Where the evidence comes from
These are the reports, public records and studies cited throughout the case. The short labels before each title help you find the same source in the case, County dossier, wildlife record or water analysis.
Public case, legal and water sources
On October 27 the Board approved the standalone 1041 text in Attachment 1.2 with the revisions in Attachment 1.1. It made effectiveness conditional on passage of a separate enacting resolution. As of November 2, 2026, passage of that resolution and the effective date remained unverified. The November 3 agenda concerns the separate land-use rewrite.
1041:S01 Eagle County, published Chapter VI before the October 27, 2026 vote
Chapter VI decision rule, §6.03.10, PDF pp. 16–17. General and water-project standards, §§6.04.01–.02, PDF pp. 19–20. Appendix A, PDF pp. 24–29.
Read the original exhibit pages in the Eagle County 1041 Evidence Dossier.
1041:S02 Eagle County, September 15, 2026 proposed 1041 regulations
September 15 planning-stage text, §§109, 211, 301–331 and 401–434. The Board later approved October 27 Attachment 1.2 with the revisions in Attachment 1.1.
Read the original exhibit pages in the Eagle County 1041 Evidence Dossier.
1041:S03 Eagle County, active application LUR-009633-2026
County application record for LUR-009633-2026. The October 27 Board hearing materials include the staff report and both rule attachments.
1041:S04 Eagle County, September 23 staff report
September 23, pp. 1 and 8. Planning-stage recommendation for coordinating repeal and reenactment. The Board set the separate-resolution trigger on October 27.
1041:S05 Eagle County, July 10 comparison draft
§331 alternatives analysis and §434 least-adverse alternative; compare September replacement. July printed pages are nine less than PDF page numbers.
1041:S06 Colorado Revised Statutes 2026, Title 24
§24-65.1-501(4): compliance and denial. Read with County conditional-approval provisions.
1041:S07 City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners, 895 P.2d 1105
Colo. App. 1994. Homestake II wetlands and nuisance findings, competent evidence, county authority, and retained water rights.
1041:S08 Colorado Springs Utilities, Eagle River Joint Use Water Project
March 2022, pp. 1-2. Broader MOU goals, Whitney storage concepts, tributary collection and pumping to existing Homestake Reservoir.
1041:S09 Homestake Partners, Whitney Reservoir geotechnical investigation application
June 25, 2019. Proposed investigation; alternative dam alignments and exploration/access maps: Technical Report Figure 1 p. 3 / PDF p. 11; Figures 3-5 pp. 6-8 / PDF pp. 14-16.
1041:S10 Save Homestake, public field archive and modeled reservoir comparison
Campaign photographs, films, generalized wildlife locations and testimony. Compare the four modeled reservoir alternatives in the valley explorer; field record updated September 12, 2026.
1041:S11 Save Homestake, the case and valley explorer
Campaign interpretation of the mapped fen complex and modeled reservoir alternatives. Model-based conclusions concern the displayed alternatives and water elevations.
1041:S12 U.S. EPA, Classification and Types of Wetlands: Fens
Groundwater-fed peat systems, characteristic hydrology and vegetation; natural formation can take up to 10,000 years.
1041:S13 33 C.F.R. §332.3(e)(3), compensatory mitigation
Federal rule expressly identifies fens among difficult-to-replace resources and addresses suitable compensation. Corroborates replacement difficulty; County standards provide the local decision rule.
1041:S14 Chimner and Cooper, Mountain Fen Restoration in Colorado: An Overview
2012, International Peat Congress. Restoration evidence and long recovery of peat physical properties. Full paper linked from the publisher record.
1041:S15 Eagle River Community Water Plan, Appendix C
§2.1.2 p. 9: 2020 current-conditions baseline; §2.1.5 p. 11: combined New Water Infrastructure scenario.
1041:S16 Eagle River Community Water Plan, Appendix N: Recreational Water Uses
Table 1 p. 7; methods pp. 9-11; Table 2 p. 16; §6 p. 22. Whitewater boatable-day methods and results.
1041:S17 Eagle River Community Water Plan, Appendix K: Eagle Mine water quality
Methods pp. 4-6; narrative p. 9; Table 12 p. 21; Table 13 p. 22. Mean monthly zinc metrics for 2009-2016.
1041:S18 Eagle River Community Water Plan, main report
Revised October 2024, pp. 22-25 and 68-69. MOU scenario, seasonal effects and additional upper-basin assessment needs. Portal: lotic.quarto.pub/community_water_plan/.
1041:S19 CROA, 2024 Commercial Rafting Use Report
Revised August 13, 2025, PDF p. 8. Upper and Lower Eagle user days and expenditure estimates.
1041:S20 Colorado Parks and Wildlife, July 16, 2026 fishing-closure announcement
Dated notice of full-day voluntary Eagle fishing closure beginning July 17, from Lake Creek to the Colorado confluence; low flows and high temperatures.
1041:S21 Proclamation 10476, Camp Hale-Continental Divide National Monument
October 12, 2022; 87 FR 63381-63392. Ute connections, military landscape and monument protections.
1041:S22 Colorado River District, Shoshone water-rights FAQ
Senior rights and river administration context. Whitney’s supply depends on its governing decrees and applicable operating agreements.
1041:S23 Eagle County, broader land-use-code adoption schedule
Schedule for the separate general land-use code and map proceeding, LUR-009660-2026. November 3 agenda items L.1–2 concern that rewrite.
1041:S26 CNHP, Fen Mapping inventory
Complete September 18 export: 600 features across the query area covering the model. Potential Fen IDs 3033, 3045, 5490 and 5491 intersect one or more modeled alternatives; 3045 and 5491 intersect all four. See the map methods and per-feature overlap register. The calculation uses the older service. A September 23 query of a separate downstream envelope returned 18 older-service features and six Fens 2025 features with different geometries. The services use different mapping methods; correspondence between individual local polygons and the newer inventory classes remains unresolved.
1041:S27 Chadde et al., Peatlands on National Forests of the Northern Rocky Mountains
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-11, 1998. Printed p. 16 / PDF p. 20: flooded sedge fen converted to aquatic vegetation; printed p. 32 / PDF p. 36: hydrology, water-level regulation and off-site disturbance. Pertinent original pages appear in the Eagle County 1041 Evidence Dossier.
Read the original exhibit pages in the Eagle County 1041 Evidence Dossier.
1041:S28 40 C.F.R. §230.41, wetlands effects
§230.41(b) recognizes permanent flooding as a mechanism damaging or destroying wetland habitat and productivity. General technical support for the modeled impact mechanism.
1041:S29 Colorado Springs Utilities, draft full ERMOU development conveyance map
CSU draft map published by Aspen Journalism, July 17, 2019, linked externally. The map section uses original Save Homestake geography from USGS and a schematic of CSU’s 2022 description (S08, p. 1).
1041:S30 CNHP, Colorado Wetlands inventory and complete overlap register
Complete September 18 export: 2,979 features, including Colorado Heritage Program and National Wetlands Inventory sources. Source classes retained; ponds/rivers/lakes separated from mapped wetlands. The complete per-feature overlap register is linked in the web map section.
1041:S31 Save Homestake, complete per-feature flood-zone overlap register
CSV lists every positive-area inventory intersection by alternative, source, feature ID, source classification and modeled area. Companion methods preserve input hashes, dissolved totals and complete-export checks. September 20, 2026 model.
1041:S32 National Research Council, Riparian Areas: Functions and Strategies for Management
2002, chapter 3, printed pp. 149-150. Reduced flows and diversions alter riparian water supply; reduced overall flows can lower water tables and stress vegetation. Supports the downstream harm mechanism.
1041:S33 CNHP / USFS, Inventory of Fens in White River National Forest
July 2025. Executive summary and printed p. 1: sustained saturation, groundwater supply and protection of contributing watersheds. Printed p. 36: disturbed hydrology, peat decomposition and carbon release.
1041:S34 Save Homestake, connected downstream wetlands and source record
Full map, connected wetland inventory and completed mapping methods; October 6, 2026.
1041:S35 Eagle County Board of County Commissioners, October 27 hearing recording
Five motions at 50:23–53:45. The Board approved Attachment 1.2 as revised by Attachment 1.1 and tied effectiveness to passage of a separate resolution. Counsel discussed timing at 54:34.
1041:S36 Eagle County, October 27 hearing package, Attachment 1.2
Base text approved with the changes in Attachment 1.1. The 64-page hearing document covers application materials in Article 3 and permit approval standards in Article 4. Printed page 1 is PDF page 5.
1041:S37 Eagle County, October 27 hearing package, Attachment 1.1
Approved changes to §§105, 109 and 201, PDF pp. 1–2. Section 105(C) gives the two conditions and delayed start of the subdivision, planned unit development and special-use exception. Section 109 expressly includes fens in Waterbody.
1041:S38 Eagle County Board of County Commissioners, November 2 meeting agenda
November 2 working meeting. The agenda and the county recordings reviewed through that date do not identify passage of the separate 1041 enacting resolution.
1041:S39 Eagle County Board of County Commissioners, November 3 meeting agenda
Items L.1–2 scheduled the general land-use rewrite and zoning map, LUR-009660-2026. The October 27 standalone 1041 proceeding was LUR-009633-2026.
1041:S40 Eagle County, October 27 1041 staff report
Staff’s recommended motions, PDF pp. 5–6. The Board’s vote is recorded in the October 27 hearing.
1041:S41 Eagle County Board of County Commissioners, October 27 meeting agenda
Item M.1 identifies file LUR-009633-2026 and links the staff report, Attachment 1.1 and Attachment 1.2.
1041:S42 Eagle County Board of County Commissioners, October 27 hearing transcript
50:23–53:45, votes on the standalone rules and effective-date motion. At 53:01 the Board corrected the attachment numbers. At 54:34 counsel discussed returning with an enacting resolution.
BRIEF:1 Utilities' project concept
Utilities' project concept, March 2022.
BRIEF:10 CMC investigation, CWCB p.4
CWCB 2007 Water Projects Bill, p. 4: Colorado Mountain College / Rocky Mountain Fen Demonstration Project.
BRIEF:2 Colorado Springs v. Eagle County, 895 P.2d 1105
Colorado Springs v. Eagle County, 895 P.2d 1105 (1994).
BRIEF:3 Eagle County Chapter VI before the October 27 vote
Chapter VI decision rule and criteria, §§6.03.10, 6.04.01–.02. The October 27 Board hearing records the separately approved package.
BRIEF:4 33 C.F.R. §§332.1(c)(3), 332.3(e)(3)
33 C.F.R. §§332.1(c)(3), 332.3(e)(3).
BRIEF:5 Colorado Regulation 87
Colorado Regulation 87.
BRIEF:6 Public Law 96-560, §§102(a)(5), 110
Public Law 96-560, §§102(a)(5), 110.
BRIEF:7 Eagle County 1041 application record
File LUR-009633-2026 and the posted hearing materials. The October 27 Board recording establishes the vote.
BRIEF:8 Eagle County, September 15 planning-stage draft
September 15 draft, July 10 draft §§331 and 434, and September 23 staff report. The later October hearing package has two attachments.
BRIEF:9 Shoshone application and closing conditions
Shoshone application and closing conditions; DWR authority, slide 29.
CASE:1 Land Use Regulations, Chapter VI: Areas and Activities of State Interest
Published Chapter VI compilation before the October 27 vote. §§6.01.04–.07, 6.03.06–.10 and 6.04.01–.03, and Appendix A.
CASE:10 Vail Valley Consolidated Water District v. City of Aurora, 731 P.2d 665
Colorado Supreme Court. Vail Valley Consolidated Water District v. City of Aurora, 731 P.2d 665. 1987. Pinpoint: 668-672.
CASE:11 Section 37-92-301(4), reasonable diligence
Colorado Revised Statutes, public reproduction. Section 37-92-301(4), reasonable diligence. Accessible 2025 text. Pinpoint: 37-92-301(4)(b)-(c).
CASE:12 Active Land Use Applications: LUR-009633-2026
County planning file LUR-009633-2026. The September 17 listing recorded hearing materials at the planning stage.
CASE:13 Eagle County in final stretch of the Land Use Regulation Rewrite Project
August 25, 2026 account of the general land-use rewrite. The November 3 rewrite is a separate proceeding from the October 27 1041 vote.
CASE:14 What is a Fen?
USDA Forest Service. What is a Fen? Undated; cites Weixelman and Cooper 2009. Pinpoint: Peatlands; Bogs and Fens.
CASE:15 Efforts to relocate an ancient wetland could help determine the fate of a water project on lower Homestake Creek
Sarah Tory / Aspen Journalism. Efforts to relocate an ancient wetland could help determine the fate of a water project on lower Homestake Creek. November 18, 2019. Pinpoint: An organ transplant; Positive signs; Inevitable impacts.
CASE:16 Sackett v. EPA, 598 U.S. 651
U.S. Supreme Court. Sackett v. EPA, 598 U.S. 651. May 25, 2023. Pinpoint: Majority Part IV.
CASE:17 Regulation 87: Dredge and Fill Control Regulation, 5 CCR 1002-87
Colorado Water Quality Control Commission. Regulation 87: Dredge and Fill Control Regulation, 5 CCR 1002-87. Effective March 30, 2026; rule version 12462. Pinpoint: 87.3(2),(4), pp.13-15; 87.6(2), pp.36-39; 87.6(7), pp.44-47; 87.10(3)(g)(iii), p.84.
CASE:18 40 CFR 230.10, Restrictions on discharge
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 40 CFR 230.10, Restrictions on discharge. eCFR current text checked September 2026. Pinpoint: 230.10(a)-(d).
CASE:19 33 CFR 320.4, General policies for evaluating permit applications
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 33 CFR 320.4, General policies for evaluating permit applications. eCFR current text checked September 2026. Pinpoint: 320.4(a),(e),(j),(k),(m).
CASE:2 City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners, 895 P.2d 1105
Colorado Court of Appeals. City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners, 895 P.2d 1105. November 17, 1994. Pinpoint: 1109-1120, especially 1110-1113, 1115-1117, and 1119-1120; Parts I-V and disposition. See also the General Assembly's official 2026 Title 24 compilation, C.R.S. §24-65.1-501(3)-(5), approval, denial, and written findings.
CASE:20 Water storage and infrastructure testimony
Marshall Brown, Aurora Water / U.S. Senate. Water storage and infrastructure testimony. July 18, 2019. Pinpoint: pp.3-6.
CASE:21 Wild Horse FAQs
Aurora Water / Wild Horse Reservoir. Wild Horse FAQs. Current undated project page, accessed September 11, 2026. Pinpoint: Purpose and emergency reserves question.
CASE:22 Water conservation in irrigation can increase water use
Frank A. Ward and Manuel Pulido-Velazquez. Water conservation in irrigation can increase water use. PNAS 105(47), 18215-18220; November 2008. Pinpoint: Abstract; DOI 10.1073/pnas.0805554105.
CASE:23 Proclamation 10476: Camp Hale-Continental Divide National Monument
President of the United States. Proclamation 10476: Camp Hale-Continental Divide National Monument. October 12, 2022; 87 FR63381-63392. Pinpoint: pp.63383-63384, 63387.
CASE:24 Western history washes up against modern reality in good, old-fashioned water war
David O. Williams / Rocky Mountain Post. Western history washes up against modern reality in good, old-fashioned water war. August 14, 2023. Pinpoint: Cabin, SHPO, and History Colorado discussion.
CASE:25 36 CFR Part 800, Protection of Historic Properties
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. 36 CFR Part 800, Protection of Historic Properties. eCFR current through September 9, 2026. Pinpoint: 800.4-.6; 800.16(d),(l),(y).
CASE:26 Discovery and Excavation on Federal or Tribal Lands
National Park Service. Discovery and Excavation on Federal or Tribal Lands. Updated January 12, 2024. Pinpoint: Discovery and excavation guidance.
CASE:27 Revised designation of critical habitat for Canada lynx
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Revised designation of critical habitat for Canada lynx. July 16, 2026; effective August 17, 2026. Pinpoint: 91 FR43732; Unit 6 pp.43755-43756; regulatory text pp.43768-43772.
CASE:28 Endangered Species Act Section 7, 16 USC1536
United States Code / U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangered Species Act Section 7, 16 USC1536. Official 2024 code; current agency guidance checked August/September 2026. Pinpoint: 1536(a)(2),(d).
CASE:29 Eagle River Community Water Plan: Rex Flats to Cross Creek
Lotic Hydrological / Eagle River Coalition. Eagle River Community Water Plan: Rex Flats to Cross Creek. Online plan, 2024 site edition. Pinpoint: Current and Historical Drivers of Degradation.
CASE:3 The Eagle River Joint Use Water Project
Colorado Springs Utilities. The Eagle River Joint Use Water Project. March 2022. Pinpoint: pp.1-2.
CASE:30 Climate Change in Colorado, Third Edition
Bolinger, Lukas, Schumacher and Goble / Colorado State University for CWCB. Climate Change in Colorado, Third Edition. 2024. Pinpoint: Chapter 3, key messages and 3.3.
CASE:31 Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County
U.S. Supreme Court. Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County. May 29, 2025. Pinpoint: Slip opinion pp.15-20.
CASE:32 National Environmental Policy Act: final rule
USDA. National Environmental Policy Act: final rule. April 3, 2026; 91 FR17092. Pinpoint: 7 CFR Part 1b, especially 1b.2, 1b.3, 1b.5, 1b.7.
CASE:33 File 26-058: Wild Horse/Otero intergovernmental agreement
Colorado Springs City Council. File 26-058: Wild Horse/Otero intergovernmental agreement. Adopted February 24, 2026. Pinpoint: Background and council action.
CASE:34 Metropolitan Suburban Water Users Association v. Colorado River Water Conservation District, 365 P.2d 273
Colorado Supreme Court. Metropolitan Suburban Water Users Association v. Colorado River Water Conservation District, 365 P.2d 273. 1961. Pinpoint: 148 Colo.190-193.
CASE:35 Application for Water Rights, 799 P.2d 33
Colorado Supreme Court. Application for Water Rights, 799 P.2d 33. 1990. Pinpoint: Parts C-D; Appendix A.
CASE:36 1041 Regulations, DRAFT 09/15/2026
Historical July and September hearing drafts and staff recommendation. The approved October 27 package is recorded in CASE:55–57.
CASE:37 33 CFR Part 332: Compensatory mitigation
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 33 CFR Part 332: Compensatory mitigation. Current eCFR checked September 2026. Pinpoint: 332.1(c)(3); 332.3(a),(e)(3),(f).
CASE:38 Revised de minimis depletion guidance
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Revised de minimis depletion guidance. Signed November 1, 2024. Pinpoint: p.2.
CASE:39 36 CFR 251.54: Proposal and application requirements and procedures
USDA Forest Service. 36 CFR 251.54: Proposal and application requirements and procedures. Current eCFR checked September 2026. Pinpoint: 251.54(e)(5),(f)(2).
CASE:4 No movement on Aurora’s Eagle County Whitney Reservoir proposal after six years
David O. Williams / Vail Daily, republished Sentinel Colorado. No movement on Aurora’s Eagle County Whitney Reservoir proposal after six years. July 28, 2026. Pinpoint: Opening project-status paragraphs.
CASE:40 Senate Bill 07-122: The 2007 Water Projects Bill
Colorado Water Conservation Board. Senate Bill 07-122: The 2007 Water Projects Bill. 2007. Pinpoint: p.4, Colorado Mountain College / Rocky Mountain Fen Demonstration Project.
CASE:41 Fens
Brad Johnson / Johnson Environmental Consulting. Fens. Undated; copyright 2023, accessed September 2026. Pinpoint: Restoration; Rocky Mountain Fen Research Project.
CASE:42 Mountain Fen Restoration in Colorado: An Overview
Rod A. Chimner and David J. Cooper / International Peatland Society. Mountain Fen Restoration in Colorado: An Overview. 2012; 14th International Peat Congress. Pinpoint: Summary, final paragraph.
CASE:43 Shoshone Frequently Asked Questions
Colorado River District. Shoshone Frequently Asked Questions. Current campaign page, accessed September 11, 2026. Pinpoint: Questions 2, 4, 6, 7, 11.
CASE:44 Shoshone Water Court Application Filed
Colorado River District. Shoshone Water Court Application Filed. November 24, 2025. Pinpoint: Substantive paragraphs 1-5.
CASE:45 Department of Interior releases $40 million award for the Shoshone Water Rights Preservation Project
Colorado River District. Department of Interior releases $40 million award for the Shoshone Water Rights Preservation Project. May 22, 2026. Pinpoint: Opening funding/status paragraphs.
CASE:46 Instream Flow Water Acquisitions
Colorado Water Conservation Board. Instream Flow Water Acquisitions. Current undated program page, accessed September 2026. Pinpoint: Program description; Benefits; Example Projects.
CASE:47 Colorado's Instream Flow and Natural Lake Level Program
Colorado Water Conservation Board. Colorado's Instream Flow and Natural Lake Level Program. August 21, 2019. Pinpoint: Slides 3, 11, 15, 17-22, 27-28.
CASE:48 Inference for occupancy and occupancy dynamics
Allan F. O'Connell and Larissa L. Bailey / U.S. Geological Survey. Inference for occupancy and occupancy dynamics. 2011. Pinpoint: Publication abstract; DOI 10.1007/978-4-431-99495-4_11.
CASE:49 Colorado Constitution
Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services. Colorado Constitution. 2025 compilation. Pinpoint: Article XVI, sections 5-6.
CASE:5 Eagle River Joint-Use Water Project, Project-00885
Colorado Department of Natural Resources project inventory. Eagle River Joint-Use Water Project, Project-00885. Record created September 15, 2021; page accessed 2026. Pinpoint: Project description.
CASE:50 State of Colorado v. Hill, 2023 CO 31
Colorado Supreme Court. State of Colorado v. Hill, 2023 CO 31. June 5, 2023. Pinpoint: Paragraph 1 and standing disposition.
CASE:51 Denver Water, Xcel enact plan to ease shortages
Heather Sackett / Aspen Journalism. Denver Water, Xcel enact plan to ease shortages. March 31, 2026; updated June 6, 2026. Pinpoint: Call relaxation; Western Slope benefit.
CASE:52 Water Rights
Colorado Division of Water Resources. Water Rights. Current undated agency page, accessed September 2026. Pinpoint: Prior appropriation; administration; futile calls.
CASE:53 DWR's Role in Stream Restoration Projects
Caleb Foy / Colorado Division of Water Resources. DWR's Role in Stream Restoration Projects. Undated presentation, accessed September 2026. Pinpoint: Slide 29, C.R.S. 37-92-502(3).
CASE:54 Canada lynx critical habitat: correction
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service / Federal Register. Canada lynx critical habitat: correction. July 29, 2026. Pinpoint: Correction to amendatory instructions; effective August 17, 2026.
CASE:55 Eagle County, October 27 hearing package, Attachment 1.2
Base text approved with the changes in Attachment 1.1. The 64-page hearing document covers application materials in Article 3 and permit approval standards in Article 4. Printed page 1 is PDF page 5.
CASE:56 Eagle County, October 27 hearing package, Attachment 1.1
Approved changes to §§105, 109 and 201, PDF pp. 1–2. Section 105(C) gives the two conditions and delayed start of the subdivision, planned unit development and special-use exception. Section 109 expressly includes fens in Waterbody.
CASE:57 Eagle County Board of County Commissioners, October 27 hearing transcript
50:23–53:45, votes on the standalone rules and effective-date motion. At 53:01 the Board corrected the attachment numbers. At 54:34 counsel discussed returning with an enacting resolution.
CASE:58 Eagle County Board of County Commissioners, November 2 meeting agenda
November 2 working meeting. The agenda and the county recordings reviewed through that date do not identify passage of the separate 1041 enacting resolution.
CASE:59 Eagle County Board of County Commissioners, November 3 meeting agenda
Items L.1–2 scheduled the general land-use rewrite and zoning map, LUR-009660-2026. The October 27 standalone 1041 proceeding was LUR-009633-2026.
CASE:6 Colorado Wilderness Act, Public Law 96-560
United States Congress. Colorado Wilderness Act, Public Law 96-560. December 22, 1980. Pinpoint: 102(a)(5), 104(b), 110; 94 Stat.3266, 3268, 3271.
CASE:7 Holy Cross Wilderness Fund v. Madigan, 960 F.2d 1515
U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. Holy Cross Wilderness Fund v. Madigan, 960 F.2d 1515. 1992. Pinpoint: Opening case history and disposition.
CASE:8 Forest Service approves Whitney Creek geotechnical project
USDA Forest Service. Forest Service approves Whitney Creek geotechnical project. March 2021. Pinpoint: Announcement of investigation approval.
CASE:9 Water Division 5, September 2023 Resume
Colorado Judicial Branch. Water Division 5, September 2023 Resume. September 2023. Pinpoint: Case 23CW3138; printed pp.15-27, related cases pp.24-25.
FED-ECFR-17.11-LYNX 50 CFR 17.11(h), federal Canada lynx listing
17.11(h), Lynx, Canada [Contiguous U.S. DPS] row; eCFR displayed current to September 21, 2026. Official source checked September 23, 2026.
HISTORY:S001 Southern Ute history
HISTORY:S002 Southern Ute chronology
HISTORY:S003 Colorado Encyclopedia
HISTORY:S004 NPS Jackson exhibit
HISTORY:S005 Thomas Moran painting
HISTORY:S006 The Cross of Snow
HISTORY:S007 Ute Mountain Ute Tribe
HISTORY:S008 Ute Indian Tribe
HISTORY:S009 1949 USGS map
HISTORY:S010 USGS map archive
HISTORY:S011 1961 court opinion
HISTORY:S012 D.J. Arnold history
HISTORY:S013 1987 Elliott-Weers retrospective
HISTORY:S014 1979 federal opinion
HISTORY:S015 Official Water Court record
HISTORY:S016 Aurora overview
HISTORY:S017 1967 dedication record
HISTORY:S018 Conflict history
HISTORY:S019 1983 Final EIS
HISTORY:S020 High Country News
HISTORY:S021 Colorado Supreme Court citation record
HISTORY:S022 Agreement summary
HISTORY:S023 Aspen Journalism
HISTORY:S024 Forest Service decision
HISTORY:S025 Aspen Journalism
HISTORY:S026 Aspen Journalism
HISTORY:S027 Fen community science
HISTORY:S028 CSU Sustainable Water Plan
HISTORY:S029 The Southern Ute Drum: the Tribe’s account
HISTORY:S030 National Park Service, An Eye for History, pp. 82 & 84 (PDF)
HISTORY:S031 Getty Museum: the original photograph
HISTORY:S032 Hut Association: how the idea grew
HISTORY:S033 10th Mountain Division Hut: its story
HWA:S-COLLECTORS DWR five Homestake collector monthly records
Monthly records for the five existing tributary intakes, water years 2014-2024.
HWA:S-GP-ANNUAL Matched Gold Park annual inputs, WY2007-2024
Annual tunnel exports and flow past Gold Park for the same 18 water years.
HWA:S-RAW Homestake raw evidence and reproducible code
Downloadable water records and calculations behind the Gold Park comparison.
HWA:S-REDCLIFF DWR-published USGS 09064500 Red Cliff water-year flow
Historical creek-flow totals at Red Cliff, water years 2007-2011.
HWA:S-REPORT Homestake flow and basin findings
The Gold Park comparison, seasonal intake records and historical Red Cliff comparison.
HWA:S-RESERVOIR DWR Homestake Reservoir storage and evaporation accounts
Homestake Reservoir storage and evaporation records used in the water accounting.
HWA:S-TOPOLOGY Gold Park basin: existing intakes and reservoir
The five existing tributary intakes and Homestake Reservoir lie upstream of the Gold Park gauge.
HWA:S-TUNNEL DWR Homestake Tunnel monthly diversion records
Monthly Homestake Tunnel export records for water years 2007-2024.
HWA:S-USGS-GP USGS 09064000 Homestake Creek at Gold Park
Daily creek-flow readings at Gold Park for water years 2007-2024.
HWA:S-WHITNEY-GAP Whitney storage and dependable-yield evidence record
Public sources identify Whitney storage concepts and a broader project objective. Whitney-only dependable annual and dry-year yield remain unresolved in the record reviewed through September 23, 2026.
HWF:FEN-2025 CNHP fen service comparison, September 23, 2026
Identical downstream query envelope returned 18 Potential Fen features from the older service and six Fens 2025 features with different geometries. The comparison preserves the dated source polygons and their overlap measurements; individual correspondence to the newer inventory classes remains unresolved.
HWF:MODEL-OVERLAP Complete modeled inundation and wetland/fen inventory overlay
Shared-area result, overlap method and input checks for all four modeled alternatives.
HWF:OBS-20260923 iNaturalist Homestake observer aggregate
BioBlitz snapshot of 1,400 observations by 102 contributors.
HWF:OBSERVERS-20260923 iNaturalist BioBlitz observers aggregate, September 23 check
The 102 contributors recorded in the September 23 BioBlitz snapshot.
HWF:REGISTRY Homestake wildlife and flora occurrence record, v0.3
September 23 v0.3 evidence package and SQLite/CSV records. 1,400 BioBlitz observations; 229 terminal concepts, including 190 species-rank concepts; 618 Research Grade, 778 Needs ID and four Casual. Additional screened GBIF/locality records: 233, including 129 eBird-derived and 103 specimen records.
HWF:S01 Homestake Valley BioBlitz live observation project
September 23, 2026 project observation records and species-count summary; individual observation URLs.
HWF:S02 2019 Whitney Reservoir Siting Study technical report, Appendix 1
Technical report pp. 16-20; Tables 2-3
HWF:S03 Inventory of Fens in White River National Forest
Section 4.2; Tables 10-12; Appendix A
HWF:S04 Moose conservation and management
History of Moose in Colorado
HWF:S05 Beaver species profile and conservation strategy
About; Habitat; Diet; Reproduction; strategy links
HWF:S06 Boreal toad species profile
About; conservation/status
HWF:S07 Wood frog species profile
Range; Habitat; Reproduction; Protection Status
HWF:S08 Boreal chorus frog species profile
Habitat and Reproduction
HWF:S09 Canada lynx critical habitat final designation news
HWF:S10 Canada lynx species profile
Listing and habitat overview
HWF:S11 Colorado River cutthroat trout species profile
About; Cutthroat Trout Taxonomy Research
HWF:S12 Beaver dams and overbank floods influence groundwater-surface water interactions of a Rocky Mountain riparian area
Abstract and citation metadata
HWF:S13 Classification and types of wetlands: fens
Fens
HWF:S14 Climate change impacts on native cutthroat trout habitat in Colorado streams
HWF:S15 Merlin Sound ID data sharing
Sound ID and sharing observations
HWF:S16 Homestake BioBlitz audit
HWF:S17 Olive-sided Flycatcher conservation priority
Birds of Conservation Concern species tables
HWF:S18 Snowshoe hare profile
Habitat; Diet; Additional Information
HWF:S19 2025 Colorado State Wildlife Action Plan
2025 species groups and tier lists
HWF:S20 Homestake Roadless Area wildlife screening
HWF:S21 Colorado Natural Heritage Program tracking lists
Current tracking table; V3-34
HWF:S22 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, final Canada lynx critical-habitat rule
43732/PDF1 effective date; 43771/PDF40 Unit6 geography; 43772/PDF41 Unit6 map; 43768-43769/PDF37-38 boundary rule. Official source checked September 23, 2026.
HWF:S23 Northern leopard frog species profile
Habitat; Reproduction; Protection Status
HWF:S24 2025 State Wildlife Action Plan: invertebrate priorities
HWF:S25 Fragmentation and thermal risks for native cutthroat
HWF:S26 Homestake fen field records research
HWF:S27 Final 2022 National Wetland Plant List, Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast region
2022 NWPL version 3.6; 3,407 entries; PDF-page locators per match
HWF:S28 Rocky Mountain Subalpine-Montane Fen ecological system
Diagnostics; hydrology; vegetation; associations
HWF:S29 Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow ecological system
Diagnostics; hydrology; vegetation
HWF:S30 Western North American Emergent Marsh ecological system
Hydrology; vegetation; associations
HWF:S31 Downstream effects of stream flow diversion on channel characteristics and riparian vegetation in the Colorado Rocky Mountains
Abstract; Methods; Table IV; pp. 586-598
HWF:S32 Moose species review
Habitat and food habits
HWF:S33 Trends in Rocky Mountain amphibians and the role of beaver
HWF:S34 Informed breeding dispersal following stochastic changes to patch quality
Abstract; DOI metadata
HWF:S35 Amphibian population responses to mitigation: wetland age and design
HWF:S36 Lincoln's Sparrow life history
HWF:S37 Olive-sided Flycatcher life history
HWF:S38 Mallard life history
HWF:S39 Colorado Parks and Wildlife, lynx species profile
Protection Status; Threatened and Endangered. Official source checked September 23, 2026.
HWF:S40 Bobcat species profile
Habitat; Diet; Reproduction
HWF:S41 East Slope Mountain Lion Management Plan, 2024 draft appendix
Habitat and prey discussion; labeled 2024 draft
HWF:S42 Black bear species profile
Species profile
HWF:S43 Red fox species profile
Diet and Reproduction
HWF:S44 Coyote species profile
Habitat; Diet; Reproduction
HWF:S45 River otter species profile
State Threatened; Hydrology; Vegetation; Land Use
HWF:S46 In search of the elusive Johnson's Hairstreak
HWF:S47 Fragmentation and thermal risks to native trout in Colorado River Basin
HWF:S48 Cytogeography of the subalpine marsh marigold polyploid complex
HWF:S49 Platanthera dilatata herbarium account
HWF:S50 Disease, drought, and warming: A triple threat to a declining high-elevation amphibian
Abstract; DOI metadata
HWF:S51 Whitney Reservoir Geotechnical Studies: Wetland Resources
HWF:V3-01 A high-altitude thermal infrared method for estimating moose abundance and demography in Rocky Mountain National Park, USA
Methods habitat-suitability model; Table 1
HWF:V3-02 Eagle County Chapter VI
Chapter VI as published before the October 27 vote, §§6.03.10 and 6.04.01(15)–(20), and Appendix A pp. iv–vi.
HWF:V3-03 Eagle County active land use applications
County 1041 planning file LUR-009633-2026 and dated hearing materials. The October 27 vote is recorded in the Board hearing.
HWF:V3-04 CPW Fish Distribution Schedule 2023
PDF p. 34, water 20622 and 67365; species-code legend
HWF:V3-05 CPW Fish Distribution Schedule 2024
PDF p. 35, water 20622 and 67365; species-code legend
HWF:V3-06 Rapid riparian ecosystem decline in Rocky Mountain National Park
Abstract; Methods; figures
HWF:V3-07 Effectiveness of Ditch Blockage for Restoring Hydrologic and Soil Processes in Mountain Peatlands
Abstract; Table 1; Results
HWF:V3-08 Influence of Water Table Levels on CO2 Emissions in a Colorado Subalpine Fen
HWF:V3-09 National Wetland Plant List current notices
Final 2022 list; draft 2024 notice distinguished
HWF:V3-10 Eagle River below Homestake fish and water-quality station
USGS 393030106224700
HWF:V3-11 Rewetting does not return drained fens to their former state
Abstract; Methods
HWF:V3-12 Fen mapping service metadata
Layer 0; returnGeometry=false
HWF:V3-13 Wetland inventory service metadata
Layer 0
HWF:V3-14 Downstream map methods, September 20, 2026
countsWithinDisplayFrame; provenance; limitations
HWF:V3-15 Modeled wetland fen intersections
Modeled alternative/wetland-fen overlap rows
HWF:V3-16 Fen ecosystem classification
Mapping methods and dataset context
HWF:V3-17 Biological Survey of Eagle County, Colorado
Printed p. 159, PDF p. 162; Holy Cross City PCA; cottongrass account
HWF:V3-18 Beaver recolonization explains aquatic insect emergence patterns
Abstract; DOI 10.1086/734565
HWF:V3-19 Influence of beaver dam density on riparian areas and riparian birds in shrubsteppe of Wyoming
Abstract
HWF:V3-20 The effect of the Grand Ditch on benthic invertebrates
Abstract
HWF:V3-21 Reduced Streamflow From Water Diversion Alters Stream Ecology and Fish Behavior
Methods and Results
HWF:V3-22 Beaver wetlands create a buzz and a flutter for pollinators
Methods and Results
HWF:V3-23 Subalpine Montane Riparian Shrubland
Vegetation and wildlife species list
HWF:V3-24 Status and Conservation of Boreal Toad 2006-2007
Printed pp. 36 and 76; site monitoring tables
HWF:V3-25 CNHP current tracked plant communities
Natural Communities; backing data V3-34
HWF:V3-26 CNHP current tracked vascular plants
Vascular Plants; backing data V3-34
HWF:V3-27 CNHP current amphibian ranks
CNHP amphibian conservation ranks.
HWF:V3-28 CNHP current mammal ranks
Mammals; backing data V3-34
HWF:V3-29 Colorado elk account
Diet; Reproduction; research overview
HWF:V3-30 Colorado mule deer account
Habitat; Diet; Reproduction
HWF:V3-31 Mountain sucker
HWF:V3-32 Long-tailed vole
HWF:V3-33 Western jumping mouse
HWF:V3-34 CNHP current tracking list, public read-only data response
2,214 returned rows; exact-name rank/status fields; accessed 2026-09-23
HWF:V3-35 Homestake discovery query and screened occurrence records
q=Homestake,country=US,stateProvince=Colorado; offsets 0/300; occurrence IDs
HWF:V3-36 EOD - eBird Observation Dataset
Dataset 4fa7b334-ce0d-4e88-aaae-2e0c138d049e; DOI; record 5455274378
HWF:V3-37 Fens (CNHP 2025), metadata and downstream query
Fens_2025/MapServer/0; six returned features
HWF:V3-38 Zapus princeps
HWF:V3-39 Western Water Shrew
Notes; scientific name
HWF:V3-40 Sorex navigator
Taxonomy and Habitat
HWF:V3-41 Beaver factsheet and habitat scorecard
HWF:V3-42 Homestake water findings
September 24, 2026 public edition; recorded exports and Gold Park flow, WY2007-2024; linked annual records and methods.
HWF:V3-43 September 15, 2026 draft 1041 regulations for September 23 hearing
September 15 planning-stage text, §§211, 307(F)–(G), 310, 311, 406(C) and 411–413. October 27 Attachments 1.1 and 1.2 record the approved terms.
LEGACY:S034 Eagle River Coalition monitoring program, Eagle Mine section
Eagle Mine monitoring section
LEGACY:S035 Colorado Basin Roundtable glossary: transbasin diversion
Transbasin diversion definition
LEGACY:S036 Colorado State University Water Knowledge: water uses
Consumptive use and return flows
LEGACY:S037 Aurora Water 2019 wilderness boundary concept map
Combined Whitney and Blodgett outline and up-to-497-acre label
LEGACY:S038 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Camp Hale, Colorado
Homestake Valley Range Complex and former training lands
LEGACY:S039 NASA Earth Observatory: Lake Powell Drops to Record Low Levels
September 18, 2026 report
LEGACY:S040 Bureau of Reclamation: August 2026 reservoir storage record
Combined Powell and Mead storage statement
MUN-S01 Aurora Water: Innovation & Sustainability
By the numbers; Future Goals.
MUN-S02 Here's how Aurora's leading water conservation
Outdoor irrigation paragraph; 2022 ordinance paragraph; Prairie Waters paragraph.
MUN-S04 2025 Official Statement, City of Colorado Springs Utilities revenue bonds
Printed pp6,47,52-53; PDF pp12,53,58-59.
MUN-S05 Utilities Board Working Committee packet
PDF pp36,41-43 of 83; slides12,17-19.
MUN-S06 2022 Water Efficiency Plan
pp13,18,20 and Table5 pp21-23.
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S01 Aurora Water: Innovation & Sustainability
By the numbers; Future Goals
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S02 Here's how Aurora's leading water conservation
Outdoor irrigation paragraph; 2022 ordinance paragraph; Prairie Waters paragraph
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S03 Integrated Water Master Plan 2, External Version, Rev1
Section 2.2 p 14; Section 4.3 p 22
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S04 2025 Official Statement, City of Colorado Springs Utilities revenue bonds
Printed pp6,47,52-53; PDF pp12,53,58-59
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S05 Utilities Board Working Committee packet
PDF pp36,41-43 of 83; slides12,17-19
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S06 2022 Water Efficiency Plan
pp13,18,20 and Table5 pp21-23
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S07 The Eagle River Joint Use Water Project
p 1: Project partners and objective; p 2: ERMOU details
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S08 Eagle River Joint-Use Water Project (Eagle River MOU), Project-00885
Project description; created 2021-09-15
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S09 Aurora Water Treatment
Reclaimed Water
MUNICIPAL:MUN-S10 Aurora Water fact sheets, reports and storage data
Master Plans
WATER:CAP-MOTION20261027 Central Arizona Water Conservation District, motion to intervene, October 27, 2026
Nevada v. Burgum, ECF 35, PDF pp. 1, 6 and 19. The district asks to join Nevada’s case challenging Colorado River operating decisions.
WATER:CAP-COMPLAINT20261027 Central Arizona Water Conservation District, proposed complaint in intervention
ECF 35-7, PDF pp. 2–4 and 32. The pleading describes the district’s claims about shortages and upstream releases and states its requested relief.
WATER:TECH-01 DWR exports
Approved monthly class 13704614, WDID 3704614. Original SQLite and source packet.
WATER:TECH-02 DWR collector accounts
WDIDs 3701253 / 3701254 / 3701255 / 3701256 / 3704644; total classes only.
WATER:TECH-03 DWR reservoir and telemetry
WDID 3704516 stagevolume and monthly records; HOMOUTCO DISCHRG and DISCHRG2.
WATER:TECH-04 DWR pilot release report
1 April 2021. PDF p. 20 calibration; Appendix A pp. 46-47 physical routing/two flumes.
WATER:TECH-05 USGS daily discharge
09063900 Missouri, 09064000 Gold Park, 09064500 Red Cliff. Qualifiers preserved.
WATER:TECH-06 USGS Gold Park station description
2003 annual record: gauge downstream from French. Current gauge area is 35.6 mi2; historic page says 36.0. NLDI/NHD polygons are modeled junction catchments.
WATER:TECH-07 Official StateMod inputs
Upper Colorado cm2015 and Shoshone 2024 update. Natural-flow record ends 2013.
WATER:TECH-08 Rights and bypass sources
Live DWR netamount; June 2024 Division 5 resume, pp. 21-26; September 2023 resume, pp. 23-24; 2025 city exhibits. All direct URLs in rights source index.
WATER:TECH-09 CSU ERJU factsheet
March 2022 fact sheet, 2 pages.
WATER:TECH-10 City File 26-058
Adopted 24 February 2026; signed Resolution 11-26 and related Otero/Wild Horse IGA documents.
WATER:TECH-11 Cities’ final pilot verification
2 December 2021, PDF pp. 4-5 actual operations and non-refill finding.
WATER:TECH-12 DWR outlet field measurements
HOMOUTCO, 19 entries through September 2026; raw values, remarks and qualifiers preserved.
WATER:TECH-13 USBR storage and operations
Site 100120 daily storage and WY2024 operations report. Provisional series and endpoint comparisons in raw companion.
WATER:TECH-14 River Watch and EPA
Water Quality Portal CORIVWCH_WQX-744; EPA NRSA UIDs 2012967/2013227/2014612. Query URLs and downloaded rows in source manifest.
WATER:TECH-15 USBR PAP-1088
July 2014, printed pp. 1, 3-4; PDF pp. 7, 9-10. Tunnel flume calibration, distinct from dam-outlet records.
WATER:TECH-16 Eagle River Inventory
2005 CSU-authored assessment, author-hosted copy; printed pp. 84-94 historical hydrology.
WATER:TECH-17 Aurora Wild Horse update
13 February 2026 South-site announcement and February 2026 presentation Q&A.
WATER:TECH-18 Red Cliff preserved annual flow
DWR-published USGS annual totals, September 20, 2026 snapshot.
WATER:TECH-19 Bureau of Reclamation Homestake repairs and refill, WY2012-2015
WY2012 section IV.D documents dam-face and outlet works repairs; WY2013 fa13.pdf section IV.D documents tunnel closure and continuing repairs; WY2014 fa14.pdf section IV.D documents renewed storage; WY2015 fa15.pdf Turquoise Lake section documents completed refill.
WATER:TECH-20 Colorado DWR State Line Delivery Pilot Reservoir Release Report
DWR 2021 report pp. 4-5 and 8-11: one-time September 23-29, 2020 release of 1,666.9 AF, purpose, Grand Valley call and Gold Park passage.
WATER:TECH-21 Aurora Water, Homestake Reservoir system description
The reservoir page identifies the collection system and states that Homestake water goes through Homestake Tunnel to Turquoise Lake when needed. Checked 24 September 2026.
MASTER:1 Eagle River Joint Use Water Project Memorandum of Understanding
Sections II, III.C, III.D, and V; PDF pp. 1-10.
MASTER:2 Whitney Reservoir drilling application and technical report
SF-299 project description and the technical report's alternatives, access, boring, and coordinate tables.
MASTER:3 Whitney Creek Geotechnical Project decision memorandum
Decision Memo, Purpose and Need, Decision, Environmental Impacts, Findings Required by Other Laws, and Future Proposals; PDF pp. 1-10.
MASTER:4 Whitney Reservoir Geotechnical Studies: Wetland Resources
Memorandum pp. 1-4 and maps in the attachment; wetland complexes W22, W23, W28, and W33b.
MASTER:5 Biological Assessment and FWS concurrence for the geotechnical investigation
Assessment sections on Action Area, Canada Lynx, Effects, Conservation Measures, and Reinitiation; FWS concurrence pages at the front of Attachment B.
MASTER:6 Biological Evaluation for the geotechnical investigation
Species tables and accounts; Olive-sided Flycatcher discussion; American marten observation; survey-method appendices.
MASTER:7 Recreation, Wilderness, and Roadless Area Review
Technical Memorandum sections on recreation, wilderness character, Colorado Roadless Areas, noise, and mitigation; PDF pp. 1-12.
MASTER:8 Cultural Resource Survey, Whitney Reservoir Siting Study
Survey scope and APE, previous investigations and resources, Homestake Road evaluation, recommendations, and consultation record.
MASTER:9 The Eagle River Joint Use Water Project fact sheet
Both pages, especially Project Benefits, Project Features, Project Status, and Next Steps.
MASTER:10 Water Division 5 diligence applications and 2026 related pleading
Case 23CW3087 in the June 2023 resume; Case 23CW3138, printed pp. 15-27 of the September 2023 resume; and the identified Homestake-related entry in the April 2026 Water Division 2 resume.
MASTER:11 Colorado Springs Utilities Integrated Water Resource Plan
2017 executive summary, Balanced Portfolio, alternative scoring, Eagle River MOU project description, implementation schedule and cost-class cautions; 2025 packet sections on IWRP update scope, schedule and workstreams.
MASTER:12 Eagle County Land Use Regulations, Chapter VI
Chapter VI as published before the October 27 vote, §§6.01.04–.05, 6.03.01–.03, 6.03.06, 6.03.10, 6.04.01–.03 and 6.05, and Appendix A.
MASTER:13 Eagle County 1041 Regulations review draft
July 10 planning-stage draft, §§105(C), 201(B), 204(A), 307, 331–332, 401, 406 and 434–435. October 27 Attachment 1.1 revises §§105 and 201.
MASTER:14 Colorado Areas and Activities of State Interest Act
C.R.S. Sections 24-65.1-106, -107, -202, -203, -402, and -501.
MASTER:15 City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County
895 P.2d at 1109-16, especially wetlands at 1110-13 and water rights and alternatives at 1115-16.
MASTER:16 Colorado House Bill 24-1379 and Homestake fish-and-wildlife provisions
H.B. 24-1379 legislative findings, Section 2, pp. 2-4; dredge-and-fill program provisions, Sections 3-4; fish-and-wildlife provisions, Section 5, especially signed-act pp. 25-28; C.R.S. Section 37-60-122.2; CPW Chapter W-16, Homestake Water Project provision.
MASTER:17 Colorado Water Quality Control Act dredge-and-fill provisions
Sections 25-8-103(19), 25-8-205.1, and 25-8-104.
MASTER:18 Regulation 87, Dredge and Fill Control Regulation
Sections 87.2-.6, 87.10, and 87.11, especially 87.3(4) transition provisions and 87.3(7) official determinations; 87.6(4) federal coordination; 87.6(7)(e)(iv) and (f); 87.6(13)(c) ongoing operations; 87.8(1)(e) Temporary Authorization transition; and 87.10(1)(b), (3)(g)(iii).
MASTER:19 Regulation 31, Basic Standards and Methodologies for Surface Water
Sections 31.5(44), 31.7(1)(b)(iv), 31.8, and 31.13(1)(e); PDF pp. 6, 12-13, 21-27, and 47-48.
MASTER:20 Regulation 33, Upper Colorado River Basin classifications
Appendix 33-1, segments COUCEA01, COUCEA03, and COUCEA04, including the Homestake Water Project footnote.
MASTER:21 Regulation 82, Section 401 Water Quality Certification Regulation
Sections 82.1, 82.3(C), 82.4, 82.5, and 82.6.
MASTER:22 Wild Horse Reservoir Regulation 87 record and Aurora statements
CDPHE application and public-notice materials; FAQ question on project need and emergency reserves; alternatives screening and LEDPA discussion; Aurora pages describing Prairie Waters, conservation, reuse, storage and mountain supply.
MASTER:23 Clean Water Act Sections 404 and 401
Section 404(a)-(c), (e), (f)(2), (o), and (t); Section 401(a) and (d).
MASTER:24 Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines
Sections 230.10-.12, especially 230.10(a)-(d), 230.11(g)-(h), 230.12(a)(3)(iv), 230.41(b), 230.75(d), and 230.77(c)-(d).
MASTER:25 Compensatory mitigation for losses of aquatic resources
Sections 332.3(a)-(b), (d)-(f), (h), (k), and (m)-(n); 332.4(b)-(c); 332.6.
MASTER:26 2026 Nationwide Permits and Colorado Regional Conditions
NWP 14, 33, 57, and 58; General Conditions 18, 22, 23, and 28; preconstruction-notice requirements; Colorado Regional Conditions 1 and 3.
MASTER:27 Joint guidance on basic and overall project purpose
PDF pp. 2-4, especially the reliable-future-water-supply example.
MASTER:28 Corps public-interest, application-scope, and general-permit regulations
Section 320.4(a), (b), (m), and (r); 325.1(b) and (d)(2); 330.1(d), 330.2(i), 330.5, and 330.6(d); 333.18(c)(1)-(4).
MASTER:29 Current WOTUS definition and continuous-surface-connection guidance
Section 328.3(a) and (c)(2); memorandum pp. 4-6.
MASTER:30 Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency
598 U.S. at 671 and 678-79; slip opinion pp. 20-27.
MASTER:31 Holy Cross Wilderness Fund v. Madigan
960 F.2d at 1518-29, including alternatives, wetlands, mitigation planning, and the court's description of the review sequence.
MASTER:32 Utahns for Better Transportation v. U.S. Department of Transportation
305 F.3d at 1179-80 and 1186-92.
MASTER:33 Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Flowers
359 F.3d at 1269-75.
MASTER:34 Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County and current Army NEPA procedures
*Seven County*, 605 U.S. at 177-92; 33 C.F.R. Sections 333.17-.18, .20, .22-.23, .35-.36, .51, and .61.
MASTER:35 Endangered Species Act Section 7 and consultation regulations
16 U.S.C. Section 1536(a)(2), (b)-(d); 50 C.F.R. definitions of `action`, `action area`, and `destruction or adverse modification`; Sections 402.14(a)-(c) and (g)-(i); and 402.16.
MASTER:36 Final revised Canada lynx critical-habitat designation
Unit 6 description, physical or biological features, effects of designation, exclusions, maps, effective date, and accompanying final GIS dataset.
MASTER:37 White River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
Main plan printed p. 2-36/PDF p. 73; Forestwide Water and Aquatic Resources direction; management area 5.41 direction on forage, birthing, winter and spring disturbance, semiprimitive setting, and roads; Canada lynx Standard S1; plan appendices AA and EE.
MASTER:38 Forest Service special-use screening, NFMA consistency, and federal wetland avoidance
36 C.F.R. Section 251.54(e); 16 U.S.C. Section 1604(i); Executive Order 11990 Sections 1(a)-(b) and 2(a)-(b).
MASTER:39 Colorado Roadless Rule
Section 294.41 definitions; Section 294.42 tree cutting; Section 294.43 road construction and reconstruction; Section 294.44 linear construction zones; and Section 294.45 environmental documentation and EIS requirements.
MASTER:40 Colorado Wilderness Act of 1980
Sections 102(a)(5), 104(b), and 110; 94 Stat. 3266, 3268, and 3271.
MASTER:41 National Historic Preservation Act Section 106, implementing regulations, and Pueblo of Sandia
54 U.S.C. Section 306108; 36 C.F.R. Sections 800.2, 800.3, 800.4, 800.5, 800.6, and 800.11(c); *Pueblo of Sandia*, 50 F.3d at 859-62.
MASTER:42 Camp Hale-Continental Divide National Monument proclamation
87 Fed. Reg. at 63,383-84 and 63,387, including monument objects and water-infrastructure provisions.
MASTER:43 Federal fen background and groundwater-dependent-ecosystem field methods
EPA Fens, Functions and Values, and Status sections; Forest Service guide chapters on conceptual models, water sources, flow paths, monitoring, soils, and vegetation; mountain-peatland manual discussion of reservoir disturbance and excessive inundation.
MASTER:44 Inventory of Fens in the White River National Forest
Executive Summary; Methods pp. 7-12; Table 1; Appendix A pp. 41-43.
MASTER:45 Corps South Pacific Division uniform mitigation performance standards
Rows and notes for organic-dominated slope wetlands and fens; hydrology, substrate, vegetation, monitoring, and contingency measures.
MASTER:46 Compensating for Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act
Executive Summary and chapters on goal setting, site selection, hydrology, performance, monitoring, and institutional responsibility.
MASTER:47 Fens of the United States
Sections on definition, hydrology, landscape connection, biodiversity, and scientific connection versus legal isolation; DOI 10.1672/0277-5212(2003)023[0608:FOTUSD]2.0.CO;2.
MASTER:48 Rocky Mountain fen carbon accumulation and water-table response
Methods and results on peat chronology, net carbon accumulation, hydrologic modification, and experimental water-table levels.
MASTER:49 Restoring vegetation of mined Southern Rocky Mountain peatlands
Study sites, reference comparison, species richness results, and restoration implications; DOI 10.1046/j.1526-100x.2000.80016.x.
MASTER:50 Ditch blockage and recovery of mountain peatland processes
Hydrology and soil-property comparisons, recovery-time discussion, and management implications; DOI 10.1111/rec.12053.
MASTER:51 Short-term wetland success criteria and long-term outcomes
Methods, year-five versus year-fifteen classification, reference-community comparison, and conclusions; DOI 10.1111/rec.14231.
MASTER:52 Hydrologic similarity does not guarantee similar plant communities
Reference-site design, hydrologic and vegetation comparisons, and management conclusions.
MASTER:53 Structural and functional loss in restored wetlands
Abstract, recovery trajectories, climate and size effects, and supporting data; DOI 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001247.
MASTER:54 Rewetting does not return drained fens to their former state
Study design, vegetation and biogeochemical ordination, legacy effects, and conclusions; DOI 10.1038/s41467-021-25619-y.
MASTER:55 Soil translocation for plant-community restoration
Effect-size results, community-similarity results, monitoring-duration distribution, donor impacts, and recommendations; DOI 10.1111/1365-2664.14364.
MASTER:56 Restoration acceleration, constructed-fen initiation, and hydrochemical trajectory
Modeled 20- to 35-year vegetation trajectories under enhanced intervention; design and initiation criteria; water-balance results; hydrochemical evolution; dependence on engineered inputs; and stated long-term uncertainties.
MASTER:57 Rocky Mountain Fen Demonstration Project record
CWCB Rocky Mountain Fen Demonstration Project entry; consultant page sections on Restoration and Rocky Mountain Fen Research Project; Aspen Journalism paragraphs reporting design, one-season richness and the then-uncertain mitigation conclusion.
MASTER:58 Homestake Valley BioBlitz live project and API snapshot
API project settings; seven 200-record observation pages; grouped license and observation fields; quality-grade counts; taxon filters; place 193310; final 2022 Corps list for the Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast region; observations 380521710, 171848241, 171851496, 315895414, 380492739, 231241653, and 230886532.
MASTER:59 BioBlitz event and grant record
Event descriptions and dates; named methods and experts; Denver Audubon Homestake grant summary; archived guideline reporting and presentation provisions.
MASTER:60 CNHP conservation status handbook and tracking lists
Digital Data Disclaimer; September 2025 workbook tabs for vascular plants, nonvascular plants, animals, and natural communities.
MASTER:61 Official wildlife conservation-priority references
SWAP status and nonregulatory explanation; Thicket Hairstreak and Wilson's Snipe entries; FWS BCR 16 table, p. 29.
MASTER:62 Whitney public-layer spatial screening
Official feature-service layers and dates, investigation coordinates and EPSG:32613 projection method.
MASTER:64 Vail Valley Consolidated Water District v. City of Aurora and reasonable diligence statute
731 P.2d at 668-72; C.R.S. Section 37-92-301(4)(b)-(c).
MASTER:65 Shoshone water rights preservation record and Colorado instream-flow law
FAQ questions on priorities, operation, call, and transaction; Case 25CW3177; May 22, 2026 funding and closing status; C.R.S. Section 37-92-102(3).
MASTER:66 USDA National Environmental Policy Act procedures
Sections 1b.2(f)-(g), 1b.5(b), 1b.7(g), 1b.10(a), and 1b.11(a)(12).
MASTER:67 Upper Colorado River endangered-fish depletion procedure
Depletion threshold, consultation branches, covered species, and recovery-program route.
MASTER:68 Migratory Bird Treaty Act
16 U.S.C. Section 703 and current FWS implementing materials.
MASTER:69 Participation, exhaustion, and review deadlines
Chapter VI Section 6.03.03(4)(b); C.R.C.P. 106(b); *Rigato* paragraphs 30-38; Regulation 87 Sections 87.6(6)(d), 87.6(12), 87.6(14), 87.7(7), 87.8(1)(e), 87.8(2)(b), and 87.8(5); Regulation 21 Sections 21.4 and 21.16; Regulation 82 Section 82.5(B); C.R.S. Sections 25-8-205.1, 25-8-403, and 25-8-404; 33 C.F.R. Section 325.3; 36 C.F.R. Part 218; 16 U.S.C. Section 1540(g); C.R.S. Section 25-8-611.
MASTER:70 Reservoir water-level fluctuation and methylmercury mechanism
Abstract; Sections 3.1-3.4; Figure 2; discussion of water-level fluctuation, porewater sulfate, dissolved organic carbon and methylmercury.
MASTER:71 Gross Reservoir Section 404 decision and pending appeal
2024 WL 4519201 at *24-30; 40 C.F.R. Section 230.12(a)(3)(iv); consolidated appellate dockets Nos. 25-1137, 25-1231 and 25-1299.
MASTER:72 Forest Service Rocky Mountain wetland and riparian historical-range synthesis
Chapter 6, especially the fen development, carbon, disturbance and fire sections and cited Colorado chronology table.
MASTER:73 EPA Two Forks Section 404(c) determination and judicial review
Final determination's project-purpose, aquatic-resource, alternatives and unacceptable-adverse-effect findings; 930 F. Supp. at 491-96.
MASTER:74 Audubon Society of Greater Denver v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
908 F.3d at 603-09 and 618-24.
MASTER:75 Section 401 minimum-flow authority and federal certification clock
511 U.S. at 711-20; 40 C.F.R. Sections 121.6 and 121.9.
MASTER:76 EPA pre-application and post-permit Section 404(c) authority
40 C.F.R. Section 231.1; 829 F.3d at 718-26, following 714 F.3d 608, 615-16 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
MASTER:77 City and County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners and 1041 grandfathering
782 P.2d at 760 and 762-66; C.R.S. Section 24-65.1-107; Chapter VI Section 6.02.12.
MASTER:78 Colorado water-quality review, standing, and exhaustion
C.R.S. Sections 25-8-205.1, 25-8-403, 25-8-404, and 24-4-106; Regulation 21 Sections 21.4 and 21.16; Regulation 31 Section 31.8(3)(b); Regulation 87 Sections 87.6(14), 87.7(7), and 87.8(5); 641 P.2d at 961-65 and n.5; 665 P.2d at 602-04; 2023 COA 11, paragraphs 18-37.
HWF:V4-01 Trends in Rocky Mountain amphibians and the role of beaver as a keystone species
Abstract, study 2002-2011
HWF:V4-02 The effects of hydropattern and predator communities on amphibian occupancy
Abstract, 62 wetland sites
HWF:V4-03 Effects of hydroperiod duration on survival, developmental rate, and size at metamorphosis in boreal chorus frog tadpoles
Abstract, laboratory simulated drawdown
HWF:V4-04 Mountain peatlands range from CO2 sinks at high elevations to sources at low elevations
Abstract; full paper Methods/Results
HWF:V4-06 Using environmental features to model highway crossing behavior of Canada lynx in the Southern Rocky Mountains
Abstract; full paper Methods/Results
HWF:V4-07 Keystone structures maintain forest function for Canada lynx after large-scale spruce beetle outbreak
Abstract; full paper Methods/Results
MEDIA:LYNX-2017 Save Homestake archive: Canada lynx, April 2, 2017
Canada lynx photographed in Homestake Valley on April 2, 2017.
MODEL:LIDAR-2026-09-24 Whitney lidar corridor analysis, addendum 2.0
Matched central gates; native 2 m routes and common-budget envelopes
HWF:LOWER-CREEK-S02 CNHP Colorado Wetlands inventory, lower Homestake export
October 5, 2026 export. Lower Homestake wetland records identify NWIC as their source and 1983 as their imagery date.
HWF:LOWER-CREEK-S03 USGS 3D Hydrography Program, Homestake Creek and Eagle River flowlines
Named creek geometry and downstream flowline connection used to trace the 5.64 km lower-creek reach.
HWF:LOWER-CREEK-S04 USDA Forest Service recreation sites, Homestake Valley and Hornsilver
Public recreation-site locations used for the dispersed-camping anchor near the Blodgett area and the Hornsilver Campground label.
HWF:BEAVER-GUIDE The Beaver Restoration Guidebook, version 2.02
2023, version 2.02, printed p.3 (PDF p.13): off-channel habitat along larger rivers and seasonal main-channel dams during low flow.
HWF:BEAVER-SAINTVRAIN Beaver-mediated lateral hydrologic connectivity, fluvial carbon and nutrient flux, and aquatic ecosystem metabolism
Wegener et al. 2017, North Saint Vrain Creek, Colorado, May-October 2015; sections 2.1 and 3.1, Figure 5: inferred June-July side-channel surface connection and relatively stable off-channel pond levels through October.
HWF:BEAVER-EASTRIVER Beaver dams overshadow climate extremes in controlling riparian hydrology and water quality
Dewey et al. 2022, East River, Colorado: main-channel dam construction during exceptionally low-water summer 2018; seasonal hydrology and figure captions.
HWF:BEAVER-FEN Beaver-mediated water table dynamics in a Rocky Mountain fen
Karran, Westbrook and Bedard-Haughn 2018, Rocky Mountain fen: four intact-dam years and two post-breach years. Abstract reports raised, stabilized water tables and greater storage within a study-specific 150 m radius.
HWF:BEAVER-FISH Relocated beaver can increase water storage and decrease stream temperature in headwater streams
Dittbrenner et al. 2022, Washington headwater streams; abstract: increased storage and cooler downstream summer water at established relocation sites.
HWF:BEAVER-HABITAT Castor canadensis: American beaver
Tesky 1993, U.S. Forest Service species review, habitat, food and cover sections; stable aquatic habitat, forage, underwater shelter access and fluctuating water levels. Accessed October 5, 2026.
HWF:BEAVER-LOCAL-FIELD Eagle River Inventory and Assessment, Appendices A-M
Colorado State University 2005, Appendix A.1, printed A-39 (PDF p.43): Homestake stream-wetland connections and Geyer’s, mountain and diamond-leaf willow field observations.
HWF:BEAVER-OBSERVATIONS Homestake BioBlitz dated observation records, September 23, 2026 snapshot
Castor canadensis rows: 220819403, 220820056, 293591322, 298332228, 373241923, 381088423; June 5, 2024 to July 11, 2026; four Research Grade and two Needs ID.
WATER:CLIMATE-MILLY2020 Colorado River flow dwindles as warming-driven loss of reflective snow energizes evaporation
Milly and Dunne, Science, March 13, 2020. Abstract: basin-scale hydrologic modeling links warming, snow loss and increased evapotranspiration to reduced Colorado River discharge.
WATER:COMPACT1922 Colorado River Compact, 1922
November 24, 1922. Articles II(a), II(f) and III(d), PDF pages 1-2: river-system and Upper Basin definitions; Upper Division states will not cause Lee Ferry flow to be depleted below 75 million acre-feet over any consecutive ten years.
WATER:OPERATIONS2026 Future Colorado River Operations: Record of Decision and 2027-2028 Operating Guidelines
Bureau of Reclamation decision documents, updated September 1, 2026. August 21, 2026 Record of Decision establishes a 2027-2036 framework; first operating guidelines cover 2027-2028.
HWF:CONNECTED-WETLANDS-S01 Homestake whole-complex wetland inventory, completed methods and source record
October 6, 2026 whole-polygon inventory: 36 linked complexes, 362.1 wetland/potential-fen acres, 137.0 acres between Blodgett and the Eagle River confluence, explicit unresolved classes and per-reservoir overlap accounting. Full source identifiers and inventory dates retained.
OCT8:H1 Westbrook, C.J., Cooper, D.J. and Baker, B.W. (2006). Beaver dams and overbank floods influence groundwater-surface water interactions of a Rocky Mountain riparian area. Water Resources Research 42, W06404. Colorado field monitoring.
OCT8:H3 Streich, S.C. and Westbrook, C.J. (2020). Hydrological function of a mountain fen at low elevation under dry conditions. Hydrological Processes 34, 244-257. Canadian fen water budget.
OCT8:H4 Blanken, P.D. (2014). The effect of winter drought on evaporation from a high-elevation wetland. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences. High Creek Fen, Colorado; energy and water fluxes.
OCT8:H6 Weber, N., et al. (2017). Alteration of stream temperature by natural and artificial beaver dams. PLOS ONE 12, e0176313. Eight-year Oregon study.
OCT8:H9 Nash, C.S., et al. (2018). A physical framework for evaluating net effects of wet meadow restoration on late-summer streamflow. Ecohydrology 11, e1953. Water-budget framework tested with Oregon data.
OCT8:H10 Westbrook, C.J., Ronnquist, A. and Bedard-Haughn, A. (2020). Hydrological functioning of a beaver dam sequence and regional dam persistence during an extreme rainstorm. Hydrological Processes 34, 3726-3737. Canadian Rockies, 2013 flood.
OCT8:H11 Dunn, S.B., Rathburn, S.L. and Wohl, E. (2024). Post-fire sediment attenuation in beaver ponds, Rocky Mountains, CO and WY, USA. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 49, 4340-4354. Pond sediment surveys.
OCT8:C3 Schimelpfenig, D.W., Cooper, D.J. and Chimner, R.A. (2014). Effectiveness of Ditch Blockage for Restoring Hydrologic and Soil Processes in Mountain Peatlands. Restoration Ecology 22, 257-265. Four Colorado fens; restoration 1-20 years earlier.
OCT8:C4 Millar, D.J., et al. (2017). Mountain Peatlands Range from CO2 Sinks at High Elevations to Sources at Low Elevations: Implications for a Changing Climate. Ecosystems 20, 416-432. Colorado/Wyoming climatic gradient.
OCT8:C8 Sutfin, N.A. and Wohl, E. (2017). Substantial soil organic carbon retention along floodplains of mountain streams. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 122, 1325-1338. 660 samples across 24 Colorado reaches.
OCT8:C9 Fairfax, E., et al. (2024). Impacts of beaver dams on riverscape burn severity during megafires in the Rocky Mountain region, western United States. GSA Special Paper 562, 131-151. Three 2020 Colorado/Wyoming megafires.
OCT8:C10 Wickland, K.P., et al. (2001). Carbon gas exchange at a southern Rocky Mountain wetland, 1996-1998. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 15, 321-335. Colorado observations plus annual gas-exchange estimates.
OCT8:E2 Chimner, R.A., Lemly, J.M. and Cooper, D.J. (2010). Mountain fen distribution, types and restoration priorities, San Juan Mountains, Colorado, USA. Wetlands 30, 763-771. Regional inventory and field survey.
OCT8:E3 Hossack, B.R., et al. (2015). Trends in Rocky Mountain amphibians and the role of beaver as a keystone species. Biological Conservation 187, 260-269. Four national parks; occupancy and colonization.
OCT8:E4 Baril, L.M., et al. (2011). Songbird response to increased willow (Salix spp.) growth in Yellowstone's northern range. Ecological Applications 21, 2283-2296. Vegetation structure and bird-community comparison.
OCT8:E6 Lindstrom, J.W. and Hubert, W.A. (2004). Ice processes affect habitat use and movements of adult cutthroat trout and brook trout in a Wyoming foothills stream. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 24, 1341-1352. Radio-tracking and winter habitat monitoring.
OCT8:E7 Wegener, P., Covino, T. and Wohl, E. (2017). Beaver-mediated lateral hydrologic connectivity, fluvial carbon and nutrient flux, and aquatic ecosystem metabolism. Water Resources Research 53, 4606-4623. North Saint Vrain Creek, Colorado.
OCT8:E8 Dewey, C., et al. (2022). Beaver dams overshadow climate extremes in controlling riparian hydrology and water quality. Nature Communications 13, 6509. East River, Colorado; fieldwork and reactive transport.
OCT8:E11 Todd, V.L., Shanahan, T.M. and Johnson, B.G. (2025). Hydroclimate and Ecosystem Changes in the Colorado Rocky Mountains Since the Last Glacial Maximum. Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology. Cumbres fen paleoenvironmental record.
OCT8:E12 Briggs, M.A., et al. (2019). Return flows from beaver ponds enhance floodplain-to-river metals exchange in alluvial mountain catchments. Science of the Total Environment 685, 357-369. Two streams near Crested Butte, Colorado.
OCT8:X1 Gallagher, M.K. and Campbell, D.R. (2017). Shifts in water availability mediate plant-pollinator interactions. New Phytologist 215, 792-802. Water manipulation in two Colorado subalpine bluebell populations.
OCT8:X2 Dewey, L., Fritz, K.A., Kirschman, L.J., Feden, M.J. and Whiteman, H.H. (2025). Beaver recolonization explains aquatic insect emergence patterns. Freshwater Science 44, 90-99. Kimball Creek, Colorado, 2011-2018.
OCT8:L4 Colorado Natural Heritage Program. Why Are Wetlands Important? Colorado Wetland Information Center. Official statewide functional account; groundwater, shade, phosphorus, roots and amphibian habitat sections.
OCT8:THREE-CREEKS-S01 Fall, Peterson and Resolution: whole-basin wetland inventory and completed methods
October 8, 2026 analysis using USFWS wetland polygons and USGS NLDI catchments. Whole-basin resource extent; ponds shown separately.
OCT8:HISTORY Colorado Judicial Branch: Water Division 1 history
OCT8:PINE-HISTORY Bureau of Reclamation: Pine River project history
OCT8:AURORA-REUSE City of Aurora: Prairie Waters and reuse of imported supply
HWF:FEN-2011-S01 Malone, Carlson, Smith, Culver and Lemly (2011), Wetland Mapping and Fen Survey in the White River National Forest
Table 1, printed p.5; Gold Park site accounts printed pp.92-99 (PDF pp.96-103), especially pp.92,94,97-98.
HWF:FEN-MAP-V2-S01 Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Fens (CNHP 2025), Fens_2025_V2 map service
Layer 0 metadata, fields FEN_STATUS and Source, unique-value renderer and retained polygon attributes.
HWF:FEN-MAP-ANALYSIS-S01 Save Homestake, CNHP Fens2025V2 watershed classification and modeled-pool comparison, October 10, 2026
homestake_basin, illustrative_footprint_comparison, historical_layer_note and archives_sha256
Source details
MASTER labels identify the case bibliography; HWF labels identify wildlife and wetland research. Titles, links and cited passages identify the supporting evidence.
Save Homestake source register
Source dates: The wildlife observations in Section I were counted on September 23, 2026. Each source retains its publication date.
The original studies, public records, laws and maps below support the case concerning Whitney Reservoir and the Eagle River Joint Use Water Project. Each entry identifies the relevant date, geography and legal or scientific setting.
A. Project history, design, and agency record
MASTER:1. Eagle River Joint Use Water Project Memorandum of Understanding
Publisher/author: City of Aurora, City of Colorado Springs, Colorado River Water Conservation District, Climax Molybdenum Company, and Vail Consortium Date/version: Executed April 21, 1998 URL: Executed MOU Supports: Project objectives, alternatives, yield allocations, phased participation, permitting commitments, and the parties' preliminary finding that Homestake-based alternatives presented potentially significant wetland-inundation and wilderness-encroachment concerns. Scope: The 1998 party agreement records project objectives and commitments. Eagle County is not a signatory; the retained record does not establish a public third-party enforcement right or the status of later amendments. Useful pinpoint: Sections II, III.C, III.D, and V; PDF pp. 1-10.
MASTER:2. Whitney Reservoir drilling application and technical report
Publisher/author: Homestake Partners, submitted to USDA Forest Service Date/version: June 25, 2019 application; later addendum in the Forest Service scoping file URL: Application and technical report Supports: Four historical dam-alignment investigation areas, thirteen published investigation coordinates, proposed borings and seismic work, temporary access, and the applicant's description of the work as a fatal-flaw-level siting study. Scope: The application documents exploratory drilling and investigation locations. A selected reservoir design and complete permanent-facility footprint remain unresolved in this record. Useful pinpoint: SF-299 project description and the technical report's alternatives, access, boring, and coordinate tables.
MASTER:3. Whitney Creek Geotechnical Project decision memorandum
Publisher/author: USDA Forest Service, White River National Forest, Eagle-Holy Cross Ranger District Date/version: Signed March 2021 URL: Forest Service Project 58221 record Supports: Authorization of ten borings, two pedestrian geophysical lines, about 2,693 feet of temporary access, mitigation, and the agency's express reservation of any future reservoir or Eagle River Joint Use project for separate review and permitting. Scope: The page status Completed refers to the geotechnical authorization record. It is not approval of reservoir construction, and its environmental findings were calibrated to a small, temporary action. Useful pinpoint: Decision Memo, Purpose and Need, Decision, Environmental Impacts, Findings Required by Other Laws, and Future Proposals; PDF pp. 1-10.
MASTER:4. Whitney Reservoir Geotechnical Studies: Wetland Resources
Publisher/author: ERO Resources Corporation for Homestake Partners and USDA Forest Service Date/version: October 9, 2020 URL: Project 58221, Attachment D Supports: Seven scientists surveyed 1,117 acres in 2016; the memorandum reports more than 200 wetland acres, 27.08 acres of open water, 111 sample points, and field or laboratory evidence concerning potential fens, including W23. It also records that the geotechnical work was designed to avoid wetlands. Scope: The totals describe the wetland survey area. The underlying June 12, 2017 final-draft delineation, raw GIS, soil logs and laboratory file remain unavailable in the reviewed public archive. Useful pinpoint: Memorandum pp. 1-4 and maps in the attachment; wetland complexes W22, W23, W28, and W33b.
MASTER:5. Biological Assessment and FWS concurrence for the geotechnical investigation
Publisher/author: USDA Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date/version: Assessment dated September 23, 2020; concurrence dated October 26, 2020; included in the 2021 decision record URL: Project 58221, Attachment B Supports: Canada lynx use and habitat context, the Holy Cross Lynx Analysis Unit, geotechnical action-area analysis, limited temporary-effects rationale, and the document's reinitiation language. Scope: It predates the final 2026 Colorado lynx critical-habitat designation and analyzes temporary investigation, not reservoir inundation, permanent access, pumping, power, or operating effects. Reinitiation of an older authorization depends on the regulatory triggers and retained agency discretion; a future permanent reservoir authorization is a new federal action. Useful pinpoint: Assessment sections on Action Area, Canada Lynx, Effects, Conservation Measures, and Reinitiation; FWS concurrence pages at the front of Attachment B.
MASTER:6. Biological Evaluation for the geotechnical investigation
Publisher/author: ERO Resources Corporation and USDA Forest Service Date/version: September 22, 2020, revised October 9, 2020 URL: Project 58221, Attachment C Supports: Existing vegetation and wildlife baseline, species screening, an American marten observation, detection of Olive-sided Flycatchers, survey dates, and effect conclusions for the limited investigation. Scope: Species lists and effect calls describe the small temporary investigation footprint and 2020 information. The Forest Plan appendix’s sensitive-species list reflects May 2009. Useful pinpoint: Species tables and accounts; Olive-sided Flycatcher discussion; American marten observation; survey-method appendices.
MASTER:7. Recreation, Wilderness, and Roadless Area Review
Publisher/author: ERO Resources Corporation for Homestake Water Project Partners Date/version: October 9, 2020 URL: Project 58221, Attachment E Supports: Heavy recreational use, proximity to Holy Cross Wilderness, roadless-area overlap, applicable management context, and estimated temporary investigation noise, including drills reported at 80-100 dBA and the seismic source at 170 dBA. Scope: The analysis evaluates short-duration geotechnical activity and its recreation, wilderness and roadless-area effects. Useful pinpoint: Technical Memorandum sections on recreation, wilderness character, Colorado Roadless Areas, noise, and mitigation; PDF pp. 1-12.
MASTER:8. Cultural Resource Survey, Whitney Reservoir Siting Study
Publisher/author: ERO Resources Corporation for Confluence Water Consulting and USDA Forest Service Date/version: February 2021, based on a June 2020 Class III survey URL: Project 58221, Attachment F Supports: The narrow 5.2-acre geotechnical area of potential effects, prior resources in the surrounding landscape, the historic Homestake Road's eligibility context, and avoidance or monitoring commitments. Scope: The survey and outreach to three Ute Tribes concern the limited siting investigation. Cultural-site locations are confidential. Useful pinpoint: Survey scope and APE, previous investigations and resources, Homestake Road evaluation, recommendations, and consultation record.
MASTER:9. The Eagle River Joint Use Water Project fact sheet
Publisher/author: Colorado Springs Utilities and Aurora Water Date/version: March 2022 URL: Project fact sheet Supports: Proponent description of a potential 6,850-20,000 acre-foot lower-Homestake reservoir, collection and pumpback concept, investigation status, participant yield goals, and later need for definitive delineation and permits if a feasible configuration is identified. Scope: A two-page proponent summary. Storage capacity, average annual yield, firm yield and annual pumping are different measures. Useful pinpoint: Both pages, especially Project Benefits, Project Features, Project Status, and Next Steps.
MASTER:10. Water Division 5 diligence applications and 2026 related pleading
Publisher/author: Colorado Judicial Branch, District Courts, Water Divisions 5 and 2; filings by or concerning the Homestake Partners Date/version: June and September 2023 resumes; April 2026 Water Division 2 resume URL: June 2023 Water Division 5 resume, Case 23CW3087, September 2023 Water Division 5 resume, Case 23CW3138, and April 2026 Water Division 2 resume Supports: The applicants’ diligence allegations, integrated-system relationships and continued pursuit of the 1998 MOU project. The later Division 2 pleading concerns related system activity. Scope: Resumes summarize applications and pleadings. They preserve applicant allegations separately from adjudicated findings and construction permits. The Division 2 filing concerns a different docket from the Division 5 cases. Useful pinpoint: Case 23CW3087 in the June 2023 resume; Case 23CW3138, printed pp. 15-27 of the September 2023 resume; and the identified Homestake-related entry in the April 2026 Water Division 2 resume.
MASTER:11. Colorado Springs Utilities Integrated Water Resource Plan
Publisher/author: Colorado Springs Utilities Date/version: 2017 adopted IWRP; May 19, 2025 update packet URL: 2017 IWRP and May 19, 2025 Utilities Board Working Committee packet Supports: The utility's portfolio-based need analysis, a modeled long-range supply gap, a 10,000 acre-foot assumed Colorado Springs share of the MOU project, conservation, reuse, agricultural transfers, other storage options, and the need to refine a permittable configuration. The 2025 packet documents an update process expected to continue through 2028 and identifies renewed work on demand, conservation, reuse, storage, climate and portfolio evaluation. Scope: The 2017 forecasts, costs, climate assumptions, conservation potential and project timing reflect that planning period. The 2025 packet contains material for the plan update. Useful pinpoint: 2017 executive summary, Balanced Portfolio, alternative scoring, Eagle River MOU project description, implementation schedule and cost-class cautions; 2025 packet sections on IWRP update scope, schedule and workstreams.
B. Eagle County and Colorado law
MASTER:12. Eagle County Land Use Regulations, Chapter VI
Publisher/author: Eagle County Date/version: County-linked enacted compilation located September 12, 2026; PDF filename identifies May 2012 URL: Chapter VI, Areas and Activities of State Interest Supports: The Chapter VI compilation before the October 27 vote, including application requirements, wetlands evidence, the applicant’s burden, benefit-loss balancing, conditions and decision procedures. Scope: Which edition governs a particular application depends on the enacting resolution, transition terms and facts of that application. Useful pinpoint: Sections 6.01.04-.05; 6.03.01-.03; 6.03.06; 6.03.10; 6.04.01-.03; 6.05; Appendix A.
MASTER:13. Eagle County 1041 Regulations review draft
Publisher/author: Eagle County Date/version: July 10, 2026 planning-stage draft URL: July 10, 2026 review draft and active application and hearing page Supports: Proposed whole-project definition, applicant burden, mandatory denial if any criterion fails, applicant-funded experts, fen, watershed, groundwater, hydrograph, wildlife, noise, diesel, cultural, least-adverse-alternative, and substitute-review provisions. The July text provides the history of provisions that changed before the October vote. Scope: July planning-stage language. The Board approved Attachment 1.2 with the changes in Attachment 1.1 on October 27. Useful pinpoint: Sections 105(C), 201(B), 204(A), 307, 331-332, 401, 406, and 434-435.
MASTER:14. Colorado Areas and Activities of State Interest Act
Publisher/author: Colorado General Assembly Date/version: Archived source: linked Title 24 compilation is 2024. The current catalog separately identifies the official 2026 compilation. URL: 2024 C.R.S. Title 24 compilation Supports: County authority to designate and regulate water projects, adopt more protective criteria tied to statutory purposes, require a permit, deny for noncompliance, and create a written record. It also preserves water-right law and contains a narrow May 17, 1974 grandfather rule. Scope: Local regulation remains tied to the statute’s objectives; the grandfather provision turns on its specified historical facts. Useful pinpoint: C.R.S. Sections 24-65.1-106, -107, -202, -203, -402, and -501.
MASTER:15. City of Colorado Springs v. Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County
Publisher/author: Colorado Court of Appeals Date/version: 895 P.2d 1105, decided 1994 URL: Published opinion Supports: A project-specific Colorado precedent upholding Eagle County's prior Homestake denial where the record supported failure of mandatory criteria, deficient wetland mitigation, rare-plant harm, nuisance, and benefit-loss findings. It also holds that decreed water rights do not entitle the holder to build any chosen configuration. Scope: The ruling addresses a different project and administrative record. Its application to Whitney depends on current law and the project’s legal and factual circumstances. Useful pinpoint: 895 P.2d at 1109-16, especially wetlands at 1110-13 and water rights and alternatives at 1115-16.
MASTER:16. Colorado House Bill 24-1379 and Homestake fish-and-wildlife provisions
Publisher/author: Colorado General Assembly and Governor of Colorado Date/version: Signed May 29, 2024 URL: Signed act, bill history, C.R.S. Section 37-60-122.2, and Colorado Parks and Wildlife Chapter W-16 Supports: Colorado’s response to federal jurisdictional contraction after Sackett, the state dredge-and-fill authorization program, mitigation framework and fish-and-wildlife provisions, including the express Homestake-specific exemption. Scope: The statute does not categorically ban fen impacts and preserves specified water-right limitations, exemptions, exclusions, and transition rules. Implementing Regulation 87 supplies much of the operative detail. The Homestake fish-and-wildlife exemption is not a blanket exemption from county, federal, water-quality, wildlife, or environmental review, and its application to each new component requires legal and factual analysis. Useful pinpoint: H.B. 24-1379 legislative findings, Section 2, pp. 2-4; dredge-and-fill program provisions, Sections 3-4; fish-and-wildlife provisions, Section 5, especially signed-act pp. 25-28; C.R.S. Section 37-60-122.2; CPW Chapter W-16, Homestake Water Project provision.
MASTER:17. Colorado Water Quality Control Act dredge-and-fill provisions
Publisher/author: Colorado General Assembly Date/version: Current public statutory compilations checked September 12, 2026 URL: C.R.S. Section 25-8-103, Section 25-8-205.1, and Section 25-8-104 Supports: State waters expressly include wetlands; the statute authorizes individual and general dredge-and-fill review, requires mitigation in specified cases, excludes fens from the isolated-state-waters general-authorization shortcut, and defines limits related to water rights and material injury. Scope: Statutory coverage concerns a discharge into covered, nonexcluded waters. The program’s water-right limitations remain part of its scope. Useful pinpoint: Sections 25-8-103(19), 25-8-205.1, and 25-8-104.
MASTER:18. Regulation 87, Dredge and Fill Control Regulation
Publisher/author: Colorado Water Quality Control Commission Date/version: Adopted February 9, 2026; effective March 30, 2026; Rule Version 12462 URL: Official Regulation 87 PDF Supports: State coverage of nonexcluded state waters regardless of federal WOTUS status, subject to transition and federal-coordination provisions; activity-as-a-whole review; purpose and need; practicable alternatives; incorporated Section 404(b)(1) prohibitions; functional assessment; mitigation; CPW consultation; applicant burdens; official applicability determinations; monitoring; ongoing-operations agreements; modification; and enforcement. Fens are treated as difficult to replace, and lack of appropriate practicable mitigation may prevent authorization where the independent state framework applies. Scope: There is no categorical Colorado fen-fill ban. Applicability may turn on federal permitting, grandfathering, exclusions, exemptions and the exact discharge. When all predicates for a qualifying major federal action affecting WOTUS and non-WOTUS waters are met, Section 87.6(4) requires reliance on federal preapplication work and Corps LEDPA/public-interest review and limits the state authorization to compensatory mitigation for qualifying non-WOTUS waters. Groundwater itself is excluded from the dredge-and-fill authorization, specified temporary standards exceedances are deemed compliant absent acute toxicity or a drinking-water exceedance, and water-right limitations remain material. Useful pinpoint: Sections 87.2-.6, 87.10, and 87.11, especially 87.3(4) transition provisions and 87.3(7) official determinations; 87.6(4) federal coordination; 87.6(7)(e)(iv) and (f); 87.6(13)(c) ongoing operations; 87.8(1)(e) Temporary Authorization transition; and 87.10(1)(b), (3)(g)(iii).
MASTER:19. Regulation 31, Basic Standards and Methodologies for Surface Water
Publisher/author: Colorado Water Quality Control Commission Date/version: Effective December 31, 2024; Rule Version 11749 URL: Official Regulation 31 PDF Supports: Wetland definitions and classifications, interim wetland standards, reviewable-water antidegradation, significant-degradation screens, alternatives, and necessity analysis. These provisions can require a water-quality record for both construction and operation. Scope: Antidegradation review requires a pollutant or water-quality nexus. Statutory constraints limit some minimum-flow and material-injury conditions. Useful pinpoint: Sections 31.5(44), 31.7(1)(b)(iv), 31.8, and 31.13(1)(e); PDF pp. 6, 12-13, 21-27, and 47-48.
MASTER:20. Regulation 33, Upper Colorado River Basin classifications
Publisher/author: Colorado Water Quality Control Commission Date/version: Current version effective December 31, 2025; source status checked September 12, 2026 URL: Official rule page Supports: Segment-specific classifications for Homestake Creek and tributary wetlands, including Reviewable status for the relevant mainstem and ordinary tributary segments and a Homestake-specific footnote affecting certain wilderness Outstanding Waters. Scope: The classifications and footnotes are segment-specific. Homestake waters do not all carry an Outstanding Waters classification. Useful pinpoint: Appendix 33-1, segments COUCEA01, COUCEA03, and COUCEA04, including the Homestake Water Project footnote.
MASTER:21. Regulation 82, Section 401 Water Quality Certification Regulation
Publisher/author: Colorado Water Quality Control Commission Date/version: Effective January 31, 2025 URL: Official Regulation 82 rule page Supports: A separate state certification gate for covered federal licenses or permits, including construction and operation impacts, public notice, lawful conditions, written findings, and denial where compliance cannot be assured even with conditions. Scope: It applies only when a covered federal license or permit may result in a discharge. Water-right and material-injury limits may constrain available conditions. Useful pinpoint: Sections 82.1, 82.3(C), 82.4, 82.5, and 82.6.
MASTER:22. Wild Horse Reservoir Regulation 87 record and Aurora statements
Publisher/author: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and Aurora Water Date/version: Individual Authorization application deemed complete August 2026; public notice September 4, 2026; pages checked September 12, 2026 URL: CDPHE project docket, Aurora state review page, project alternatives, FAQs, Aurora water innovation, Aurora water sources, and Aurora mountain supply Supports: A live Regulation 87 comparator from the same municipal proponent, Aurora's screening of more than twenty options, Aurora's published conservation, reuse and system-capacity context, and Aurora's statement that existing-system improvements, conservation, and reuse can meet projected community demand through 2075 without added storage but not its emergency-reserve objective. Scope: Wild Horse is a separate, approximately 90,000 acre-foot off-channel proposal with a distinct water source and purpose. Its capacity and storage-resilience benefits are distinct from Whitney-specific dependable yield. Useful pinpoint: CDPHE application and public-notice materials; FAQ question on project need and emergency reserves; alternatives screening and LEDPA discussion; Aurora pages describing Prairie Waters, conservation, reuse, storage and mountain supply.
C. Federal wetland permitting and environmental review
MASTER:23. Clean Water Act Sections 404 and 401
Publisher/author: United States Congress Date/version: Current United States Code text checked September 12, 2026 URL: 33 U.S.C. Section 1344 and 33 U.S.C. Section 1341 Supports: Federal authorization for discharges of dredged or fill material into jurisdictional waters, EPA oversight, general-permit authority and recapture, and state certification for federally licensed or permitted activities that may result in a discharge. Scope: Federal Section 404 jurisdiction is feature-specific after Sackett. Permit applicability depends on the proposed discharge, final design and jurisdictional facts. Useful pinpoint: Section 404(a)-(c), (e), (f)(2), (o), and (t); Section 401(a) and (d).
MASTER:24. Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines
Publisher/author: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Date/version: 40 C.F.R. Part 230, current eCFR text checked September 12, 2026 URL: 40 C.F.R. Part 230 Supports: No discharge may be permitted if a practicable alternative would cause less aquatic harm without other significant adverse environmental consequences, the discharge would cause prohibited degradation, or impacts have not been minimized. If material information remains insufficient at the determination stage, Section 230.12(a)(3)(iv) requires a noncompliance finding. The rules require written determinations addressing cumulative and secondary aquatic effects and expressly identify fluctuating impoundment and downstream water levels from dam operation. They also identify dewatering, permanent flooding and altered water movement as wetland effects, direct use of demonstrated restoration methods or small-scale pilots for novel methods, and comparison of the lost ecosystem with the proposed replacement. Scope: The Guidelines apply to a discharge within federal jurisdiction. The water-dependency presumption, feasible alternatives, and significance findings remain fact-sensitive and receive administrative deference when adequately supported. Useful pinpoint: Sections 230.10-.12, especially 230.10(a)-(d), 230.11(g)-(h), 230.12(a)(3)(iv), 230.41(b), 230.75(d), and 230.77(c)-(d).
MASTER:25. Compensatory mitigation for losses of aquatic resources
Publisher/author: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Date/version: 33 C.F.R. Part 332, final rule issued in 2008; current eCFR text checked September 12, 2026 URL: 33 C.F.R. Part 332 and 2008 final rule record Supports: Avoidance and minimization precede compensation; fens are expressly recognized as difficult to replace; in-kind compensation and greater assurance may be required; ratios may exceed 1:1; and temporal loss matters. When compensatory mitigation is required for an individual permit, Section 332.4(c)(1)(i) requires the applicable final mitigation plan to be approved before permit issuance and incorporated by reference. Scope: The district engineer has discretion over method, ratios, performance standards, monitoring and assurances, subject to a reasoned record. Required documentation differs for permittee-responsible, mitigation-bank and in-lieu-fee approaches, and some plan elements may be placed directly in enforceable permit conditions. Useful pinpoint: Sections 332.3(a)-(b), (d)-(f), (h), (k), and (m)-(n); 332.4(b)-(c); 332.6.
MASTER:26. 2026 Nationwide Permits and Colorado Regional Conditions
Publisher/author: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, including Albuquerque and Omaha Districts Date/version: National permits published January 8, 2026; Colorado conditions effective March 15, 2026 through March 15, 2031 URL: 2026 national NWP final rule and Colorado regional conditions Supports: Limits and notice rules for roads, temporary access and dewatering, electric utilities, and water lines; anti-stacking and endangered-species conditions; and Colorado Regional Condition 3, which revokes most nationwide permits for actual dredged or fill discharges in qualifying Histosol peatlands, including fens and bogs. Scope: Regional Condition 3 does not itself establish a qualifying Histosol or federal jurisdiction and does not bar an individual permit. Some nationwide permits remain available subject to notice and other conditions. Useful pinpoint: NWP 14, 33, 57, and 58; General Conditions 18, 22, 23, and 28; preconstruction-notice requirements; Colorado Regional Conditions 1 and 3.
MASTER:27. Joint guidance on basic and overall project purpose
Publisher/author: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Date/version: January 2026 URL: Joint purpose guidance Supports: The Corps must exercise independent judgment, define a generic basic purpose and a sufficiently broad overall purpose, and avoid a site-locked formulation that predetermines the alternatives outcome. The guidance gives a directly relevant future-water-supply example and identifies conservation, reuse, aquifer storage, existing storage, gravel pits, off-channel storage, smaller facilities, and portfolios as possible alternatives categories. Scope: Agency guidance on defining project purpose. Legitimate applicant objectives may be considered, and alternatives must meet the properly defined purpose. Useful pinpoint: PDF pp. 2-4, especially the reliable-future-water-supply example.
MASTER:28. Corps public-interest, application-scope, and general-permit regulations
Publisher/author: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Date/version: Current eCFR text checked September 12, 2026 URL: 33 C.F.R. Section 320.4, Section 325.1, Part 330, and Section 333.18 Supports: Public-interest review includes conservation, wetlands, water supply, energy, safety and cumulative considerations. Section 320.4(b) treats wetlands as complete and interrelated systems and generally disfavors alteration of important wetlands unless benefits outweigh damage; Section 320.4(m) requires consideration of demand reduction and efficiency to minimize new supply. An individual-permit application must disclose activities reasonably related to the same project. The district engineer may require individual review, related activities cannot automatically be segmented into separate general-permit packages, and Section 333.18(c)(4) requires the same scope for environmental consequences and alternatives as for project benefits. Scope: Same project and single and complete project are regulatory terms. Scope depends on functional dependence, Corps control and responsibility, and the actual discharge. Useful pinpoint: Section 320.4(a), (b), (m), and (r); 325.1(b) and (d)(2); 330.1(d), 330.2(i), 330.5, and 330.6(d); 333.18(c)(1)-(4).
MASTER:29. Current WOTUS definition and continuous-surface-connection guidance
Publisher/author: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Date/version: 33 C.F.R. Section 328.3 current text; joint memorandum dated March 12, 2025 URL: Current WOTUS definition, 2025 joint memorandum, and current implementation page Supports: The current federal jurisdictional test for adjacent wetlands and agency interpretation of direct abutment or touching, discrete features, and case-specific temporary interruptions. It defines the water and connection criteria relevant to jurisdiction. Scope: Federal jurisdiction depends on the applicable water and surface-connection criteria. Colorado Regulation 87 may apply independently to state waters. Useful pinpoint: Section 328.3(a) and (c)(2); memorandum pp. 4-6.
MASTER:30. Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency
Publisher/author: Supreme Court of the United States Date/version: 598 U.S. 651, decided May 25, 2023 URL: Official opinion Supports: Federal wetland jurisdiction requires a covered relatively permanent water and a continuous surface connection making the wetland difficult to distinguish from that water. It explains why WOTUS cannot be presumed from the ecological label fen. Scope: The decision addresses federal jurisdiction. State wetland authority has a separate legal basis, and federal coverage depends on each water’s characteristics and surface connections. Useful pinpoint: 598 U.S. at 671 and 678-79; slip opinion pp. 20-27.
MASTER:31. Holy Cross Wilderness Fund v. Madigan
Publisher/author: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date/version: 960 F.2d 1515, decided 1992 URL: Published opinion Supports: The court upheld Homestake II federal approvals against a record containing a categorical no-wetland-loss condition, extensive baseline work, repeated alternatives review, and an unusual permit-first sequence followed by deferred mitigation planning. Scope: This judgment concerns the historical project and administrative record. Whitney involves later project records, mitigation rules, federal jurisdiction, Colorado law and wildlife designations. Useful pinpoint: 960 F.2d at 1518-29, including alternatives, wetlands, mitigation planning, and the court's description of the review sequence.
MASTER:32. Utahns for Better Transportation v. U.S. Department of Transportation
Publisher/author: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date/version: 305 F.3d 1152 (2002), modified 319 F.3d 1207 (2003) URL: Opinion text Supports: Agencies must verify important alternatives and cost assumptions; a permit cannot issue when available information is insufficient for the required Guidelines determination. It also addresses independent utility and the distinct scope of CWA cumulative effects. Scope: A transportation-project ruling on alternatives and permit findings. Later law governs NEPA scope. Useful pinpoint: 305 F.3d at 1179-80 and 1186-92.
MASTER:33. Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Flowers
Publisher/author: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date/version: 359 F.3d 1257, decided 2004 URL: Opinion Supports: The Corps may consider legitimate applicant objectives, scale analysis to impacts, and receive deference when its practicability and aquatic-effects record is supported. Scope: The court’s deference rests on a coherent practicability and aquatic-effects record. Useful pinpoint: 359 F.3d at 1269-75.
MASTER:34. Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County and current Army NEPA procedures
Publisher/author: Supreme Court of the United States and U.S. Department of the Army Date/version: Seven County, 605 U.S. 168 (2025); Army interim final rule effective in 2025 URL: Official Supreme Court opinion, 33 C.F.R. Part 333, and Army rulemaking record Supports: The decision defines the scope of NEPA review: agencies receive substantial deference on scope and generally need not analyze effects of separate projects they cannot prevent. Part 333 supplies current Corps procedures for permit NEPA review, alternatives, significance, applicant material, and public process. Scope: NEPA establishes a procedural review duty. Review covers reasonably foreseeable effects of the authorized facility and dependent components within agency control. Useful pinpoint: Seven County, 605 U.S. at 177-92; 33 C.F.R. Sections 333.17-.18, .20, .22-.23, .35-.36, .51, and .61.
D. Federal land, wildlife, wilderness, and cultural resources
MASTER:35. Endangered Species Act Section 7 and consultation regulations
Publisher/author: United States Congress and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date/version: Current statutory and regulatory text checked September 12, 2026 URL: 16 U.S.C. Section 1536, 50 C.F.R. Section 402.02, 50 C.F.R. Section 402.14, and 50 C.F.R. Section 402.16 Supports: Each federal agency must ensure its action is not likely to jeopardize a listed species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, using the best scientific and commercial data available. Consultation covers the action area, not merely the federal parcel or fill footprint, and may produce reasonable and prudent alternatives or measures. Adverse modification considers the value of the designation as a whole, and Section 402.16 identifies when consultation on an existing action must be reinitiated. Scope: Section 7 applies through a federal nexus and evaluates species or habitat effects through consultation on the complete action. Reinitiation requires the rule’s predicates, including retained federal involvement or control where specified. Useful pinpoint: 16 U.S.C. Section 1536(a)(2), (b)-(d); 50 C.F.R. definitions of action, action area, and destruction or adverse modification; Sections 402.14(a)-(c) and (g)-(i); and 402.16.
MASTER:36. Final revised Canada lynx critical-habitat designation
Publisher/author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date/version: 91 Fed. Reg. 43,732, published July 16, 2026; effective August 17, 2026; corrected July 29, 2026 URL: Final rule and correction Supports: First final Canada lynx critical habitat in Colorado, including Unit 6, Southern Rockies, and the physical or biological features and special-management considerations relevant to federal review. The official shapefile supports a reproducible screen showing ten of thirteen 2019 investigation points inside the final polygon. Scope: The mapped investigation points locate the authorized drilling work. Their overlap is distinct from reservoir or permanent-facility overlap, and the rule treats existing infrastructure separately from proposed facilities. Useful pinpoint: Unit 6 description, physical or biological features, effects of designation, exclusions, maps, effective date, and accompanying final GIS dataset.
MASTER:37. White River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
Publisher/author: USDA Forest Service Date/version: 2002 Forest Plan, as amended; retained source edition. URL: White River National Forest plan materials Supports: Mandatory and discretionary direction for water and aquatic resources, wetlands, groundwater-dependent systems, wildlife habitat, recreation, roadless and wilderness-adjacent management, and management area 5.41 deer and elk winter range. The plan also contains the S1 permanent-development lynx-connectivity standard and specific American Indian Rights and Interests standards protecting important cultural areas and sensitive traditional knowledge. Scope: Standards, guidelines and desired conditions have different legal force. The plan appendix’s May 2009 sensitive-species list has its own date and scope. Useful pinpoint: Main plan printed p. 2-36/PDF p. 73; Forestwide Water and Aquatic Resources direction; management area 5.41 direction on forage, birthing, winter and spring disturbance, semiprimitive setting, and roads; Canada lynx Standard S1; plan appendices AA and EE.
MASTER:38. Forest Service special-use screening, NFMA consistency, and federal wetland avoidance
Publisher/author: USDA Forest Service, United States Congress, and Executive Office of the President Date/version: Current federal law checked September 12, 2026; Executive Order 11990 dated May 24, 1977 URL: 36 C.F.R. Section 251.54, 16 U.S.C. Section 1604(i), and Executive Order 11990 Supports: A new use of National Forest System land requires screening and authorization; Forest Service actions must be consistent with the governing forest plan; and federal agencies must avoid support of new construction in wetlands when a practicable alternative exists and minimize unavoidable harm. Scope: Screening, consistency, plan amendment, valid-existing-rights, statutory exceptions and the agency’s control over specific facilities determine how these authorities apply. Useful pinpoint: 36 C.F.R. Section 251.54(e); 16 U.S.C. Section 1604(i); Executive Order 11990 Sections 1(a)-(b) and 2(a)-(b).
MASTER:39. Colorado Roadless Rule
Publisher/author: USDA Forest Service Date/version: 36 C.F.R. Part 294, Subpart D, current eCFR text checked September 12, 2026 URL: Colorado Roadless Rule Supports: Restrictions and findings governing tree cutting, road construction, and linear facilities in Colorado Roadless Areas. The rule defines linear facilities to include pipelines, electrical power lines, dams, reservoirs, and water-conveyance structures, and can require an EIS for significant alteration of undeveloped character. Scope: Homestake is a general-tier Colorado Roadless Area. The rule contains preexisting-water-right and water-conveyance exceptions. The map comparison uses public GIS boundaries and the published investigation points. Useful pinpoint: Section 294.41 definitions; Section 294.42 tree cutting; Section 294.43 road construction and reconstruction; Section 294.44 linear construction zones; and Section 294.45 environmental documentation and EIS requirements.
MASTER:40. Colorado Wilderness Act of 1980
Publisher/author: United States Congress Date/version: Public Law 96-560, enacted December 22, 1980 URL: Statutes at Large PDF Supports: Holy Cross Wilderness designation, preservation of specified Homestake conditional water rights and project interests, and the express no-buffer provision. It defines the exact statutory terrain for claims about wilderness infringement. Scope: The Act contains express Homestake provisions. Their application depends on the historical right, selected facilities and scope of the claimed exception. Useful pinpoint: Sections 102(a)(5), 104(b), and 110; 94 Stat. 3266, 3268, and 3271.
MASTER:41. National Historic Preservation Act Section 106, implementing regulations, and Pueblo of Sandia
Publisher/author: United States Congress, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date/version: Current statute and regulations checked September 12, 2026; Pueblo of Sandia v. United States, 50 F.3d 856, decided March 14, 1995 URL: 54 U.S.C. Section 306108, 36 C.F.R. Part 800, and Pueblo of Sandia opinion Supports: A federal agency must define the area of potential effects, make a reasonable and good-faith identification effort, assess direct and indirect effects, consult SHPO and Tribes, and seek resolution before approval. Pueblo of Sandia holds that a form request alone was inadequate where the agency had notice of likely traditional cultural properties, failed to pursue information, disregarded relevant Tribal communications, and did not account for cultural limits on disclosure. Scope: Section 106 is principally procedural, with avoidance, documentation, treatment and agreements among its outcomes. Pueblo of Sandia concerns the agency’s consultation record under an earlier regulatory version. Confidential cultural information receives protection, and Tribes speak for their own cultural interests. The prior outreach concerned limited drilling. Useful pinpoint: 54 U.S.C. Section 306108; 36 C.F.R. Sections 800.2, 800.3, 800.4, 800.5, 800.6, and 800.11(c); Pueblo of Sandia, 50 F.3d at 859-62.
MASTER:42. Camp Hale-Continental Divide National Monument proclamation
Publisher/author: President of the United States Date/version: Proclamation 10476, October 12, 2022; 87 Fed. Reg. 63,381 URL: Official proclamation Supports: Ute cultural history, 10th Mountain Division and military landscape context, monument objects, valid-existing-rights language, and standards for expansion or construction of water infrastructure within the monument. Scope: The proclamation recognizes Ute cultural connections, the 10th Mountain Division’s legacy and the surrounding mountain landscape. Useful pinpoint: 87 Fed. Reg. at 63,383-84 and 63,387, including monument objects and water-infrastructure provisions.
E. Fen hydrogeology, restoration, and replacement science
MASTER:43. Federal fen background and groundwater-dependent-ecosystem field methods
Publisher/author: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, USDA Forest Service, Rodney A. Chimner, and David J. Cooper Date/version: EPA page updated January 15, 2026; Forest Service General Technical Report WO-86b issued 2012; mountain-peatland manual issued 2024 URL: EPA, Classification and Types of Wetlands: Fens, Forest Service GDE Level II Inventory Field Guide, and Mountain Peatland Restoration: Assessment, Goals, and Approaches Supports: Fens depend principally on groundwater and upslope inputs; peat formation can span millennia; source areas and hydroperiod matter; and project review can use structured hydrogeologic, soil, vegetation, water-quality, and disturbance methods rather than a simple wetland-line buffer. The restoration manual identifies reservoir construction as a peatland disturbance and explains that excessive or prolonged inundation can kill peatland plants, especially mosses. Scope: General agency references on fen formation, groundwater connections, ecological functions and field methods. Useful pinpoint: EPA Fens, Functions and Values, and Status sections; Forest Service guide chapters on conceptual models, water sources, flow paths, monitoring, soils, and vegetation; mountain-peatland manual discussion of reservoir disturbance and excessive inundation.
MASTER:44. Inventory of Fens in the White River National Forest
Publisher/author: Patricia Laughlin, Joanna Lemly, and Gabrielle Smith, Colorado Natural Heritage Program for USDA Forest Service Date/version: Final report, July 2025 URL: CNHP final report Supports: Forest-wide aerial interpretation and field verification; 8,946 potential fen polygons, including 271 confirmed and 1,366 likely fens; conservation recommendations; and watershed-level results of 56 confirmed or likely fens totaling 86 acres in French Creek-Homestake Creek HUC12 and nine totaling 45 acres in Whitney Creek-Homestake Creek HUC12. Scope: These are watershed inventory totals with confirmed/likely classes. They are separate from the dissolved wetland and Potential Fen overlap calculated for the four modeled full-pool flood zones. Useful pinpoint: Executive Summary; Methods pp. 7-12; Table 1; Appendix A pp. 41-43.
MASTER:45. Corps South Pacific Division uniform mitigation performance standards
Publisher/author: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Pacific Division Date/version: 2012 technical guidance URL: Uniform Performance Standards table Supports: Corps technical recognition that organic-dominated slope wetlands and fens require type-specific hydrology, soil, vegetation, monitoring, and performance measures, rather than acreage shallow water or vegetation survival as full replacement. Scope: Regional technical guidance for mitigation performance. The district engineer retains site-specific authority. Useful pinpoint: Rows and notes for organic-dominated slope wetlands and fens; hydrology, substrate, vegetation, monitoring, and contingency measures.
MASTER:46. Compensating for Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act
Publisher/author: National Research Council, National Academies Date/version: 2001 URL: National Academies report Supports: Independent synthesis finding persistent shortcomings in wetland-compensation practice and emphasizing watershed context, functions, hydrogeomorphic setting, enforceable performance standards, long-term stewardship, and avoidance before compensation. Scope: A national synthesis of wetland-compensation practice and design principles published before the 2008 federal mitigation rule. Useful pinpoint: Executive Summary and chapters on goal setting, site selection, hydrology, performance, monitoring, and institutional responsibility.
MASTER:47. Fens of the United States
Publisher/author: Barbara L. Bedford and Kevin S. Godwin Date/version: Wetlands 23, 2003, pp. 608-629 URL: Article PDF Supports: Peer-reviewed synthesis of fen distribution, groundwater and geochemical controls, landscape connections, biodiversity, and mismatch between ecological systems and fragmented legal treatment. Scope: A national synthesis of fen hydrology, biodiversity and landscape connections. Useful pinpoint: Sections on definition, hydrology, landscape connection, biodiversity, and scientific connection versus legal isolation; DOI 10.1672/0277-5212(2003)023[0608:FOTUSD]2.0.CO;2.
MASTER:48. Rocky Mountain fen carbon accumulation and water-table response
Publisher/author: Rodney A. Chimner, David J. Cooper, and William J. Parton; Rodney A. Chimner and David J. Cooper Date/version: Wetlands 22, 2002, pp. 100-110; Canadian Journal of Botany 81, 2003, pp. 477-491; Soil Biology and Biochemistry 35, 2003, pp. 345-351 URL: Carbon accumulation paper, carbon dynamics paper, and water-table experiment Supports: Colorado-specific peer-reviewed evidence that high-elevation fen peat records and carbon accumulation span long periods and that water-table position strongly affects carbon dioxide exchange. Scope: Colorado studies of peat chronology and carbon responses to water-table position. Carbon balance varies by site, season, methane, temperature and vegetation. Useful pinpoint: Methods and results on peat chronology, net carbon accumulation, hydrologic modification, and experimental water-table levels.
MASTER:49. Restoring vegetation of mined Southern Rocky Mountain peatlands
Publisher/author: David J. Cooper and Lee H. MacDonald Date/version: Restoration Ecology 8, 2000, pp. 103-111 URL: Article record Supports: Colorado field comparison showing that mined peatlands retained far fewer species than intact reference fens after recovery periods extending to roughly four decades, supporting caution about vegetation and ecosystem equivalence after peat destruction. Scope: A comparison of mined Southern Rocky Mountain peatlands with intact reference fens, covering vegetation recovery over periods extending to roughly four decades. Useful pinpoint: Study sites, reference comparison, species richness results, and restoration implications; DOI 10.1046/j.1526-100x.2000.80016.x.
MASTER:50. Ditch blockage and recovery of mountain peatland processes
Publisher/author: Daniel W. Schimelpfenig, David J. Cooper, and Rodney A. Chimner Date/version: Restoration Ecology 22, 2014, pp. 257-265 URL: Publisher DOI Supports: Colorado evidence that blocking drainage improved summer water tables and net ecosystem carbon-dioxide exchange while important peat physical properties remained different from reference conditions after about twenty years. It separates selected hydrologic and carbon-exchange responses from full soil-process recovery. Scope: The study concerns drained peatlands and ditch repair and evaluates peat properties after rewetting. Useful pinpoint: Hydrology and soil-property comparisons, recovery-time discussion, and management implications; DOI 10.1111/rec.12053.
MASTER:51. Short-term wetland success criteria and long-term outcomes
Publisher/author: M. Adam and coauthors Date/version: Restoration Ecology 32, 2024, e14231 URL: Open article Supports: Revisit of a 12-wetland Colorado mitigation program deemed successful after year-five criteria were met over sufficient area. At year fifteen, only 55 percent of 72 sampled plots met the study's reference-community outcome. The result shows that early program-level compliance can mask divergent later plot trajectories. Scope: The study evaluates ecological outcomes across 12 restored Colorado mountain wetlands. Useful pinpoint: Methods, year-five versus year-fifteen classification, reference-community comparison, and conclusions; DOI 10.1111/rec.14231.
MASTER:52. Hydrologic similarity does not guarantee similar plant communities
Publisher/author: Jason P. Sueltenfuss and David J. Cooper Date/version: Restoration Ecology 27, 2019, pp. 1137-1144 URL: Article record Supports: Peer-reviewed evidence that restored wetlands can attain hydrologic conditions resembling references without developing comparable plant communities, reinforcing the need for multiple independent performance endpoints. Scope: The study compares hydrology and plant communities at restored and reference wetlands. Useful pinpoint: Reference-site design, hydrologic and vegetation comparisons, and management conclusions.
MASTER:53. Structural and functional loss in restored wetlands
Publisher/author: David Moreno-Mateos and coauthors Date/version: PLOS Biology 10, 2012, e1001247 URL: Open article Supports: Global meta-analysis finding that restored and created wetlands commonly retain persistent structural and functional deficits for decades and, in some cases, much longer. Scope: The meta-analysis documents persistent restoration deficits across wetland types and regions. Useful pinpoint: Abstract, recovery trajectories, climate and size effects, and supporting data; DOI 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001247.
MASTER:54. Rewetting does not return drained fens to their former state
Publisher/author: J. Kreyling and coauthors Date/version: Nature Communications 12, 2021, article 5693 URL: Open article Supports: Multisite European evidence that rewetted fens can remain compositionally and biogeochemically different from near-natural reference fens, even when wetness returns. It directly supports the distinction between rewetting and ecosystem equivalence. Scope: The study examined rewetted European fens and found persistent differences from near-natural reference fens. Useful pinpoint: Study design, vegetation and biogeochemical ordination, legacy effects, and conclusions; DOI 10.1038/s41467-021-25619-y.
MASTER:55. Soil translocation for plant-community restoration
Publisher/author: G. M. Gerrits and coauthors Date/version: Journal of Applied Ecology 60, 2023, pp. 714-724 URL: Open manuscript Supports: Quantitative synthesis of soil or turf translocation showing highly variable and generally limited similarity to donor or reference communities, short monitoring in much of the literature, and donor-site costs. It is directly relevant when peat-block or vegetation transfer is proposed as replacement. Scope: The synthesis covers varied ecosystems and translocation methods. Establishment and community similarity are distinct from recovery of groundwater-regulated peat-forming function. Useful pinpoint: Effect-size results, community-similarity results, monitoring-duration distribution, donor impacts, and recommendations; DOI 10.1111/1365-2664.14364.
MASTER:56. Restoration acceleration, constructed-fen initiation, and hydrochemical trajectory
Publisher/author: J. M. Allan and coauthors; Andrea K. Borkenhagen and David J. Cooper; Kathleen M. Biagi, Michelle G. Clark, and Sean K. Carey; Kathleen M. Biagi and Sean K. Carey Date/version: Restoration Ecology 32, 2024; Journal of Applied Ecology 53, 2016; Ecological Engineering 166, 2021; Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 39, 2022 URL: Vegetation-recovery meta-analysis, fen initiation study, constructed watershed hydrology, and six-year hydrochemistry Supports: Affirmative evidence that enhanced intervention can accelerate selected vegetation endpoints and that engineered systems can establish shallow groundwater and some fen-initiation conditions, while water balance, salinity, hydrochemistry, marsh drift, and continuing artificial support can constrain long-term self-regulation and equivalence. Scope: The meta-analysis concerns predominantly temperate or boreal Sphagnum systems and vegetation endpoints. The Alberta studies examine engineered fen initiation and watershed recovery after mining, including water balance and hydrochemical development. Useful pinpoint: Modeled 20- to 35-year vegetation trajectories under enhanced intervention; design and initiation criteria; water-balance results; hydrochemical evolution; dependence on engineered inputs; and stated long-term uncertainties.
MASTER:57. Rocky Mountain Fen Demonstration Project record
Publisher/author: Colorado Water Conservation Board; Johnson Environmental Consulting; Aspen Journalism Date/version: CWCB Water Supply Reserve Account materials, 2007; consultant project summary accessed September 2026; Aspen Journalism report published November 18, 2019 and updated April 21, 2021 URL: 2007 CWCB project fact sheets, Johnson Environmental Consulting, Fens, and Aspen Journalism project report Supports: A Rocky Mountain fen demonstration involving Colorado Mountain College, a participating scientist's favorable account, and a journalistic report of 67 plant species at the receiver after one growing season versus 10 at the degraded donor. The same report said it was too early to know whether the project could serve as reservoir mitigation. Scope: The sources report project design and early plant establishment after one growing season. Long-term recovery of whole-fen hydrology, peat formation and ecological function remains unresolved in the reviewed record. Useful pinpoint: CWCB Rocky Mountain Fen Demonstration Project entry; consultant page sections on Restoration and Rocky Mountain Fen Research Project; Aspen Journalism paragraphs reporting design, one-season richness and the then-uncertain mitigation conclusion.
F. BioBlitz, wildlife, spatial, and community evidence
MASTER:58. Homestake Valley BioBlitz live project and API snapshot
Publisher/author: iNaturalist; project maintained by Homestake community-science organizers Date/version: Project created July 14, 2022; API snapshot queried September 12, 2026 URL: Project page, project API, observation count, species counts, observers, and Corps National Wetland Plant List downloads Supports: A dated API audit of 1,400 observations, 618 Research Grade, 778 Needs ID, four Casual, 229 terminal taxa, 190 distinct species-rank terminal taxa, 115 species-rank taxa with at least one Research Grade observation, and 102 uploader accounts. Five identified field days contain 86.6 percent of the records. A taxon-and-synonym crosswalk against the Corps' final 2022 Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast list found 17 obligate-wetland taxa in 125 observations and 29 facultative-wetland taxa in 285 observations, totaling 410 wetland-indicator records, 304 Research Grade. The records include quality grades, contributor IDs, observation dates, taxon names, reported location accuracy and observation and media licenses. Of 2,323 photographs, 607 displayed no media-license value in the API response. The georeferenced records, with their reported positional uncertainty, include a Research Grade Olive-sided Flycatcher, Thicket Hairstreak and Indiscriminate Cuckoo Bumble Bee records, peatmoss leads, and clusters containing component taxa of tracked fen or wet-meadow communities. Scope: A dynamic community-observation project with no date or observer restriction. Counts, identifications, place membership and license fields can change. The collection uses an approximately 2,254-acre search polygon; thirty-three records predate project creation and the first organized event. Most records are plants, project taxon filters shape coverage, and coordinates vary in accuracy. Identification grades, observation dates, location uncertainty and media licenses accompany the records. Media with an unspecified license require rights verification before reuse. Useful pinpoint: API project settings; seven 200-record observation pages; grouped license and observation fields; quality-grade counts; taxon filters; place 193310; final 2022 Corps list for the Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast region; observations 380521710, 171848241, 171851496, 315895414, 380492739, 231241653, and 230886532.
MASTER:59. BioBlitz event and grant record
Publisher/author: Wilderness Workshop, Eagle River Coalition, WildEarth Guardians, Denver Audubon, Rose Sandell, and Colorado Watershed Assembly Date/version: Public accounts for 2022-2026 events; pages checked September 12, 2026 URL: Wilderness Workshop 2022 account, Eagle River Coalition 2023 account, WildEarth Guardians 2023 account, Eagle River Coalition 2026 account, Denver Audubon Lois Webster Fund, archived 2024 grant guidelines, and 2025 Colorado Watershed Assembly outreach deck Supports: Event chronology, named organizers and experts, reported field stations and participant activity, reported bird, plant, algae and macroinvertebrate work, grant-supported ecological work, and a public outreach presentation. Denver Audubon's fund page summarizes moderate-to-high ecological integrity, bird-breeding habitat and wetland functions. The archived 2024 grant guidelines called for midseason and final reports, a public article and a later presentation. Scope: Public event accounts, grant summaries and outreach materials describe the fieldwork and its reported findings. Useful pinpoint: Event descriptions and dates; named methods and experts; Denver Audubon Homestake grant summary; archived guideline reporting and presentation provisions.
MASTER:60. CNHP conservation status handbook and tracking lists
Publisher/author: Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University Date/version: September 2025 tracking workbook and current data disclaimer URL: Tracking Lists and data disclaimer Supports: State and global conservation ranks, watchlist and fully tracked designations, and natural-community names relevant to BioBlitz taxa. Listed communities include G2/S2 and S1 fen or wet-meadow associations. Scope: CNHP ranks describe conservation status; federal and state statutory listings are separate designations. Exact-name matching uses the published taxonomic names, and Element Occurrence records use qualified field data. Useful pinpoint: Digital Data Disclaimer; September 2025 workbook tabs for vascular plants, nonvascular plants, animals, and natural communities.
MASTER:61. Official wildlife conservation-priority references
Publisher/author: Colorado Parks and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date/version: Colorado 2025 State Wildlife Action Plan, approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in January 2026; Birds of Conservation Concern 2021 URL: Colorado 2025 State Wildlife Action Plan and FWS Birds of Conservation Concern 2021 Supports: Conservation-priority context for BioBlitz leads, including Thicket Hairstreak as a Colorado Tier 2 species and Olive-sided Flycatcher as a Bird of Conservation Concern in Bird Conservation Region 16. Scope: Planning and conservation-priority designations with a separate role from ESA listings. They identify species of concern across their specified regions. Useful pinpoint: SWAP status and nonregulatory explanation; Thicket Hairstreak and Wilson's Snipe entries; FWS BCR 16 table, p. 29.
MASTER:62. Whitney public-layer spatial screening
Publisher/author: Save Homestake analysis using Homestake Partners, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA Forest Service, and CNHP public data Date/version: Reproducible desktop analysis dated September 12, 2026 URL: 2019 source coordinates, 2026 lynx rule and GIS source, Forest Service Wilderness GIS service, Forest Service Colorado Roadless Areas GIS service, Forest Service Other National Designated Area GIS service, and CNHP fen mapping Supports: Reproducible screening shows ten of thirteen public 2019 investigation points inside final lynx critical habitat, one point inside the Homestake Colorado Roadless Area, no point inside Holy Cross Wilderness or Camp Hale National Monument, and several points near legacy potential-fen polygons. Scope: A desktop comparison of published investigation coordinates and public GIS layers. Its mapped features are the investigation points. Community-supplied Whitney A-D KML polygons have unverified provenance. Useful pinpoint: Official feature-service layers and dates, published investigation coordinates, and the EPSG:32613 screening method summarized in the public evidence record.
MASTER:63. Save Homestake public field archive
Publisher/author: Save Homestake community evidence archive Date/version: 102 files reviewed September 12, 2026 URL: Public field archive Supports: Dated, public examples of elk, deer, moose and beaver activity, plus landscape, creek, wetland and drilling documentation. Scope: Dated campaign records with varied metadata. The April 2, 2017 lynx photograph is attributed to the down-valley Blodgett area by supplied archive metadata; its original photographer is unspecified. The archive is a separate source from the BioBlitz snapshot. Useful pinpoint: Public captions, dates, generalized camera-zone labels and linked source notes.
G. Water rights, river protection, and Shoshone
MASTER:64. Vail Valley Consolidated Water District v. City of Aurora and reasonable diligence statute
Publisher/author: Colorado Supreme Court and Colorado General Assembly Date/version: 731 P.2d 665, decided 1987; current C.R.S. Section 37-92-301(4) compilation checked September 2026 URL: Vail Valley opinion and reasonable-diligence statute Supports: Colorado's integrated-system doctrine can allow work on one project component to count toward diligence on conditional rights, and absence of a governmental permit alone does not automatically defeat diligence. This explains why old rights can remain active while a configuration is unresolved. Scope: Diligence preserves a conditional water right; it does not approve Whitney's dam, footprint, land use, wetlands impacts, federal authorization, or environmental compliance. Current decrees and complete 2023 case dockets control the particular rights. Useful pinpoint: 731 P.2d at 668-72; C.R.S. Section 37-92-301(4)(b)-(c).
MASTER:65. Shoshone water rights preservation record and Colorado instream-flow law
Publisher/author: Colorado River Water Conservation District, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Colorado General Assembly, and U.S. Department of the Interior funding partners Date/version: Colorado River Water Conservation District FAQ current at cutoff; change application announced November 24, 2025; federal funding update May 22, 2026; C.R.S. Section 37-92-102(3) current compilation URL: Shoshone FAQ, Case 25CW3177 filing announcement, May 2026 funding update, CWCB acquisitions program, and C.R.S. Section 37-92-102 Supports: The Colorado River Water Conservation District, a public agency serving 15 Western Slope counties, describes the hydroelectric plant's nonconsumptive rights as 1,250 cubic feet per second with a 1902 priority and 158 cubic feet per second with a 1929 priority. Those priorities can constrain junior upstream depletions when the call is valid and water is available. The pending transaction seeks to preserve those priorities and add an instream-flow use through Colorado's existing legal mechanism. This is a serious firm-yield and alternatives input for Whitney. Scope: Shoshone’s senior rights affect river administration and timing. The cited summaries describe those rights and the preservation effort; variable call conditions and temporary arrangements are distinct from the decrees themselves. Useful pinpoint: FAQ questions on priorities, operation, call, and transaction; Case 25CW3177; May 22, 2026 funding and closing status; C.R.S. Section 37-92-102(3).
H. Supplemental current authorities
MASTER:66. USDA National Environmental Policy Act procedures
Publisher/author: U.S. Department of Agriculture Date/version: 7 C.F.R. Part 1b, effective April 3, 2026; current eCFR text checked September 12, 2026 URL: Current 7 C.F.R. Part 1b Supports: USDA's current EA/EIS and significance framework, integration with NHPA and other environmental review, treatment of effects outside the immediate geography or later in time, and independent evaluation of applicant- or consultant-prepared material. Scope: NEPA is procedural. The agency may draw a reasonable and manageable causal line, and review of some separate actions outside USDA authority is discretionary under the current rule. The relevant action is the project the Forest Service would authorize and its effects. Useful pinpoint: Sections 1b.2(f)-(g), 1b.5(b), 1b.7(g), 1b.10(a), and 1b.11(a)(12).
MASTER:67. Upper Colorado River endangered-fish depletion procedure
Publisher/author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date/version: 2024 decision tree, current agency page checked September 12, 2026 URL: Upper Colorado River Water Depletion Information and Decision Tree Supports: Project-specific accounting for new Upper Colorado Basin depletions affecting bonytail, Colorado pikeminnow, humpback chub, and razorback sucker. The decision tree generally routes new net depletions greater than 10 acre-feet per year into formal consultation. Scope: Reservoir capacity and annual depletion are different measures. Initial fill, refill, evaporation, seepage, exchanges and return flows affect the accounting. Recovery-program provisions describe a compliance process. Useful pinpoint: Depletion threshold, consultation branches, covered species, and recovery-program route.
MASTER:68. Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Publisher/author: United States Congress and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date/version: Current statutory and agency material checked September 12, 2026 URL: 16 U.S.C. Sections 703-712 and FWS Act overview Supports: Federal protection against prohibited take of covered migratory birds and the need to evaluate direct mortality pathways such as nest destruction or collision where the current law applies. Scope: The cited statute concerns protected birds and prohibited conduct. Habitat alteration and a legally established take have distinct meanings. Useful pinpoint: 16 U.S.C. Section 703 and current FWS implementing materials.
MASTER:69. Participation, exhaustion, and review deadlines
Publisher/author: Eagle County, Colorado Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, Colorado Water Quality Control Commission, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, USDA Forest Service, United States Congress, and Colorado General Assembly Date/version: Agency materials checked September 12, 2026; C.R.C.P. linked from the 2023 official OLLS compilation; Regulation 87 Rule Version 12462; Rigato v. Duran decided 2026 URL: Eagle County Chapter VI, C.R.C.P. 106(b), 2023 official compilation, Rigato v. Duran, 2026 COA 33, Regulation 87, Regulation 21, Regulation 82, C.R.S. Section 25-8-205.1, C.R.S. Section 25-8-403, C.R.S. Section 25-8-404, 33 C.F.R. Section 325.3, 36 C.F.R. Part 218, 16 U.S.C. Section 1540(g), and C.R.S. Section 25-8-611 Supports: Working deadlines and issue-preservation rules for a County FONSI request and Rule 106 review; Regulation 87 comments, Individual Authorization reconsideration and adjudicatory-hearing paths; final General Authorization reconsideration; direct review of a Notice of Coverage or Temporary Authorization; formal proceedings for final Section 401 and antidegradation decisions; Corps hearing requests; Forest Service objections; and ESA citizen-suit notice. Section 25-8-611 does not create a general Colorado Water Quality Control Act citizen suit. Scope: Deadlines depend on the instrument, finality, service, party status and applicable extensions or review steps. This source register records the cited procedures and their dates. Useful pinpoint: Chapter VI Section 6.03.03(4)(b); C.R.C.P. 106(b); Rigato paragraphs 30-38; Regulation 87 Sections 87.6(6)(d), 87.6(12), 87.6(14), 87.7(7), 87.8(1)(e), 87.8(2)(b), and 87.8(5); Regulation 21 Sections 21.4 and 21.16; Regulation 82 Section 82.5(B); C.R.S. Sections 25-8-205.1, 25-8-403, and 25-8-404; 33 C.F.R. Section 325.3; 36 C.F.R. Part 218; 16 U.S.C. Section 1540(g); C.R.S. Section 25-8-611.
MASTER:70. Reservoir water-level fluctuation and methylmercury mechanism
Publisher/author: Chris S. Eckley, Todd P. Luxton, Jennifer Goetz and John McKernan; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-affiliated research team Date/version: Environmental Pollution 222 (2017): 32-41 URL: Full peer-reviewed article in PubMed Central Supports: At the studied Oregon reservoir affected by a historic mercury mine, sediment and porewater methylmercury concentrations were more than three times higher in seasonally fluctuating areas than in permanently inundated sediment. The study supports a scientifically plausible link among drawdown and rewetting, redox and sulfate cycling, dissolved organic carbon, and methylmercury production. Scope: A study of reservoir water-level fluctuations at a site with a known historical mercury source. Geology, chemistry, hydrology, climate and operations shaped the measured response. Useful pinpoint: Abstract; Sections 3.1-3.4; Figure 2; discussion of water-level fluctuation, porewater sulfate, dissolved organic carbon and methylmercury.
MASTER:71. Gross Reservoir Section 404 decision and pending appeal
Publisher/author: U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado; appeal pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date/version: District-court order October 16, 2024; consolidated Tenth Circuit appeals Nos. 25-1137, 25-1231 and 25-1299 argued July 31, 2026; status checked September 12, 2026 URL: District-court order and Tenth Circuit oral-argument listing Supports: The district court applied the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines' sufficient-information requirement to a Colorado municipal reservoir expansion and found unresolved future hydrology and climate information material to practicability and LEDPA analysis. It is a close procedural and factual analogue for insisting that Whitney's firm yield, hydrology, climate stress and alternatives be resolved before a permit finding. Scope: A district-court ruling on its own administrative record, with an appeal pending at the source’s retained research cutoff. Useful pinpoint: 2024 WL 4519201 at *24-30; 40 C.F.R. Section 230.12(a)(3)(iv); consolidated appellate dockets Nos. 25-1137, 25-1231 and 25-1299.
MASTER:72. Forest Service Rocky Mountain wetland and riparian historical-range synthesis
Publisher/author: Edward Gage and David J. Cooper; USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station Date/version: General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-286WWW, 2013 URL: Official Forest Service report PDF Supports: Regional synthesis of fen formation, hydrology, peat accumulation, carbon, disturbance, drought and fire. It reports Colorado peat accumulation commonly on the order of 1 to 5 centimeters per century and examples of dated profiles between about 6,180 and 11,820 years, with site-specific depths and rates. It also explains that saturation usually limits peat combustion while prolonged drying can remove that resistance. Scope: It synthesizes regional literature and is coauthored by a prominent Colorado fen researcher. Useful pinpoint: Chapter 6, especially the fen development, carbon, disturbance and fire sections and cited Colorado chronology table.
MASTER:73. EPA Two Forks Section 404(c) determination and judicial review
Publisher/author: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado Date/version: EPA final determination November 23, 1990; federal-court decision 1996 URL: EPA final determination, EPA Section 404(c) chronology, and Alameda Water & Sanitation District v. Reilly Supports: EPA used Section 404(c) to prohibit the proposed disposal site for Colorado's Two Forks municipal water-supply impoundments after evaluating unacceptable aquatic, fishery, wildlife and recreation effects and alternatives. The determination survived the cited Colorado federal-court challenge. It shows that Section 404(c) can operate as a substantive backstop for a Colorado reservoir on an exceptional record. Scope: EPA initiation is discretionary. Two Forks concerned a larger reservoir proposal with its own site, purpose, resources, alternatives and administrative record. Useful pinpoint: Final determination's project-purpose, aquatic-resource, alternatives and unacceptable-adverse-effect findings; 930 F. Supp. at 491-96.
MASTER:74. Audubon Society of Greater Denver v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Publisher/author: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date/version: 908 F.3d 593, decided November 5, 2018 URL: Published opinion Supports: Tenth Circuit precedent upholding the Chatfield storage-reallocation permit after the Corps quantified demand, timing, reliability, cost, alternatives and effects. The court accepted a narrower Clean Water Act scope because the regulated fills relocated existing facilities and were treated as incidental to a congressionally authorized reallocation in an existing reservoir. Scope: The case concerns storage reallocation in an existing reservoir and the role of regulated fills in relocating existing facilities. The court gave substantial deference to the quantified agency record. Useful pinpoint: 908 F.3d at 603-09 and 618-24.
MASTER:75. Section 401 minimum-flow authority and federal certification clock
Publisher/author: Supreme Court of the United States and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Date/version: PUD No. 1, 511 U.S. 700, decided 1994; 40 C.F.R. Part 121 current text checked September 12, 2026 URL: PUD No. 1 opinion, 40 C.F.R. Part 121, C.R.S. Section 25-8-104, and Colorado Regulation 82 Supports: PUD No. 1 establishes the general federal proposition that a minimum-flow certification condition can protect a designated aquatic-life use when lawful under the certifying state's law. The federal agency sets a reasonable certification period; the current default if none is set is six months, the maximum is one year, and failure or refusal to act within the period can waive certification. Scope: Colorado law expressly prevents the Commission or Division from requiring a minimum stream flow or minimum water level and restricts denial or conditions causing material injury to water rights. PUD No. 1 arose under Washington law and does not override those Colorado limits. Current federal rules limit certification to water-quality-related impacts, and the live federal notice may set a shorter period. Useful pinpoint: 511 U.S. at 711-20; 40 C.F.R. Sections 121.6 and 121.9.
MASTER:76. EPA pre-application and post-permit Section 404(c) authority
Publisher/author: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Date/version: Current 40 C.F.R. Part 231; Mingo Logan merits decision issued 2016 URL: 40 C.F.R. Section 231.1 and Mingo Logan Coal Co. v. EPA, 829 F.3d 710 Supports: EPA can initiate Section 404(c) consideration before a permit application and, under persuasive D.C. Circuit authority, can retain withdrawal authority after Corps permit issuance when it reasonably establishes unacceptable adverse effects. Scope: Persuasive D.C. Circuit authority on EPA’s discretionary Section 404(c) power. Initiation rests with EPA, alongside the ordinary Corps permitting process. Useful pinpoint: 40 C.F.R. Section 231.1; 829 F.3d at 718-26, following 714 F.3d 608, 615-16 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
MASTER:77. City and County of Denver v. Board of County Commissioners and 1041 grandfathering
Publisher/author: Colorado Supreme Court and Colorado General Assembly Date/version: 782 P.2d 753, decided 1989; linked Title 24 compilation is 2024; County compilation checked September 12, 2026 URL: Published opinion, 2024 C.R.S. Title 24 compilation, and Eagle County Chapter VI Supports: Counties may regulate extraterritorial municipal water projects under the 1041 Act, but may not impose a categorical prohibition or criteria untethered to statutory objectives. The state and County texts also support a component-specific audit of narrow pre-May 17, 1974 approval or vesting claims and specified minor maintenance or replacement treatment. Scope: The case arose from a different project and regulatory record. A historical water decree, integrated-system history or sponsor-city approval is not automatically the local approval or vesting described by the 1041 grandfather provisions, but the actual approval record can be decisive. Useful pinpoint: 782 P.2d at 760 and 762-66; C.R.S. Section 24-65.1-107; Chapter VI Section 6.02.12.
MASTER:78. Colorado water-quality review, standing, and exhaustion
Publisher/author: Colorado General Assembly and Colorado appellate courts Date/version: Statutory and regulatory materials checked September 12, 2026; cited decisions issued 1982, 1983, and 2023 URL: C.R.S. Section 25-8-205.1, C.R.S. Section 25-8-403, C.R.S. Section 25-8-404, C.R.S. Section 24-4-106, Regulation 21, C.R.S. Section 25-8-611, Colorado WQCC v. Town of Frederick, National Wildlife Federation v. Cotter, and Colorado Stormwater Council v. Water Quality Control Division, 2023 COA 11 Supports: Section 25-8-404 generally provides a 30-day route to review final Division or Commission action, with venue and finality rules and tolling while a Section 25-8-403 reconsideration request is pending. Section 25-8-205.1 expressly routes an Individual Authorization through reconsideration and then judicial review. Regulation 21 treats specified final Section 401 and antidegradation appeals as formal proceedings. Colorado Water Quality Control Commission v. Town of Frederick, 641 P.2d 958, 961-65 and n.5 (Colo. 1982), explains that party status is required when review concerns a C.R.S. Section 24-4-105 adjudicatory hearing, while Section 24-4-106(4) otherwise permits review by an adversely affected or aggrieved person, subject to claim-specific rules. National Wildlife Federation v. Cotter, 665 P.2d 598, 602-04 (Colo. 1983), recognizes concrete member health, aesthetic, recreational and conservation injuries rather than abstract organizational concern. Scope: Section 25-8-611 does not create a freestanding citizen-enforcement action. Finality, injury, party status, exhaustion, issue preservation, service and claim-specific deadlines require current legal review. Different Regulation 87 instruments do not share one review path. Regulation 31 de novo antidegradation review has its own written-comment eligibility rule, and Colorado Stormwater Council reinforces exhaustion requirements. Useful pinpoint: C.R.S. Sections 25-8-205.1, 25-8-403, 25-8-404, and 24-4-106; Regulation 21 Sections 21.4 and 21.16; Regulation 31 Section 31.8(3)(b); Regulation 87 Sections 87.6(14), 87.7(7), and 87.8(5); 641 P.2d at 961-65 and n.5; 665 P.2d at 602-04; 2023 COA 11, paragraphs 18-37.
I. Wildlife, flora and wetland sources
The HWF labels identify wildlife and wetland sources. Where a source also appears in the historical register, its original MASTER label is shown alongside it. Dates and cited passages identify the evidence each source contributes.
The table identifies each source and the passages relevant to Homestake’s wildlife and wetlands.
Source ID | Source and URL | Relevant passage | Related bibliography entry |
|---|---|---|---|
HWF:S01 | Seven observations pages and species-count endpoint; individual record URLs | 58 | |
HWF:S02 | 2019 Whitney Reservoir Siting Study technical report, Appendix 1 | Technical report pp. 16-20; Tables 2-3 | 2 ; 62 |
HWF:S03 | Section 4.2; Tables 10-12; Appendix A | 44 | |
HWF:S04 | History of Moose in Colorado | ||
HWF:S05 | About; Habitat; Diet; Reproduction; strategy links | ||
HWF:S06 | About; conservation/status | ||
HWF:S07 | Range; Habitat; Reproduction; Protection Status | ||
HWF:S08 | Habitat and Reproduction | ||
HWF:S09 | |||
HWF:S10 | Listing and habitat overview | ||
HWF:S11 | About; Cutthroat Trout Taxonomy Research | ||
HWF:S12 | Abstract and citation metadata | ||
HWF:S13 | Fens | ||
HWF:S14 | Climate change impacts on native cutthroat trout habitat in Colorado streams | ||
HWF:S15 | Sound ID and sharing observations | ||
HWF:S16 | 58 | ||
HWF:S17 | Birds of Conservation Concern species tables | ||
HWF:S18 | Habitat; Diet; Additional Information | ||
HWF:S19 | 2025 species groups and tier lists | 61 | |
HWF:S20 | |||
HWF:S21 | Current tracking table; V3-34 | 60 | |
HWF:S22 | Final Canada lynx critical habitat designation, effective August 17, 2026 | 91 FR 43732; effective August 17, 2026; Unit 6 | 36 ; 62 |
HWF:S23 | Habitat; Reproduction; Protection Status | ||
HWF:S24 | 61 | ||
HWF:S25 | |||
HWF:S26 | 62 | ||
HWF:S27 | Final 2022 National Wetland Plant List, Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast region | 2022 NWPL version 3.6; 3,407 entries; PDF-page locators per match | |
HWF:S28 | Diagnostics; hydrology; vegetation; associations | ||
HWF:S29 | Diagnostics; hydrology; vegetation | ||
HWF:S30 | Hydrology; vegetation; associations | ||
HWF:S31 | Abstract; Methods; Table IV; pp. 586-598 | ||
HWF:S32 | Habitat and food habits | ||
HWF:S33 | |||
HWF:S34 | Informed breeding dispersal following stochastic changes to patch quality | Abstract; DOI metadata | |
HWF:S35 | Amphibian population responses to mitigation: wetland age and design | ||
HWF:S36 | |||
HWF:S37 | |||
HWF:S38 | |||
HWF:S39 | Habitat; Diet; Reproduction; Protection Status | ||
HWF:S40 | Habitat; Diet; Reproduction | ||
HWF:S41 | East Slope Mountain Lion Management Plan, 2024 draft appendix | Habitat and prey discussion; labeled 2024 draft | |
HWF:S42 | Species profile | ||
HWF:S43 | Diet and Reproduction | ||
HWF:S44 | Habitat; Diet; Reproduction | ||
HWF:S45 | State Threatened; Hydrology; Vegetation; Land Use | ||
HWF:S46 | |||
HWF:S47 | Fragmentation and thermal risks to native trout in Colorado River Basin | ||
HWF:S48 | Cytogeography of the subalpine marsh marigold polyploid complex | ||
HWF:S49 | |||
HWF:S50 | Disease, drought, and warming: A triple threat to a declining high-elevation amphibian | Abstract; DOI metadata | |
HWF:S51 | 3 ; 4 ; 5 ; 6 ; 7 ; 8 | ||
HWF:V3-01 | Methods habitat-suitability model; Table 1 | ||
HWF:V3-02 | 6.03.10; 6.04.01(15)-(20); Appendix A pp. iv-vi | 12 ; 69 ; 77 | |
HWF:V3-03 | County planning file and hearing materials for the 2026 1041 amendment | 13 | |
HWF:V3-04 | PDF p. 34, water 20622 and 67365; species-code legend | ||
HWF:V3-05 | PDF p. 35, water 20622 and 67365; species-code legend | ||
HWF:V3-06 | Rapid riparian ecosystem decline in Rocky Mountain National Park | Abstract; Methods; figures | |
HWF:V3-07 | Effectiveness of Ditch Blockage for Restoring Hydrologic and Soil Processes in Mountain Peatlands | Abstract; Table 1; Results | |
HWF:V3-09 | Final 2022 list; draft 2024 notice distinguished | ||
HWF:V3-10 | USGS 393030106224700 | ||
HWF:V3-11 | Rewetting does not return drained fens to their former state | Abstract; Methods | 54 |
HWF:V3-12 | Layer 0; returnGeometry=false | ||
HWF:V3-13 | Layer 0 | ||
HWF:V3-14 | countsWithinDisplayFrame; provenance; limitations | ||
HWF:V3-15 | Modeled alternative/wetland-fen overlap rows | ||
HWF:V3-16 | Mapping methods and dataset context | 62 | |
HWF:V3-34 | 2,214 returned rows; exact-name rank/status fields; accessed 2026-09-23 | 60 | |
HWF:V3-35 | q=Homestake,country=US,stateProvince=Colorado; offsets 0/300; occurrence IDs | ||
HWF:V3-36 | Dataset 4fa7b334-ce0d-4e88-aaae-2e0c138d049e; DOI; record 5455274378 | ||
HWF:V3-37 | Fens_2025/MapServer/0; six returned features | ||
HWF:V3-39 | Notes; scientific name | ||
HWF:V3-40 | Taxonomy and Habitat | ||
HWF:V3-17 | Printed p. 159, PDF p. 162; Holy Cross City PCA; cottongrass account | ||
HWF:V3-18 | Beaver recolonization explains aquatic insect emergence patterns | Abstract; DOI 10.1086/734565 | |
HWF:V3-19 | Influence of beaver dam density on riparian areas and riparian birds in shrubsteppe of Wyoming | Abstract | |
HWF:V3-20 | Abstract | ||
HWF:V3-21 | Reduced Streamflow From Water Diversion Alters Stream Ecology and Fish Behavior | Methods and Results | |
HWF:V3-22 | Methods and Results | ||
HWF:V3-23 | Vegetation and wildlife species list | ||
HWF:V3-24 | Printed pp. 36 and 76; site monitoring tables | ||
HWF:V3-25 | Natural Communities; backing data V3-34 | ||
HWF:V3-26 | Vascular Plants; backing data V3-34 | ||
HWF:V3-27 | Amphibian ranks | ||
HWF:V3-28 | Mammals; backing data V3-34 | ||
HWF:V3-29 | Diet; Reproduction; research overview | ||
HWF:V3-30 | Habitat; Diet; Reproduction | ||
HWF:V3-42 | September 24, 2026 public edition; recorded exports and Gold Park flow, WY2007-2024; linked annual records and methods. | ||
HWF:V3-43 | September 15, 2026 draft 1041 regulations for September 23 hearing | Cover; §§211, 307(F)-(G), 310, 311, 406(C), 411-413 |
Why the two fen inventories differ: HWF:INT-C001
September 23 same-envelope geometry comparison of the two CNHP services: older service 18 Potential Fen features; Fens 2025 six. Five newer polygons overlap older-service polygons; one does not, and no pair has equal geometry. CNHP’s 2025 report, printed pp.7-9, explains the change from rating existing NWI wetland polygons to redrawing fen-specific boundaries. Individual correspondence between our retained local polygons and the newer classes remains unresolved. The geometry comparison records the source polygons, method and overlap measurements.