite slight increases in growth rates and densities compared to previous estimates. Brown Trout density and range increased throughout the drainage in 2018 compared to all previous estimates. Simultaneous declines in Mountain Whitefish and Brook Trout were observed in 2018 as well.
Big Wood Fishery Assessment, Wood River Land Trust, May 23, 2005.
This assessment by a staff member of the Wood River Land Trust (WRLT) used existing studies and research to identify the factors that limited the health and productivity of the BWR, noting the “vital role” the river has “in our vibrant local economy”. The report describes the history and ecology of the river, the role of its floodplain and the river’s normal hydraulic process and the importance of large woody debris as a component of trout habitat and healthy river function. The assessment suggests the following steps: (1) educating the public and policy makers on the value of the floodplain and factors influencing fish habitat, (2) restoration measures between the Glendale Diversion and the North Fork (specifically mentioning re-vegetation of banks, use of anchored woody debris and monitoring) and (3) adoption of local ordinances and state laws to regulate development of the floodplain, specifically with regard to buffer zones, steps to maintain “natural sheet flooding across the floodplain”, alternatives to riprap, requiring river and bank restoration as part of the subdivision approval process and limiting water withdrawals. The assessment recommended further studies.
Status and Population Characteristics of Wood River Sculpin Idaho, 2007, and Distribution, Abundance, and Generic Population Structure of Wood River Sculpin, Cottus Leiopomus, 2008, IDFG.
These studies report on the distribution of Wood River Sculpin, one of eight sculpin species in Idaho. It is unique to the BWR, Little Wood and Camus Creek. The studies indicate that while these fish (a favorite trout food) are only plentiful in certain areas, “abundance has not been reduced to a critical level”.
Aquatic Biological Communities and Associated Habitats at Selected Sites in the Big Wood Watershed, South Central Idaho, Dorene E. MacCoy, Terry M. Short, USGS, 2014.
This assessment was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with Blaine County, Trout Unlimited, the Nature Conservancy, and the Wood River Land Trust to help identify the status of aquatic resources at selected locations in the watershed. Information in this report provides a basis with which to evaluate and monitor the long-term health of the Big Wood River and its major tributaries. To date, this assessment most thoroughly describes food web conditions present, by evaluating a suite of parameters including nutrients, macroinvertebrates, fish, and algal biomass. Below are some key takeaways from the publication:
-
Annual average daily discharge increased from the Big Wood River near Ketchum, ID downstream to the Big Wood River at Hailey, ID, but decreased by nearly 50 percent from Hailey downstream to the Big Wood River at Stanton Crossing near Bellevue, ID
-
Macroinvertebrate community diversity was high at all sites except for Stanton’s Crossing, where low community diversity was attributed to low species richness and high abundances of a few tolerant taxa. Species richness is simply the number of species in a community. Species diversity is more complex, and includes a measure of the number of species in a community, and a measure of the abundance of each species.
-
The State of Idaho maximum temperature criteria for protection of cold-water aquatic life of 22 °C was exceeded at Warm Springs and Stanton’s Crossing during summer 2014, but at none of the other main-stem or tributary sites. The 13 °C critical temperature criterion for salmonid spawning was exceeded in early July 2014 at Ketchum and Hailey near the end of the rainbow trout critical spawning and rearing period.
-
Native rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Wood River sculpin (Cottus leiopomus) were the dominant fish species in the drainage and were found at all tributary and main-stem sites. Non-native brown (Salmo trutta) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) were limited to lower drainage sites on the Big Wood River, and occurred in relatively low numbers.
-
Groundwater contributes greater than 85 percent of the total flow during late summer, when streamflow is typically at its lowest and when conditions are often most stressful to aquatic organisms. Groundwater discharge is particularly important in moderating stream temperature extremes, which is critical to maintaining a cold-water fishery in the Big Wood River.
Big Wood River Watershed Management Plan: TMDL Five-Year Review, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, 2017.
This 5-year review of the Big Wood River subbasin assessment and total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) addresses the water bodies in the Big Wood River subbasin (hydrologic unit code 17040219) that are in Category 4a of the most recent Integrated Report (DEQ 2014a). This 5-year review describes current water quality status, pollutant sources, and recent pollution control efforts in the Big Wood River subbasin. Water bodies identified in Category 4a of the most recent Integrated Report (DEQ 2014) have approved TMDLs for various pollutants including total phosphorus (TP), bacteria (Escherichia coli), sediment (sedimentation/siltation), total suspended solids (TSS), and temperature.
Water quality conditions, in the affected assessment units of the Big Wood River subbasin, have improved in some areas, stayed the same in other areas, and have degraded in a limited area. Improvement limitations have also been exacerbated by recent wildfire activity. TSS and TP levels remain high in spring months in the Big Wood River assessment units, as well as in several tributary watersheds. Most notable are watersheds affected by recent wildfire activity including Warm Springs, Greenhorn, and Croy Creeks. Eagle Creek and Lake Creek watersheds appear to have water quality problems unrelated to the TMDL pollutants of sediment and phosphorus. These watersheds have low levels of these pollutants, yet also have failing bio-assessment scores. Further investigation is needed to determine if the problem is related to other pollutants or simply a lack of water for sufficient stream biology. Additionally, the assessment units that make up the Seamans Creek watershed need to be investigated further. The hydrography of these assessment units appears to be inaccurate in several locations. Hydrologic connections are either lacking or need to be redrawn to show where water flows presently.
See table below for common violation parameters and TMDL load targets in the Big Wood River:
Stream crossings by roads pose a serious threat to aquatic ecosystems. Improperly designed culverts and fords can block fish passage to valuable spawning and rearing habitat and be a chronic sediment source. Crossing failures can cause downstream impacts from dam-break floods and channel scour. To assess these threats, the Sawtooth National Forest completed a road fish passage assessment in 2003 and 2004. The purpose of this assessment was to better describe the extent of culvert barriers across the forest to fish species, evaluate threats to water quality from undersized culverts or poorly designed crossings, and prioritize culverts for replacement.
The findings from this assessment indicate that over twenty passage barriers exist, disconnecting nearly thirty miles of viable trout habitat. A number of culvert replacement opportunities exist, particularly in Baker Creek and North Fork Big Wood River.
Fish Passage at Road Crossings Assessment: Sawtooth National Forest, John C. Chatel, USFS, 2004
Quality of Groundwater and Surface Water, Wood River Valley, South-Central Idaho, Candice B. Hopkins and James R. Bartolino, USGS, 2012
Residents and resource managers of the Wood River Valley are concerned about the effects that population growth and development might have on the quality of groundwater and surface water quality. As part of a multi-phase assessment of the groundwater resources in the study area, the U.S. Geological Survey evaluated the quality of water at 45 groundwater and 5 surface-water sites throughout the Wood River Valley during July and August 2012. Water samples were analyzed for field parameters (temperature, pH, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, and alkalinity), major ions, boron, iron, manganese, nutrients, and Escherichia coli (E coli) and total coliform bacteria.
This study was conducted to determine baseline water quality throughout the Wood River Valley, with special emphasis on nutrient concentrations. Water quality in most samples collected did not exceed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards for drinking water. E. coli bacteria, used as indicators of water quality, were detected in all five surface-water samples and in two groundwater samples collected.
Genetic Analysis of Rainbow Trout from the Big Wood River and Trail Creek, R.N. Williams and D.K. Shiozawa, IDFG, 1993
This report used genetic analyses to determine the genetic and taxonomic status of two naturally occurring trout populations: Lower Big Wood River and Trail Creek. The objective of the study was to 1) determine if either the Lower Big Wood River or Trail Creek populations could be identified as native interior rainbow trout, and 2) determine if genetic characteristics of hatchery rainbow trout (primarily of coastal origin), westslope cutthroat trout, or yellowstone cutthroat trout, were present in the sample populations.
The Lower Big Wood and Upper Big Wood populations did not differ significantly, and can be considered a single interbreeding population that has both non-native coastal and native interior genetic components. The Trail Creek specimens revealed both coastal and interior components, although 88% exhibited interior rainbow trout haplotypes. Interestingly, a unique and additional rainbow trout haplotype was detected in half of the Trail Creek specimens.
Geomorphic
Rivers are constantly changing as they interact with the surrounding landscape. The influence of climate, geology, biota (such as riparian zones and beaver) dictate the character of a river. But, the dynamic nature of these interactions means that rivers and their surroundings are both constantly changing as they adjust to new conditions. These changing conditions can have big consequences for all aspects of the Big Wood River ecosystem, and our community.
Geomorphic assessments are the foundation of interdisciplinary, process-based approaches to restoration and river engineering. Through on-the-ground (or water) surveys and analysis of geospatial data, geomorphic assessments help to identify the underlying causes of river related problems such as habitat degradation or flooding/erosion and helps develop holistic approaches to solve them. These assessments can help address questions related to channel evolution, developing sediment and wood budgets, or quantify habitat conditions and support varying projects and recommendations.
Final Geomorphic Assessment Report, Big Wood River, Blaine County, Idaho, Biota Research and Consulting, Inc., 2016.
This major study commissioned by Trout Unlimited (TU) along with WRLT, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and others, describes the functioning and impaired channel conditions in the main stem of the BWR from the North Fork (which enters the BWR at the Sawtooth National Recreation Area (SNRA)) to Magic Reservoir. Measurements were taken in each reach studied of the geomorphic conditions (channel width, bankfull depth, sinuosity, stream erosion rate, channel type, etc.) and each reach is rated in terms of Sediment Transport Capacity, Lateral Stability, Vertical Stability, Channel Enlargement Potential and Sediment Supply. The study found that sections of the river have experienced “various degrees of morphologic impairment” that have adversely affected sediment movement, lateral channel stability and aquatic ecosystems, and recommends 13 design guidelines designed to reduce highly entrenched channels, reduce sediment input and improve sediment transport, increase lateral channel stability, enhance trout habitat, reduce flood hazard and maximize ecological and recreational values. The study then goes on to specify various approaches that can be utilized throughout the river to improve “flood attenuation” and thereby reduce flood hazard, improve the continuity of sediment movement, increase channel stability and reduce bank erosion, including improving functional channel geometry, utilizing wood revetment bank stabilization techniques instead of riprap, installing rock stabilization with willow bundles where suitable, floodplain improvements, grade control by constructing “hardened riffles” and installing “rock cross vane treatments” to promote scowl pools for energy dissipation and depth and turbulence cover for fish, and establishing set-back requirements for new development. The report does not recommend any particular projects, but identifies seven sections of the river as “conservation opportunities” where restoration measures should be prioritized:
-
3500 ft. above and below Fox Creek Bridge (Exh 98)
-
6000 ft. (the “Training Channel Reach”) starting at Glassford Heights to below the pedestrian bridge at Lake Creek (Exh 99)
-
8000 ft (the “Highway 75 Reach”) from above Sheep’s Bridge to Red Cliffs (Exh 100)
-
7000 ft. from Gimlet to above the East Fork Bridge (Exh 101)
-
27,000 ft. from below Golden Eagle to below the Deer Creek Bridge (Exh 102)
-
4000 ft. below the Bullion Bridge (Exh 103)
-
22,000 ft from above Colorado Gulch Rd in Hailey to below the lower Broadford Road Bridge in Bellevue (Exhs 104 and 105)
The study concludes with the recommendation that specific river treatments should be applied “in concert to address underlying causes of fluvial system instability” as opposed to applying “the typical Band-Aid approach” of addressing only the “symptoms of system degradation”.
Big Wood River Atlas, Cardno and Ecosystem Sciences (Cardno), 2020
This major study, which was commissioned by Blaine County and covers the 42 miles from the SNRA to Stanton Crossing, was designed to accomplish five objectives:
-
Build community trust and collaboration over river management issues
-
Understand historic and current processes
-
Develop a flood risk management framework that supports the connectivity of floodplains
-
Develop a decision-making framework to identify and evaluate projects that work to restore natural river processes, and encourage aquatic habitat formation
-
Assist river managers with identifying best management practices for development within the river
The study points out that, as a trout fishery, the BWR is “ a significant contributor to the economic health of the valley”. The most critical factor limiting the trout population is the amount and quality of fish habitat, with trout densities in unaltered reaches 8 to 10 times greater than altered reaches (cover impaired or having rock revetments). The study emphasizes the importance of large woody debris in providing good habitat for trout and improving the river’s hydrology. Large stable log jams played a major role in the development and maintenance of the pre-development “anastomosing” channel system described in the Rapp study. This type of channel system is more resilient to disturbances such as flood, fire and large sediment events and creates a more complex mosaic of habitat types that support fish. The study recommends reintroducing large wood to the river but only after proper geomorphic and engineering analysis (see Appendix A). Other factors noted in the study as influencing channel form behavior and habitat are (a) sedimentation, (b) riparian vegetation (which reduces the risk of flood, erosion and bank failure and improves aquatic habitat and water quality), and (3) rock revetments or “riprap” (which adversely affects stream morphology, degrades fish populations and exacerbates flooding and erosion). The study recommends removal of riprap where deemed not critical, modification of existing riprap to achieve greater hydraulic complexity and limiting construction of new riprap, warning that riprap “does not eliminate the potential of an area to be re-captured by the river or be subject to future bank loss.” In terms of steps to be taken to maintain and restore the river, the study recommends projects in the following priority:
-
Protect remaining intact functional floodplain through acquisition, easements or legislation
-
Reconnect channels where evidence shows that removing confinements such as riprap and levees would open up “prior channel occupation”
-
Reconnect floodplain processes in areas where development has encroached into the floodplain and embankments have been constructed restricting access to the floodplain
-
Restore riparian vegetation where it has been removed or modified to the point of compromised function
-
Use flood fence and engineered LWD [large woody debris] jams to stabilize “dynamic channel planform” (control sediment in a way that reduces flooding and channel erosion while improving habitat)
Read more about the findings from the River Atlas
Geomorphic Assessment of the Big Wood River, Cynthia Rapp, 2006
This study prepared for the WRLT describes the transformation of the BWR due to development from “a dominantly anastomosing [a pattern of multiple channels with forested floodplain in between] and meandering system” to a system with a combination of (a) braided channels [multiple channels with bare bars] (49%), (b) straight/sinuous channel patterns (36%), and (3) limited remaining meandering sections (16%). Channels have become more “entrenched” meaning they are restricted with higher flow velocities and limited access to the river’s natural floodplain. Entrenchment increases flood risk. The study advises that bank hardening activities (e.g., riprap) “do not provide a long-term solution posed by flood and erosion hazards'', but actually contribute to the problem. The study makes no specific recommendations for renovation projects, but recommends additional studies on channel erosion tendencies, sediment inputs/production, aquatic and riparian habitat and so forth. It does suggest that preserving and restoring straight and sensuous reaches that are not entrenched, have intact riparian cover and connect other braided or meandering sections may provide “the greatest biological benefit for the lowest cost”. Examples include reaches 13 (downstream of Starweather Bridge), 22 and 23 (near Colorado Gulch Bridge). It also suggests the use of engineered log jams in braided sections to enhance long-term sediment storage and multiple channel development and in other sections to reconnect the river to secondary channels that could be active during high flows.
Hydrology
When asked about factors limiting the quality of the fishery in the Big Wood, our friend Scott Schnebly from Lost River Outfitters in Ketchum says, “just add water”. This region has a contentious past regarding water usage. The upper valley relies heavily on water for domestic and recreational uses. Agriculture and ranching practices in the Bellevue Triangle require millions of gallons of water to produce food for the region. Evaluating how and where water goes is an important component to understanding why the river periodically runs dry near Bellevue, and what can be done to preserve water for fish, wildlife, and the community.
Ground-Water Budgets for the Wood River Valley Aquifer System, South-Central Idaho, 1995-2004, James R. Bartolino, USGS, 2009
This report describes the development of ground-water budgets for the Wood River Valley aquifer system for the 10-year period 1995–2004, as well as for a wet year (1995), and a dry year (2001) within that period. The report also includes discussions of the issue of the sustainability of the ground-water resource in the study area, how the findings of the current study can be applied, and offers suggestions for future data collection aimed at reducing uncertainties in the ground-water budget.
The individual components in the wet and dry year ground-water budgets responded in a consistent manner to changes in precipitation and temperature. Although the ground-water budgets for the three periods in the study indicated that ground-water storage is replenished in wet years, statistical analyses by Skinner and others (2007) suggest that such replenishment is not complete and over the long term more water is removed from storage than is replaced. In other words, despite restoration of water to ground-water storage in wet years, changes have occurred in either recharge and (or) discharge to cause ground-water storage to decline over time. Such changes may include, but are not limited to: lining or abandoning canals and ditches, conversion of surface-water irrigation rights to ground-water rights, changes in location of diversion points, changes in irrigation method and efficiency, increased consumptive use by evaporation or evapotranspiration, and long- or short-term climatic change. Most urban land uses in the Wood River Valley generally are estimated to have slightly less consumptive water use than agricultural uses. However, many other factors influence the ultimate effects of the conversion of agricultural land to urban uses and may have greater effects on the aquifer system by the redistribution or reduction of recharge.
Stream Seepage and Groundwater Levels, Wood River Valley, South-Central Idaho, James R. Bartolino, USGS, 2012
This report describes a seepage investigation of streams and canals in the Wood River Valley and groundwater levels and water-level changes in the Wood River Valley aquifer
system for inclusion in a groundwater-flow model. Stream discharge measurements for the seepage investigation were made in August 2012, October 2012, and March 2013.
Supplemental discharge measurements made during the seepage investigation are included. Water-level measurements were made in selected wells during October 2012 and then
compared to measurements made in the same wells during October 2006.
The Wood River Valley aquifer system is composed of a single unconfined aquifer that underlies the entire valley, an underlying confined aquifer that is present only in the southern
Bellevue fan, and the confining unit separating the two aquifers. Although the confined aquifer may not receive direct recharge from precipitation or streams, groundwater withdrawal from the confined aquifer induces flow from the unconfined aquifer. Declines in the confined aquifer are likely due to groundwater withdrawals and declines in the water table of the unconfined
aquifer. A statistical analysis of five long-term monitoring wells (three completed in the unconfined aquifer, one in the confined aquifer, and one outside the aquifer system boundary)
showed statistically significant declining trends in four wells.
Socio-Economics
The term "ecosystem services" is used to describe the outputs of natural systems from which humans may derive benefit. River ecosystems, for example, incorporate numerous natural processes, structures, and functions that lead to the output of ecosystem services that people value—fishing, clean water, flood control, aesthetics. Ecosystem services are generally categorized as either regulating services (e.g., disturbance regulation such as flood control), provisioning services (e.g., goods such as food or timber), or cultural services. Because the livelihood of the Wood River Valley is contingent upon tourism, quantifying the monetary benefit of the river is particularly important to recognize and evaluate.
Preliminary Estimates of the Economic Effects of Stream Restoration on the Big Wood Valley, Idaho, Philip S. Cook and Dennis R. Becker of the University Idaho College of Natural Resources, 2016
This study estimated the economic effect of restoring the BWR to “its historic vibrant fishery”. It focused solely on the increased number of days non-resident anglers would spend fishing on the river once restored. The proposed “restoration treatments” were those proposed by Biota in its 2015 study for seven reaches in and around Fox Creek, Hulen Meadows, Hospital Bridge, East Fork, Deer Creek, downstream of Bullion St. Bridge, Colorado Gulch and lower Broadford Rd Bridge, assumed to cost $15 million. It estimates that improved fishing alone would increase non-resident angler spending by $69,000 in year 1 to almost $1.3 million in years 15-20. The benefits from reduced flood risk, improved water quality and increased aesthetic appeal were not considered, nor was the benefit to resident anglers.