On Aug. 26, at 6 p.m., Gabriel Matta, of the Colorado Rural Water Association, led the second source water protection plan (SWPP) meeting in Naturita at the community center. Matta said the first meeting, held Aug. 9, was an introduction for West End communities to learn what source water protection is and to determine the watershed map.
This week’s meeting was for using a matrix to assess potential sources of contamination that could negatively impact source water.
“Transportation corridors” were the first possible source of contamination discussed. That refers to highways and roads where accidents could spill materials that run off and affect the watershed. CDOT is not showing the local highway as a nuclear route or a hazardous material route. Still, community members at the SWPP meeting said accidents could happen, and it would depend on how big the truck was that crashed — and what was in it.
Those at the meeting decided to rank transportation corridors as a “possible” threat with a “significant” impact. That makes them a “moderate” risk, and it was decided the West End community has some indirect control over those types of incidents, regarding protecting water.
Secondly, “urban activities” or “urbanization” was also discussed as a possible source of contamination. That’s because upstream development can affect what happens in West End communities’ water due to the development of roads and sidewalks, petroleum products, salts, and also viruses or parasites.
Adrian Bergere, executive director of San Miguel Watershed Coalition, said Telluride does have sedimentation issues with its streets, but traps have been installed for catchment, and also runoff goes into wetlands for pre-treatment.
“There are some safeguards,” Bergere told those in the meeting.
It was decided that the probability of contamination was “likely,” but the impact was “insignificant,” making the threat “low” risk. It was agreed West End communities have some indirect control over the issue, as far as protecting water goes.
Regarding “wastewater treatment plants” and “septic systems” in the watershed, Matta said hilly areas can complicate septic systems and increase contamination. He also said that the effectiveness of any septic system depends on soils, design and maintenance of them.
It was decided that the probability of that type of contamination was “certain,” but the impact “minor.” That makes it a “moderate” risk, and it was agreed that there is some indirect control from the West End.
Regarding “agricultural practices,” which was discussed next, those in attendance discussed farming, chemicals like nitrogen and phosphorus, plus manure, since they can be contaminating to source water. In this case, the group decided that the probability was “unlikely” and the impact “insignificant.” That rates the risk as “low,” but there is not really any control over this issue, it was decided.
After discussing those four possible sources of contamination, the meeting had lasted more than one hour. Matta said the next SWPP meeting will discuss another four possible sources of contamination: public lands management, mining, wildlife and recreation activities.
Matta asked for members in attendance to think of experts in the community who could attend and speak about those potential threats. Aimee Tooker was mentioned, as were members of the USFS in the Norwood Ranger District, where also wildland firefighters office.
Matta also asked if any other possible source of contamination should be added to the list. PFAS, the “forever” chemicals used in firefighting, were mentioned.
The next SWPP meeting has been scheduled for Sept. 26.
The West End communities of Nucla and Naturita are each eligible for a $5,000 matching grant from the state to be used for water, simply for developing the SWPPs.
