Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
resolution.council.059-17
COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Winter 2017 City of Aspen Parks, Open Space, & Trails COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLANCOZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLACOZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLA COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN I 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose 1 1.2 History Of Cozy Point Ranch 4 1.3 Process & Public Involvement 7 2.0 Existing Conditions 13 2.1 Overview 14 2.2 Natural Resources 14 2.3 Facilities & Land Use 20 2.4 Current Lease Holders 26 3.0 Opportunities & Planning Issues 28 3.1 General Site Opportunities & Planning Issues 29 3.2 Natural Resource Opportunities & Planning Issues 32 3.3 Equestrian Opportunities & Planning Issues 33 3.4 Agriculture Opportunities & Planning Issues 35 3.5 Archery Range Opportunities & Planning Issues 37 3.6 Community Connection Opportunities & Planning Issues 38 4.0 Recommended Management Actions 41 4.1 General Site Management Actions 41 4.2 Natural Resource Management Actions 43 4.3 Equestrian Management Actions 45 4.4 Agriculture Management Actions 47 4.5 Archery Range Management Actions 48 4.6 Community Access Management Actions 49 TABLE OF CONTENTS II Appendix A 50 Site Survey Appendix B 52 Conservation Easement, Aspen Valley Land Trust Appendix C 71 Biological & Historical Resource Survey, Western Ecological Resource, Inc. & Wildlife Specialties Llc, February 2016 Appendix D 108 Concept Stream Restoration Plan, Western Ecological Resource, Inc. & Black Creek Hydrology Llc, July 2016 Appendix E 142 Title Commitment Appendix F 159 Stakeholders Meeting Log Appendix G 161 Public Comment Analysis Appendix H 167 Strategic Plan References & Resources 173 COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS III TABLE OF CONTENTS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN “A community is the mental and spiritual condition of knowing that the place is shared, and that the people who share the place define and limit the possibilities of each other’s lives. It is the knowledge that people have of each other, their concern for each other, their trust in each other, the freedom with which they come and go among themselves.” ~ Wendell Berry IV Cozy Point Ranch Cozy Point South Sky Mountain Park Seven Star Planning Area City & County Properties KEY Trails Rivers & Creeks Roar i ng Fo r k Riv er B rus h C re ekW oo d y C reekHwy 8 2 cccccccccccCCCCCCCCCCllllllll aaaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiii nnnnnnnnnFFFFFFFFFFllllll aaaaaaaatttttt sssssssssRRRRRRRRRRRooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaadddddddddddddddddJ u niper Hill Rd.B rush C re ek R d .0 0.25 0.5 0.75 Miles AABC Woody Creek Brush Ck. Community McLain Flats O w l Cre e k SEE MAP BCOZY POINT RANCH GATEWAY PROPERTY COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Map A V COZY POINT RANCH & ADJACENT OPEN SPACE PROPERTIES AspenMass Cozy Point Ranch Cozy Point South Mills Jaffee Park Maroon River Parcel Airport Ranch City of Aspen Property Management Area City & County Properties Pitkin County Properties KEY Structures Trails Rivers & Creeks Ditches Roa r i n g Fork Ri verCo u gar Cre e kBru s h C reek Wo o d y Cre e k Hwy 8 2Ra c e wa y R d.Upper Riv er Rd.McLai n F l at s Rd.Twi ning Flats Rd. J uniper Hill Rd.Bru sh C reek R d .0 0.25 0.5 1.0 Miles Woody Creek Brush Ck. Community McLain Flats COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Map B VI “All innovation starts embryonically ~ Joel Salatin COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE All year round Cozy Point Ranch is an important habitat for many animals. Photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC The vision for Cozy Point Ranch has emerged out of its long and rich history, beginning with the original homestead in 1890. Today it is a 168-acre City of Aspen open space property where lessees run a public equestrian operation and a farm and garden learning center, with areas of wildlife habitat, a public archery range, and historic buildings and agricultural activities. This authentic, working landscape, located at the intersection of Highway 82 and Brush Creek Road, is the gateway to the communities of Aspen and Snowmass. residents and visitors to the area for decades. The ranch was purchased by the City in 1994 in order to preserving its ranching heritage by utilizing historically agricultural lands and equestrian facilities, as well as protecting important natural landscapes such as native mountain shrublands, pinyon-juniper woodlands, shale badlands, and riparian ecosystems. The vision is a broad, future-oriented concept of Cozy Point Ranch that honors the land’s history and unique attributes, the community, and the goals of the City of Aspen Open Space and Trails Program: Preserving our valley’s ranching heritage and fostering ecological & community health through innovative management approaches that provide locally-grown food and enhance equestrian and agricultural operations, while connecting the community with the land. 2 Appendix H: Strategic Plan a special work session conducted on the site in 2014 by ranch manager at the time, Monroe Summers, for Aspen City Council and City of Aspen Open Space and Trails Board members. Monroe inspired and captivated Council and Board members with the role the property played in the community, as well as his passionate and forward-thinking ideas about future possibilities for expanding and deepening that role, making the ranch a truly unique and valuable public amenity. When Monroe passed away only a few months later, the City stepped in to directly manage the property and lessees, and the need for developing a formal management plan came to the forefront. The plan was developed from the original vision set forth by Monroe and enhanced through research and public input. The vision is to be carried out by operating in a manner consistent with these guiding principles: PRESERVATION… of natural and rural beauty, wildlife habitat, riparian ecosystems, and our ranching heritage SUSTAINABILITY… meeting the needs of the present while maintaining a commitment to the future through fostering healthy natural ecosystems, economic vitality, and socially responsibility EDUCATION… connecting people with the land through educational programming encompassing equestrian pursuits, agricultural and local food systems awareness, environmental appreciation, and our valley’s ranching heritage HEALTHY COMMUNITY… supporting a happy, healthy community through public access to nature, local food, recreational and equestrian pursuits, and other amenities on the ranch, while providing the SAFETY… promoting the safety of all who use the site including the safety and welfare of the animals who live there The purpose of this management plan is to provide sound rationale and directives that will guide the management of Cozy Point Ranch Open Space toward its full potential to serve the community. Moving forward with this plan, the City is in an exciting position to lead the way with precedent-setting agricultural, equestrian, natural, and recreational integrated systems operating sustainably on public open space land. This plan strives to honor the land's history and unique attributes, develop the City's leadership role in the local agriculture sector, Hands-on experiences at Aspen T.R.E.E give children priceless knowledge about their food. Photo courtesy of Aspen T.R.E.E. INTRODUCTION 3Appendix G: Public Comment Analysis INTRODUCTION COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN of our community coming together around this special property. The plan also serves as a guide to current and future potential lessees in developing proposals and business plans that will help realize the vision for Cozy Point Ranch. Equestrian and agricultural lessee(s) will be overseen by the City of Aspen’s ranch manager acting as the overall land steward. Lessee(s) will bring in the expertise needed to address actions that fall within the scope of their operation(s), in collaboration with the ranch manager. Working together they, will achieve the goals laid out in this plan. The management plan was developed through consultation with experts, a rigorous public process, and additional research, all of which is detailed within this document. Existing conditions of the property are described, including operations, facilities, easements, and an ecological analysis of the land. with respect to the land, its management, and surrounding properties. This is followed by a set of current recommended management actions that address many of the opportunities and constraints, in pursuit of the vision. This management plan will evolving needs of the property in order to best care for the land and serve the community. key components (see Figure b) addressed in the and background information may be found in Chapters 3 and 4, and in the Appendices. Natural resource protection and function is a key component to the plan. Ecological health is a top priority of the management plan, in response to the fundamental needs of the land at the ranch and as a basis on which the success of all other goals and such as stabilizing and restoring the ecological integrity of the two streams on the property, maintaining wildlife habitat where appropriate, utilizing best management practices in agricultural the large tracts of adjacent open space habitat. Related actions outlined in Chapter 4 will return ecological health to the streams and land after many decades of improper and intensive use. as the "balancing needs and resources today with due consideration for the future". These needs are organized between three balanced pillars of economic, environmental, and social systems ("Aspen Sustainability Report", 2016). Pillars both limit and enhance each other through a series of checks and balances. Sustainability is an overarching goal that will be infused throughout all components of the property, including agricultural and equestrian operations, wildlife habitat, and recreation and will require collaboration between operators. Developments toward this goal will include measures such as closing waste-stream loops by utilizing manure for systems, maintaining high water quality in streams, facilities, and more best management practices. NATURAL RESOURCES SUSTAINABILITY EQUESTRIAN ACTIVITIES AGRICULTURE PRESERVATION COMMUNITY ACCESS EDUCATION HEALTH SAFETY Figure b: "Key Components & Principles of CPR" 4 1.2 HISTORY OF COZY POINT RANCH Cozy Point Ranch is located on land shaped by glacial activity during the Pleistocene Epoch, between 2 million and 11,000 years ago. As glaciers grew and retreated during that time, meltwater distributed large quantities of gravelly debris throughout the material through which the Roaring Fork River has “Threshing Time, 1930-”. Photo Courtesy of The Aspen Historical Society “Brush Creek Haystack, 1925”. Photo courtesy of The Aspen Historical Society The multi-faceted agricultural component will expand to enhance our local food system. This includes altitude farming techniques, providing professional development for young farmers, coordination with educational opportunities to the local community, all while embracing sustainability as a fundamental practice. Sustainability in agriculture is seen as an integration of land stewardship, community health, systems, and business viability. The public equestrian operation promotes self- growth. Equestrian activities also pay homage to the valley's ranching heritage, especially through facilities will be repaired, remodeled, and developed toward safer and enhanced experiences for users. Equestrian operations will collaborate with other ranch operations toward resource and energy Creating opportunities for people to connect with the land, maintaining the existing character of the ranch, and preserving our local agricultural heritage, are additional goals of the plan. Educational and interpretive experiences work directly toward meeting these goals. The Aspen Historical Society may play a role in developing interpretive displays and/or programming that celebrate our area’s agricultural heritage. Other possibilities exist around public engagement, such as natural history interpretation walks, harvest celebrations, and archery events. Connectivity is another important goal for Cozy Point Ranch, stemming from the property’s strategic location adjacent to the Brush Creek Intercept Lot and surrounded by other adjacent open space parcels. This presents valuable opportunities to collaborate with Pitkin County and the Town of Snowmass Village to create multi-use trail connections among trail systems around Cozy recreating, accessing the ranch, and commuting. Appendix C: Biological & Historical Survey COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN INTRODUCTION Cozy Point Ranch is a unique open space property where the fabric of our community can be shared and celebrated, from our agricultural heritage to concepts of the Aspen Idea. It is hoped that every child who grows up in the communities of Aspen and Snowmass will develop a special connection to Cozy Point, and that their lives will be enriched by formative experiences at the ranch. 5 carved its course. Cozy Point Ranch is situated on a level outwash terrace enhanced by Brush Creek, making it an ideal location for ranching. Aspen was established in 1879 with the start of mining development that would yield one-sixth of U.S. silver production at is peak. Boom turned to bust in 1893 when the Sherman Silver Act was repealed, after which mining gradually faded out in the early 1900s and small-scale mixed farms and ranches carried the local economy. Between 1900 and 1950, these operations grazed cattle on National Forest land during the summer, and used their farmland to produce hay, potatoes, grain and the farming and ranching history of the Roaring Fork Valley. federal government through direct cash sales, the Homestead Act, the Stock Raising Homestead Act, Cozy Point Ranch Historical Timeline Native American Hunting Grounds Equestrian, Haying & Native land Sustainable VisionHomesteading/Agrarian1870 Aspen Mining Boo m 1890 Purchase by Jotham A. S mith & Ranch Established1980s Bison Raised & Formal Equestrian Activities Start1994 Purchased by City of Aspen2000 Monroe Manages Cozy Point LLC2003 Designated Open Space & Conservation Easement 2011 AspenT.R.E.E. Begins Operations 2014 Monroe’s Sustainability Vision2015 Manage ment Plan Begins Figure c: "Cozy Point Ranch Historical Timeline" ownership in the area that would become Cozy Point Ranch occurred in 1882, when the northern portion of the Cozy Point Ranch parcel was granted to the state of Colorado for school revenue. Later, Jotham M. (Jote) Smith purchased the piece of land that would become Cozy Point’s homestead in 1890. True A. Smith, Jote Smith’s son, purchased land north of his father’s land in 1892. Initial land ownership transfers on land adjacent to Cozy Point Ranch include Alexander Cruikshank’s 1897 homestead on land where the Aspen Mass and Mills parcels now lie, and his 1889 purchase of a small ranch along Brush Creek on the Cozy Point South parcel. Historic information about the various ranching families of the Cozy Point Ranch area is limited. Council historical review of Cozy Point Ranch, a news article in the Rocky Mountain Sun Newspaper, Appendix C: Biological & Historical Survey INTRODUCTION COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 6 Appendix F: Stakeholder Log; Appendix G: Public Comment Analysis Cozy Point Management Plan Timeline SITE RESEARCH/PUBLIC / STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH BOARD REVIEW BOARD REVIEW & ADOPTION CITY COUNCIL DRAFT PUBLIC COMMENT Early Winter 2016 Winter 2016 Late Winter 2016 Summer 2016Late Summer 2016Fall 2016DRAFT PLAN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PLAN REVIEW RFP PROCESSSpring 2017Fall 20178 IMPLEMENT ACTIONS 9 Figure d: "Public Process Timeline" October 3rd, 1885 wrote, "the largest ranch and at the mouth of Brush Creek... He has this year 90 acres of oats, of heavy yield, part of which will go 60 bushels to the acres... Worth $6,000 at least". Another article in the Aspen Daily Times, April 3rd, 1906, indicates True A. Smith's use of class horseman to handle the Percheron stallion "Boston" for the season of 1906. None but a sober, competent man need apply". A brief history of the Smith and Cruikshank families, an anecdote about the origin of the name Cozy Point, and a table of other early land owners can be found in Appendix A: Biological and Historical Resources Surveys. More recently, bison for commercial meat production were grazed on the ranch, and equestrian facilities were built, including the metal horse barn, under the ownership of Michael Hernstadt in the early 1980s. At that time, the ranch was much larger than it is today, consisting of about 1,600 acres. Portions of the ranch were subdivided in 1981 death in 1984, the remaining core property of Cozy Point Ranch was held by an inheriting party, and ultimately purchased by Thomas Daly in 1994. Daly it from him later in 1994 with the support of City Council Members Rachel Richards, Augie Reno, COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN INTRODUCTION Georgeann Waggaman, Terry Paulson, and John Bennett. Monroe Summers was contracted by the City to run the ranching operation in 2000, and his leadership carried Cozy Point into the next decade until his death in August 2014. During that time, the City improvements to the ranch property, including the installation of irrigation systems, bringing livestock from entering these sensitive ecosystems, and numerous improvements to the equestrian buildings and facilities. At that time, weed management practices included mechanical removal and very little herbicide use. Fertilization was accomplished by turning out cows to graze and naturally spread their manure then harrowed into the soil with a chain/mat drag. brought in for the purpose of consuming excess and degraded hay considered unsuitable for feeding to the horses. Exposure to moisture and animals while stored under tarps at Cozy Point Ranch caused degradation of winter hay stores. Haying operations produced hay on Cory Point Ranch property, South Cozy Point, and on three McLain 7 1.3 PROCESS & PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The development of a Management Plan for Cozy Point Ranch Open Space has been a long- standing goal for the City of Aspen Parks & Open Space Department. An unfortunate event that also contributed to the need for a Management Plan was the passing of independent business operator Monroe Summers in 2014, who had run the Appendix F: Stakeholders Meetings log; Appendix G: Public Comments Analysis Mule Deer with wildlife fencing placed by CDOT, Photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC INTRODUCTION COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Flats properties in partnership with Cozy Point Ranch LLC. The ranch's irrigation system was also limited by the pump's horsepower, leaks, and the extent of existing ditches. Recognizing the property’s value to the community as the last major agricultural operation in the upper Roaring Fork Valley, the City of Aspen designated Cozy Point Ranch as Open Space in 2003, in order to preserve the area’s rich farming and ranching heritage. A Conservation Easement through Aspen Valley Land Trust was established that same year, as a further measure to ensure the property’s preservation in perpetuity. In 2011 Monroe brought in Aspen T.R.E.E. to help round out the ranch experience with its small agricultural learning center. Subsequent to Monroe Summers’ passing in 2014, Patti Watson, who had been employed by Summers to run the equestrian portion of the operation, became the new owner of the equestrian operation, and certain aspects of the ranch business were taken over by the City. Together, the City of Aspen, Patti Watson, and the horse community have accomplished a long list of improvements to equestrian facilities and operations (See Figure g). Some of these improvements include the following: The 25 cow pairs currently on the ranch are owned by Cozy Point Ranch LLC employee Manuel Morales, and are kept there for the purpose of consuming low-quality hay that is unsuitable for the horses and for their manure that is rich fertilizer for the land. The cows are grazed on the property in winter only when fencing is in good repair to contain them properly. In this way, the cows and hay operations are tied together in a sustainable, symbiotic way. The yearly budget for general maintenance and upkeep has been $25,000. Some projects utilized extra funding to accomplish large tasks. Further, weed management has been improved in that spraying is currently accomplished using a backpack spraying unit, applying between 3 and 5 ounces per acre. The addition of a new 125-horsepower pump in conjunction with the existing 30-horsepower pump has increased total pumping capacity to 2,500 gallons per minute. With this increased capacity, it will be possible to send water to dry agricultural areas of the ranch, and will also support the seeding of dry areas where native vegetation and/or pasture or hay grasses need to be reestablished in place of weeds. Haying operations produce 11,000 to 14,000 bales annually, with much of the higher-quality hay coming from Cozy Point Ranch. Two cuttings per year are possible Point South. Coordination to address weed issues on McLain Flats partner properties is an on-going Hay is currently stored in close proximity to where it is used in winter. Additionally, Soil Meter Controls that measure soil temperatures and moisture Increasing loaminess of soils is also being done, in part by using wood shavings from stall bedding, in order to bolster soil quality and moisture retention. 8 agricultural and equestrian operations at the ranch for 14 years. series of 45 meetings, site visits, and discussion forums with community members and stakeholder groups, various experts, and local organizations, in order to share ideas and obtain public input. Over 100 people attended the public meetings, and numerous additional public comments were also received by the City of Aspen Parks Department through other means. A biological and historical survey was completed in February 2016. This survey provides updated similar 2011 survey conducted for Sky Mountain Park that addressed Cozy Point Ranch as an adjacent open space property. The City of Aspen Parks and from Pitkin County, the Town of Snowmass Village, the public, and wildlife and botanical consultants in the making of this plan. A similar 2016 survey of the hydrological systems on site revealed a need to restore riparian areas. Special consultation was provided by visits from renown sustainable agriculture and local food systems experts, Joel Salatin and Eliot Coleman, during the summer of 2015. The City brought them to tour Cozy Point Ranch as well as other agricultural operations in the valley in order to provide a contextual overview of the valley’s local food network. Salatin’s input emphasized the value of coordination between agriculture and equestrian grazing for pasture health. He also recommended and schools. Coleman recognized the property’s developing and showcasing high-altitude and extended-growing-season techniques, serving as a tool library for small local growers. He also felt that there was rich potential for aligning all ranch operations under one sustainable umbrella. Northwest view from red barn area. Photo courtesy of The City of Aspen Parks Dept Other groups consulted include: • Aspen Center for Environmental Studies • Aspen Historical Society • Aspen T.R.E.E. • Aspen Valley Land Trust • Brush Creek Metro District • Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture Institute • City of Aspen Council Members • City of Aspen Open Space and Trails Board • Cozy Point Ranch LLC • Cure Organic Farm • • Friends of Cozy Point • Pitkin County Commissioners • Pitkin County Open Space and Trails Board • Roaring Fork Food Policy Council • Roaring Fork Mountain Bike Association • Roaring Fork Valley Horse Council • Sustainable Settings • Town of Snowmass Village Town Council • Woody Creek Caucus • CSU Extensions, Ag & Livestock Professionals • Natural Resource Conservation Service • WindWalkers Assisted Learning & Therapy Center In addition to the above mentioned discussion forums, 650 public comments were also taken in through letters and emails (148), a questionnaire form made available at a public open house held on March 8, 2016 and at the Parks Department front desk (153), online at the City of Aspen’s website through the Open City Hall Forum (137) and during COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN INTRODUCTION 9Figure e: "Public Comment Word Cloud"; Appendix G: Public Comments Analysis INTRODUCTION COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN In general, public comments indicate a strong desire to maintain and expand both the equestrian and agricultural components at Cozy Point Ranch supports the preservation of the property’s natural resources in terms of open space values, wildlife conservation, and preservation of our area’s interest in local food production and involvement in the sustainability and security of our local food systems. Education is another strong theme expressed through public input, spanning a variety of activities on the ranch from horseback riding through farm and garden experience. Public support for the equestrian component cites recreation, and gaining riding skills. Additional input supporting the equestrian component acknowledged the importance of this program for our community’s youth, especially young girls. Many equestrian program participants expressed passionate feelings about having access to safe boarding, riding, and instructional facilities. They also expressed a desire for certain enhancements to the existing program and facilities, such as a cross- country jumping course, dedicated equestrian trails, and barn and paddock improvements including drainage, footing, and safety. Equestrian input also expressed the need to keep other activities, such as biking, separate from horse activities for general safety. A number of comments conveyed support for overall sustainability at the ranch, embracing all activities and management areas. With regard to agriculture, comments expressed the desire for local food production, model gardens and demonstration areas showcasing high-altitude growing techniques, space for local small growers to lease, educational opportunities for all ages, and more. Comments were received conveying the desire for additional ways through which the public may learn about how to access and enjoy this open space parcel. Further comments supported the Archery Range facility and enhancements to it that would foster greater overall safety as well as experiences for youth archers and hunters. The small but passionate archery community expressed the desire to generally upgrade the Range facility to involvement period re addressed admiration for the commitment to community and existing programs and their management, and further reinforcing the key values and components of the property. Most notable was a desire to concentrate on user safety. f). Opportunities and actions described in this plan were developed based on those themes. The plan will be reviewed every 5-10 years for updating. Any brought to the City of Aspen Open Space and Trails Board. The Bonds family, photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC 10 PUBLIC COMMENTS WORD CLOUD COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN INTRODUCTION 11Figure f: "Public Comment Themes"; Appendix G: Public Comments Analysis Sustainable Agriculture Sustainable agriculture comments were measured by mentions of food security and local food production ranging from community gardens, the Aspen T.R.E.E. agricultural learning center, to large scale innovative production. Desires for increased pasture health, and weed- and herbicide-free haying operations were also considered a component of sustainable agriculture. Education Educational values ranged from passive experience in nature to programs such as Aspen T.R.E.E and Camp Cozy Point. Stories described life lessons gained from the agricultural processes included horse care, growing food, animal husbandry. Much of this was expressed in terms of childhood learning, however some adults appreciated the experiences gained from a historical perspective. Natural Resources & Wildlife Care for wildlife and habitat were mentioned often, including concerns about riparian areas, elk and deer migration corridors, and the quality of agricultural fields and water. Ranch Heritage and History This category general marked a value in the valley's agrarian heritage. This includes ranching, agriculture, and equestrian history. Mentions of the "Old Aspen" and maintaining its "rural character" were also considered a hat tip towards historical preservation. Equestrian Mentions of equestrian values were generally framed in a desire to maintain and improve the existing facilities in efforts such as improved safety, drainage, fencing and other upgrades, as well as mentions of equestrian trails, cross country jumps, and other equestrian-centered recreation. Accolades and primary care for the Cozy Point Ranch LLC were also counted in this category. Community Access This category marked the desire to connect the Cozy Point property with adjacent properties, and the potential to improve internal infrastructure. This included the need for better signage and designated parking, as well as multi-modal trails and other forms of passive use associated with public land. Other connections included experience and advancements for community health. The mention of safe use across all components of the site was included. Open Space Activities Includes activities that most associate with open space recreation, for example, hiking, biking, and wildlife viewing. Other open space values include preserving land for the future. Model Landscape There is a strong desire to maintain a landscape that exemplifies the high quality values of sustainability, environmental protection, and historical preservation synonymous with Aspen. The visual presence and cultural significance of its location as the "Gateway" to Aspen and it's past make a model landscape most valued by the community. PUBLIC COMMENT THEMES INTRODUCTION COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 12 “Do unto those downstream as you would have those upstream do unto you.” ~ Wendell Berry COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 13 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 0 2550 100 150 Feet Historical Buildings HWY 82HWY 82JUNIPER HILL ROADBRU S H C REEK755 0 ’7500’ INDOOR ARENA HORSE PADDOCKS HORSE PASTURES HORSE PASTURES HORSE PASTURES RIDING ARENA MAIN PARKING LIVESTOCK & EQUIPMENT CAMP COZY POINT RIDING ARENA HAY STORAGE THE RED BARN DISREPAIRED PAN-ABODE TURN OUT PASTURE TURN OUT PASTURE HAYING FIELDS DE VELOPME N T E N VELOPE ASPENTREE RANCH OFFICE EMPLOYEE HOUSING OVERFLOW & TRAILER PARKING COZY POINT RANCH DEVELOPMENT ENVELOPE Map C: "Cozy Point Ranch Development Envelope" 14 2.1 OVERVIEW Cozy Point Ranch Open Space comprises 168 acres of hay meadows, cattle and horse pastures, historic buildings, ranch outbuildings and structures, equestrian facilities, a farm and garden learning center, and areas of unattended land and natural landscape. The natural landscape of Cozy Point is a mosaic of sagebrush shrubland and pinyon/ juniper woodland, with riparian plant communities occurring along Brush and Cougar Creeks. 2.2.1 Climate 2.2 NATURAL RESOURCES 2.2.3 Geology 2.2.2 Topography The climate of Cozy Point Ranch Open Space is generally characterized by long, cold and moist winters, and short, cool, dry summers. Average annual precipitation is 23 inches and the mean January. The growing season is 127 days, generally occurring between May 24 and September 28, and the average annual snowfall is 187 inches. The geologic bedrock of Cozy Point Ranch consists primarily of the upper member of the Mancos Shale Formation. The Mancos Shale is a dark-gray, silty shale with a few outcrops of persistent olive-gray sandstone up to 40 feet thick. The upper Mancos Shale member was laid down during the Upper Cretaceous Period 99 to 65 million years ago by environments of the Cretaceous North American Inland Sea. Holocene alluvial fan deposits and older Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits occur along many of the gently sloping sagebrush shrublands as well as along Brush Creek Cozy Point Ranch Open Space is a 168-acre parcel located southwest of the intersection of U.S. Highway 82 and Brush Creek Road, approximately six miles north of the City of Aspen between the communities of Snowmass Village and Woody Creek. The parcel consists of an alluvial terrace and lower portions of adjacent slopes at an elevation of approximately 7,500 feet above sea level. Cozy Point Ranch currently supports a large equestrian boarding and training facility as well as an archery range and agricultural operations. Flat irrigated acres of the ranch, equestrian facilities make up approximately 27 acres, and the remaining 81 acres are unattended agricultural and natural lands. The property is bisected by Brush Creek, a perennial tributary to the Roaring Fork River. Other open space properties adjacent to Cozy Point Ranch are Aspen Mass, Mills, and Sky Mountain Park. Sky Mountain Park Open Space is managed for wildlife habitat and non-motorized recreation. The Aspen Mass and Mills parcels are currently used for recreation. Topography is highly varied, including slopes of shale badlands, rock outcrops, and steep slopes descending to the Roaring Fork River. Additionally, the CDOT Intercept Lot, located adjacent to the Mills parcel, contains developed and undeveloped parking areas and two areas of wetlands in drainage basins. Appendix A: Site Survey; Appendix C: Biological & Historical Resource Surveys; Appendix D: Concept Stream Restoration Plan. Bank erosion on Lower Brush Creek. Photo courtesy of Western Ecology Resources Inc COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS 15 EXISTING CONDITIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN cycle as solar energy acts directly on the snowpack, in contrast to the slower melting cycle that would occur if the snowpack in these areas was shaded by trees. Urban development in Snowmass Village and surrounding neighborhoods has lead to more where impermeable surfaces such as roads, parking lots, roofs, and plazas prevent water from soaking into the ground which would otherwise moderate Brush Creek include historic ranching activities such as irrigation ditches, straightening of reaches of the creek, and removal of riparian vegetation; water diversions for municipal and residential purposes; bridges and culverts; and beaver activity. Currently the portion of Brush Creek in the Cozy Point South Open Space is in fairly healthy, ecologically functioning condition from a hydrological standpoint. Here, the riparian corridor is fairly wide (200-300 stream system, and bank erosion is minimal. The Cozy Point South reach is a suitable reference for on the reach that runs through Cozy Point Ranch. Throughout the Cozy Point property, Brush Creek exhibits a variety of conditions ranging from fairly healthy to severely degraded. At times, unnaturally due to scouring of the stream bed, deepening of the stream channel, bank erosion, and impacts to vegetation along Brush Creek within the planning area is a Mountain Willow/Mesic Forb Shrubland wetland/riparian habitat type, common in the upper montane valleys of Colorado, and comprised of native plants such as willows, hawthorn, alder, and river birch. Scattered stands of narrow-leaf cottonwood trees, sedges, and a suite of native forbs including cow parsnip, largeleaf avens, and chiming bells also occur in these areas. Non-native pasture grasses are also common here, and the presence of non-native, invasive plants including reed canarygrass, ox-eye daisy, houndstongue, Canada thistle, and plumeless thistle highly degrade Appendix C: Biological and Historical Resource Survey; Appendix D: Concept Stream Restoration Plan 2.2.5 Hydrology Brush Creek is the main body of surface water that runs through the planning area from south to north. A secondary, intermittent stream known as Cougar Archery Range access road. Elements comprising these stream ecosystems include the stream channels, riparian or stream-side vegetation, and wetlands associated with the streams. Brush Creek Brush Creek's 15 square mile watershed drains Snowmass Village and much of Snowmass Ski snow-making operations, forest canopy openings on ski trails, and impermeable surfaces such as roads and roof tops, as well as the natural structure increases the snowpack where these operations take place, which in turn increases snowmelt volume entering the watershed in spring. The extent of open areas where ski trails replace forests has 2.2.4 Soils The most common soil on Cozy Point Ranch Open Space is Kobar silty clay loam, which dominates situated. This well-drained soil is present on the property’s alluvial fans and terraces, and is derived from Mancos shale. This soil type has typically been used for irrigated hay meadows. The Dollard-Rock Outcrop-Shale is another common soil, occurring on ridges and slopes that comprise a relatively small area of the parcel. This calcareous soil is moderately deep, well-drained, and derived from Mancos Shale, the underlying bedrock beneath the project area. Other soils covering a very minor amount of the parcel include: Rock Outcrop (Mancos shale), Torriorthents-Rock Outcrop Complex, Uracca Moist-Mergel Soil Association, and Fluvaquents (a wetland soil). 16 Map d rendered based off of Appendix C: Biological & Historical Resource Survey AspenMass Cozy Point Ranch Cozy Point South Mills Native Habitat KEY Unattended Agricultural Land Agricultural Land Activities Envelope Riparian Habitat Structures Trails Rivers & Creeks Ditches City of Aspen Property Boundaries Roa rin g Fo r k Ri verCo u gar Cre e kBru s h C reek W oo d y C reek Hwy 8 2Ra c e wa y R d.Upper Riv er RoadMcLai n Fl at s Rd.Twi nning Flatts Rd. J u niper Hill Rd.B rush C reek R d .0 0.25 0.5 1.0 Miles COZY POINT RANCH AREA LAND USE & VEGETATION ZONES COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS 17 2.2.6 Vegetation The land of Cozy Point Ranch Open Space comprises a variety of vegetation types, including Mountain Shrubland, Sagebrush Shrubland, Active Agriculture, Abandoned Agriculture, Shale Barrens, Riparian/Wetland, Aquatic Habitat, Disturbed, and fallow. A combination of Sagebrush and Mountain Shrublands, and Active Agriculture cover the greatest land area at Cozy Point Ranch. Sagebrush and Mountain Shrublands Within the Sagebrush and Mountain Shrublands, Gambel oaks, serviceberry, sagebrush, and juniper shrubs grow in a mosaic of large and portions of the riparian/wetland habitat. Point Ranch lacks lateral stability and connectivity occurring, and the riparian zone and vegetation are constricted (100 feet or less in width) or completely lacking in some sections. Bank stability in this reach is directly related to the presence or absence of woody riparian vegetation. In areas lacking such vegetation, erosion has lowered the stream channel below the rooting depth of riparian plants, allowing the banks to become undercut. This, in turn, has led to collapsed banks and lateral migration of the stream channel. Beavers pose a special set of considerations. In completely natural ecosystems, the activities of higher water tables, increased wetland and riparian habitat, improved water quality, and increased biodiversity. However, when beavers and human development coexist, many factors change and management of beaver populations becomes necessary. Where beavers have been removed and their old dams have breached, streams have become incised. In places, such erosion degrades the stream ecosystem and may also become a concern for nearby homes. Beavers can also impact culverts and landscape vegetation. In some upstream areas of Brush Creek, beaver dams create stepped ponds in a stable, healthy situation. In short, beavers act instinctively, and as such their activities may or may not be congruent with healthy stream systems when human activities are part of the game. Cougar Creek Cougar Creek is a small intermittent stream north of Brush Creek on Cozy Point Ranch Open Space. Riparian habitat along Cougar Creek consists of river hawthorn, strapleaf willow, and small amounts of chokecherry, serviceberry, gooseberry and Woods’ rose, with a stand of narrowleaf cottonwoods along the western property boundary. Appendix D: Concept Stream Restoration Plan; Appendix C: Biological & Historical Resource Surveys. Cougar Creek, upstream of farm road, is relatively healthy compared to downstream of the road. Photo courtesy of Western Ecology Resources Inc Upstream of the Archery Range access road, the stream channel is in good condition and is connected under the access road is in need of replacement. Downstream of the access road, however, the channel is incised, and further downstream it lacks riparian shrubs and is lined with large cobbles and boulders. Two small concrete weirs exist in the lower reaches of the creek, and the large manure compost pile adjacent to the creek may contribute precipitation events. EXISTING CONDITIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 18 small patches. Other common plants within these areas are rabbitbrush, snowberry, chokecherry, and Woods’ rose. Elk sedge, lanceleaf bluebells, balsamroot, Oregon grape, and ballhead waterleaf grow among the oaks and serviceberry shrubs, which form dense thickets in some areas. Other plants associated with the sagebrush include Indian paintbrush, northern bedstraw, green needlegrass, and butterweed groundsel. Mountain Shrublands provide big game winter range and habitat for a variety of local wildlife including nesting birds and raptors. Over browsing regime have lead to lower diversity of understory plants, high stem density, and clubbing of terminal sprouts in shrub thickets on the property, reducing the value of these areas to wildlife. species that is most valuable to wildlife when it is between 12 and 50 years of age. Active Agriculture & Unattended Agriculture The land in active use for agricultural purposes is primarily vegetated with grasses as pasture for cattle and horses or for hay production. Grasses in these areas are non-native smooth brome, orchardgrass, crested wheatgrass, timothy, Kentucky bluegrass, quackgrass, and intermediate wheatgrass. Other non-native vegetation in these areas includes alfalfa, black medic, white Dutch clover, yellow sweet clover, various thistle species, and other non-native plants. Unattended agricultural land is vegetated with species listed above as well as some sagebrush and rabbitbrush that have begun to re-establish in these areas. Dense stands of Canada, plumeless, and musk thistles are problematic in many of these areas, and are addressed with weed control measures. Vegetation on active and unattended agricultural lands at Cozy Point Ranch is supported by ranching, farming, and equestrian operations and activities. Management of soil nutrients includes fertilizer inputs such as composted horse and cow manure as well as wood shavings from stall bedding. Management of weeds includes prudent use of Milestone herbicides at an average rate of 3 to 5 ounces per acre, as well as mechanical removal. Rotational grazing of livestock supports vegetation communities in pastures by giving these areas time to recover on regular intervals. No pesticides are used on these land areas. Primary outputs hay produced annually for consumption primarily by horses. Lower grade hay and hay waste is consumed by cows. Shale Barrens Shale Barrens typify the steep slopes of Mancos Shale at Cozy Point Ranch. This relatively small portion of the property has sparse vegetation due to its exposure to wind, dry conditions, and erosion. Indian ricegrass occurs here, and is part of a vegetation community that is ranked as globally and state imperiled by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. Shrubs found in these areas include mountain mahogany, bitterbrush, Gambel oak, serviceberry, and snowberry. Additional grasses and forbes in this community include junegrass, hawksbeard, twoform pussytoes, balsamroot, evening primrose, mat penstemon, and point-tip twinpod. Appendix C: Biological & Historical Resource Surveys COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS Ranch LLC 19 Appendix C: Biological & Historical Resource Surveys 2.2.7 Wildlife Habitat types are determined largely by dominant vegetation communities, and these plants, in turn, given landscape. Wildlife species detected through Resource, Inc. on Cozy Point Ranch Open Space include coyote, mule deer, elk, red fox, and mountain cottontail rabbit, as well as the avian species, Brewer's sparrow (a BLM, USFS sensitive was the most common species photographed by wildlife cameras used in the study, followed by deer and coyote, respectively. Townsend's big-eared bat and bluehead sucker are indicated in the report as potentially present in the planning area. surveys mentioned above, other species may also be present year round or seasonally, as typical inhabitants of the habitat communities represented on the ranch. Possible additional species include mountain cottontail, least chipmunk, Wyoming ground squirrel, badger, coyote, red fox, mountain lion, and bobcat. Additional avian species include red-tailed hawk, golden eagle, common nighthawk, broad-tailed hummingbird, American kestrel, prairie falcon, plumbeous vireo, common raven, black- billed magpie, Woodhouse's scrub-jay, blue-gray gnatcatcher, mountain bluebird, Virginia's warbler, yellow warbler, green-tailed towhee, spotted towhee, sage sparrow, vesper sparrow, lark sparrow, Riparian/Wetland and Aquatic Habitat Riparian/wetland and aquatic habitats occur on Cozy Point Ranch along Brush Creek and Cougar Creek. Portions of Brush Creek support native riparian and wetland vegetation such as various willow species, hawthorn, alder, river birch, chiming bells, cow parsnip, and largeleaf avens. In many areas banks of the creek are dominated by the non- native/invasive reed canarygrass. Native sedges the willow riparian areas are degraded by pasture grasses and non-native/invasive plants including ox-eye daisy, houndstongue, Canada thistle, and plumeless thistle. Noxious weeds threaten the reach of Brush Creek the ranch. Past ranch-related activities and other activities upstream may be impacting the stream. degraded water quality and impaired the aquatic macroinvertebrate community. Cougar Creek is an intermittent drainage running through the northern portion of the planning area. This drainage is bordered by native willows and hawthorns. This riparian community is threatened lower portion of this drainage has been altered vegetation. Brush Creek Ditch runs through the northern portion of the planning area. The headgate for this ditch is located in the Hwy 82 right-of-way between the north and south bound lanes. Narrowleaf cottonwoods have formed a narrow riparian community here as a result of the ditch water. Chokecherry, sandbar willow, smallfruit bulrush, and snowberry grow here, along with non-native plants such as burdock, houndstongue, and yellow sweet clover. This riparian community is entirely dependent on irrigation ditch water rights. "Brewer's Sparrow singing on territory in western Colorado in June". Photo courtesy of Wild Bird Video Productions EXISTING CONDITIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 20 All public access to Cozy Point Ranch is from Juniper Hill Road, where two driveways enter the main part of access to the indoor arena - horse barn complex and the large upper and lower associated parking lots. The second driveway provides access to the Camp Cozy Point Headquarters building, historic red barn, a large outdoor arena, Aspen T.R.E.E, and a the small parking area that serves all operations in 2.3.1 Water Rights The City of Aspen owns water rights associated with Cozy Point Ranch Open Space for agricultural use pulls water from Brush Creek via the Jote Smith Ditch and Smith and Rex water right. The pump system, located in the pond on Cozy Point South Open Space, has been upgraded to an 125-horsepower pump integrated into the existing 30-horsepower pump, enabling the system to pump 2,500 gallons per minute from the Jote Smith water right. The increased water pressure and volume that this system delivers, now allows irrigation water to be delivered more widely across the ranch, including outlying areas that had been too far away for the original, smaller pump to serve. 2.3 FACILITIES & LAND USE Appendix A: Site Survey; COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS Brewer's sparrow, Black-headed grosbeak, western Most of these wildlife species spend much of their time within the dry habitats on the ranch, and a few primarily occupy riparian habitats, but all of them depend on riparian habitats at least part of the time. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) denotes the planning area as overall range for mule deer and elk. The northern end of the planning area is denoted as mule deer winter range and also includes critical habitat for Brewer’s sparrow. The area between Cozy Point Ranch and Cozy Point South is mapped by CPW as an elk migration corridor and highway crossing area, although it is less heavily used than areas further to the west on Brush Creek Road. In a 2011 study by Western Ecological, Inc., a group of local wildlife professionals shared the opinion that considered as a whole, Cozy Point Ranch and it's surrounding open space properties form an area of extended habitat whose value to wildlife is greater than the sum of its parts. As such, these properties should be managed in concert with each other in order to maintain the wildlife populations that they support. (See Appendix C for more information and maps) Photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC The increased capacity of the new pump system will also allow for optimal use of the ranch's water rights. In addition, there are two wells on the property serving the structures on site. The actively used ditch that crosses the northern portion of Cozy Point Ranch is owned and maintained by another portion of the property was established in the late 1800s and is in disrepair and unusable. 21 Kids holding bunnies at Aspen T.R.E.E. on Field Day. Photo courtesy of Aspen T.R.E.E 2.3.3 Facilities & Buildings Facilities and buildings on the property at Cozy Point Ranch Open Space include structures related to general operations, equestrian and haying operations, the sustainable agriculture program, and the archery range. The development envelope delineated in the conservation easement on the property held by Aspen Valley Land Trust requires that all facilities and building be sited only within a ten acre envelope, with the exclusion of the archery range and some structures related to agricultural activities. (See Map C: "Cozy Point Ranch Development Envelope" which features current conditions, including Facilities and buildings related to general operations driveways and parking areas, an un-restored Pan- Abode building that is not currently in use. Facilities and buildings related to equine and haying operations include: the historic red barn, a large indoor riding arena and barn complex that includes 29 indoor horse stalls and one housing unit, an insulated semi trailer used for grain storage, the Camp Cozy Point headquarters building, a pole barn, a maintenance garage with an attached employee housing unit, and two additional single- family employee housing units. Outdoor facilities include: a large outdoor riding arena with a judge/ announcer platform structure, a small outdoor riding arena, and various fenced paddock areas ranging in size, most with individual horse shelters. Hay storage capacity within the facilities and buildings listed above consists of: 350 square bales Appendix A: Site Survey; Appendix E: Title Commitment EXISTING CONDITIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN this vicinity. The two entrance areas are connected by a driveway running passed the maintenance garage. This driveway sees mixed use by cars, trucks, trailers, farm implements, equestrians with horses, service vehicles, and people on foot. Users can drive through to the upper parking lot from the second entrance an a small road before the Camp areas have poor drainage, which limits accessibility during muddy times. Small foot paths run from the small parking lot to its own driveway and parking lot, accessed from 82 to employee use only due to safety issues that and from the ranch. A small operational dirt road runs south from the driveway on the north side of Juniper Hill Road composting piles, as well as providing parking for poor drainage, and increasingly encroaches on the landscape. Concerns for horse and hiker safely, as well as land quality, center around a need to design There is a need to address safety and access issues in the area of the historic red barn where access the farm and garden learning center and various equestrian facilities. 22 Appendix E: Title Commitment; Appendix B: Conservation Easement; Appendix C: Biological & Historical Resource Surveys of Aspen T.R.E.E COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.3.4 Historical Buildings & Resources The 2,202 square foot red barn of Cozy Point Ranch is the primary extant structure of historical built circa 1890 – 1930. Signage at the building indicates a construction date circa 1890; however, the Historic Building Inventory Record Form of the and Historic Preservation dates the construction circa 1930. This barn is one of the only historic barns in the valley that remains in use for agricultural purposes. The barn was designated as a Pitkin County Landmark in June 2013, in recognition of its association with the settlement of Pitkin County and the agricultural heritage of the area. An Historic in the historic red barn, 1,000 square bales in the pole barn, and 9,650 square bales stored outside under tarps adjacent to the pole barn. In addition, round hay bales for cows are stored outdoors in the cattle staging area under tarps. Quantities and sizes of outdoor horse paddocks situated on a total of 21 acres are as follows: there are 19 paddocks 20' x 37' in size, 9 paddocks 40' x 150' in size, 4 paddocks that are 1 acre in size, and 5 paddocks that are 2 acres in size. Facilities and buildings related to the cattle operation staging ground with a lean-to shelter and fenced area. Large, round hay bales for cows are stored outside and covered by tarps in this staging area. Facilities and buildings related to the Aspen T.R.E.E. farm and garden learning center include: a geodesic dome, animal pens, an animal shelter building with outdoor classroom facility on the roof, and a garden area. This half acre facility is located between the historic red barn and Brush Creek. Facilities and buildings related to the Archery Range include: signage, parking, staging and shooting areas, targets, and footpaths. Most of these facilities are in need of upgrades. Structure Assessment grant was awarded by the State Historical Fund, and additional grant awards for funding to complete the rehabilitation of the barn are anticipated. The two-story rectangular barn has a saltbox roof with an extension on the east slope and two small cupolas. The roof is covered with corrugated a combination of lap and clapboard siding. Large animal stalls were originally located on the ground some of this space for other uses including equestrian equipment storage, stalls for tacking up horses, classroom space, and cubbies for camp participants. The second story is a hayloft, currently used for limited hay storage (approximately 800 small bales). A large sliding door, originally present in the middle of the south end of the barn, has been The barn’s roof and foundation were restored fall of 2016. 23 2.3.6 Adjacent Land Use 2.3.5 Conservation Easements On June 30, 2003, the City of Aspen granted a conservation easement to Aspen Valley Land Trust (AVLT) on Cozy Point Ranch (Reception No. 484726, recorded June 30, 2003). The purpose of the easement is to preserve and protect, in perpetuity, the conservation values of the property, and continue the land use patterns which include City open space, wildlife habitat, agricultural uses, and recreational uses. The easement also of the property. For example, the building of large feedlots is prohibited, and agricultural land must not be disturbed, impaired, changed, or altered in ways that would devalue the land. Further, if agricultural and equestrian operations were to be discontinued, the land on which they took place would revert back to wildlife habitat. The development envelope is limited to 10 acres, and the envelope location may be shifted to allow for optimal operations. As the Grantor of the conservation easement, the City of Aspen retains ownership of the property and management responsibilities. Other easements Site Survey. Cozy Point South Open Space This parcel is hayed through a joint operation between the City of Aspen Open Space and Trails Program, and Cozy Point, LLC. It is a location for trailhead access into Sky Mtn Park on Cozyline Trail, and is the location of the lower terminus of Brush Creek Trail. It also is the site of an irrigation impoundment pond. Appendix C has more information on the state of riparian ecosystems at Cozy Point South. Colorado Department Of Transportation Intercept Lot This parcel consists mainly of infrastructure for Roaring Fork Transit Authority and Town Of Snowmass Village bus services, a large paved parking lot, a bus stop shelter, two stormwater detention ponds, and areas of impacted and natural construction staging take place on this parcel. The CDOT lot also serves as trailhead access to Brush Creek Trail, Cozyline Trail, and Rio Grande Trail via AspenMass Trail. EXISTING CONDITIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Field Day Hay Rides. Photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC Two historic frame houses exist on the property. One is 700 square feet in size and has a steeply pitched gable roof, bay window, lap siding, and a metal pipe chimney. The second frame house is 960 square feet in size and has wide lap siding, skylights, a large brick chimney, and a shed for extension on the rear. Both of these houses are Three Pan-Abode buildings make up the remaining historic structures on the property. These buildings were relocated from Aspen. Two have been restored: a 500 square foot Pan-Abode currently used as the is used for Camp Cozy Point headquarters. The third Pan-Abode, which is 560 square feet in size, is in disrepair and not currently used. ("Historic Structure Assessment and Preservation Plan," 2014) 24 COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS The West of Maroon Creek Plan (adopted October 8, 2013) The existing West of Maroon Creek Plan addresses the community’s vision for this gateway area to the Aspen Community, providing land-use guidance for future uses and decisions regarding the location and scale of development in the planning area which extends from the west bank of Maroon Creek to the northwest end of the Pitkin County Airport. This plan is a Pitkin County Sub-Area Master Plan, written and adopted by the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission. (“West of Marron Creek Plan”, 2013) The Roaring Fork Gorge Management Plan (adopted December 3, 2013) The existing Roaring Fork Gorge Management Plan encompasses eight public properties, two and a trail easement. The plan acknowledges the conservation value of the unique geological features and ecological communities that exist within the planning area, as well as the recreational value the gorge area holds for the community. It is a place of important wildlife habitat, a wildlife habitat areas, and a place of historical importance to the Aspen community with regard to railroad and ranching history. Trails within this planning 2.3.7 Existing Management Plans For Adjacent Land Areas Sky Mountain Park Management Plan (May 2012) The management plan for Sky Mountain Park provides long-term vision and management goals for this open space parcel managed by Pitkin County Open Space and Trails. The plan acknowledges the property’s importance as winter range for elk and mule deer as well as sensitive bird species such as Brewer’s sparrows and Virginia’s warblers. It also acknowledges Sky Mountain Park’s many plant communities, including the widely threatened sagebrush shrubland community, and the need for protecting silverleaf milkvetch, a rare plant that occurs on shale barrens areas. The vision for Sky Mountain Park includes preserving wildlife habitat and migration corridors, ecological restoration, non- motorized recreation, education, and preserving the property’s historical features. The plan was born out of a community collaboration between Pitkin County, City of Aspen, and other acting stakeholders. To date, a number of trail connections have been established and are widely used by hikers, mountain bikers, and equestrians. (“Sky Mountain Park Management Plan”, 2012) Mills Open Space This open space parcel is mainly natural landscape. Uses on this parcel include wildlife habitat and AspenMass Open Space Mainly unattended agricultural land and natural land, this parcel is the location of the AspenMass Trail, which is a connector trail linking the Rio Intercept Lot, Brush Creek Trail, and Sky Mountain Park. Land use on this parcel is mainly recreational trail use and wildlife habitat. For more historical information on AspenMass see Appendix C. Bovine on the property are used to eat hay not suitable for horses. Photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC 25 COZY POINT RANCH IMPROVEMENTS & REPAIRS MADE BY THE CITY OF ASPEN & IN COOPERATION WITH COZY POINT RANCH LLC 2008/2009 • Public restroom construction • Office and meeting space for staff • Covered storage for hay, bedding and equipment • Irrigated grass turnout pastures • Domestic water storage and treatment • Landscape improvements • Septic, electric, and water systems • Structural deficiency improvements • Archery range improvements 2015/2016 • Safety improvements to employee housing units; led lighting, electrical improvements, new windows, caulking, flooring, new roofing for 2 houses, insulation, e-appliances, boilers/heaters and improved smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors and fire wall improvements • Outdoor arena footing excavated & replaced with safer horse material • Outdoor arena drainage improved • Dust control irrigation system installed in outdoor arena • Indoor riding arena new led lighting system • New power roll up doors installed in indoor arena area • New road installed along shed area • New snow fence installed over the indoor arena to keep snow from leaking through roof during winter months • Extensive fencing repairs performed on a regular basis throughout 2015 and 2016 including welding of hinges, gates • Extensive noxious weed management performed throughout the property in accordance with Pitkin County regulations • Baled 15,000 small square bales of hay and 230 large round bales (to be used for horses and excess will be sold for profit) • Repaired & reconditioned two small square balers & 499 haybine wather • Purchased used 4430 John Deere tractor & 945 Moco wather • Upgraded outside paddock tank heater electrical circuits • Brand new pump irrigation system & pump installed • Flower gardens upgraded and replanted • Left over materials & junk removed & recycled • Fencing repairs regularly • New haying equipment purchased such as a new used tractor & new used stack wagon (purchased in partnership with City & Cozy Point Ranch LLC) • Pastures drill seeded, rejuvenated & turned out • Extensive noxious weed management in accordance with Pitkin County regulations • Historic red barn repairs phase 1; restore structural & roofing components (managed through state historical fund & the City Of Aspen’s Asset Management Dept.) • Baled 15,000 small square bales of hay (excess sold for profit) • Upgraded pump system • Continuing repairing 35-year-old haying equipment & tractors • Installed new bearings on Parma Groomer • Continuing work on the smallest employee housing unit structural & energy repairs • Mucked out the cozy point ditch head gate Figure g: "Cozy Point Ranch Improvements & Repairs" EXISTING CONDITIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN area include a segment of the Rio Grande Trail, AspenMass Trail, and the Burlingame Connector properties and easements of the gorge, and provides a comprehensive guide for their future. (“Roaring Fork Gorge Management Plan”, 2013) 26 COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS Aspen T.R.E.E. (0.5 acres), a farm and garden learning center owned by Eden Vardy, leases part of the property for its educational program. experiences for ages 1 and up, centered around sustainable agriculture, environmental citizenship, personalized programs for private groups and schools as well as co-op memberships for eggs and vegetables. Aspen T.R.E.E. partners with valley-wide agricultural programs and farmers for its annual community Thanksgiving meal event which supports and showcases our local farmer economy. The event attracts hnudreds of community members. Inside the Dome at Aspen T.R.E.E. Photo courtesy of Aspen T.R.E.E Two independent business operators currently lease facilities at Cozy Point Ranch. Together they served around 34,500 site user days in 2015. Patti Watson, owner of Cozy Point Ranch LLC (32.5 acres), directs the public equestrian operation, including horse boarding and Camp Cozy Point. The business employs 8 year-round workers, 7 trainers, 4 farriers, 8 veterinarians, and 2 acupuncturists and chiropractors. The business also works in conjunction with City of Aspen Open Space and Trails to conduct haying operations. Cozy Point Ranch LLC also partners with one of its employees, Manuel Morales, who owns a small herd of cows (25 cow-calf pairs) whose purpose is to absorb grazed on the property only in winter depending on the fencing being in a good state of repair. The number of cows is slowly being reduced. Up to eighty (80) horses can be boarded through Cozy Point Ranch LLC on various levels, including indoor stalls, outdoor paddocks, or pasture. Cozy Point Ranch LLC's operation has a capacity to board 29 horses indoors and about 50 horses living permanently outside, with additional outdoor horses during summer. The horse, cow, and haying operations are interconnected through various inputs such as herbicide spot spraying and hand-pulling, and outputs such as fertilizer from composted manure and horse bedding (wood shavings). young riders as well as instruction for adults. These opportunities include horse camp for beginners and experienced riders, as well as show camp for riders participating in shows. Membership and day-use Cozy Point Ranch to use the riding facilities. Cozy Point Ranch LLC hosts valley-wide middle and high school equestrian teams for practices and events. They are also the home stable for the Apsen Equestrian Team. The operation also hosts horse show events that are open to the public. 2.4 CURRENT LEASE HOLDERS 27 “The City of Aspen hopes to preserve the agricultural and ranching heritage of the upper Roaring Fork Valley through a planning effort that is underway for the Cozy Point Ranch. Joel Salatin’s expertise and vision for sustainable agriculture, small scale community farming, and local food production is invaluable to provide us with a perspective of what is possible for our community and this unique, publicly owned ranch.” ~ Austin Weiss, City of Aspen Open Space Manager EXISTING CONDITIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 28 3.0 OPPORTUNITIES & PLANNING ISSUES Appendix F: Stakeholder Meetings log; Appendix G: Public Comment Analysis rather an idea of what might occur at Cozy Point. “Cozy Point Envisioning” rendering by Dunnett Designs The vision for Cozy Point Ranch Open Space encompasses preserving our valley’s ranching heritage and fostering the ecological health of the land through innovative management approaches that provide locally-grown food and enhance equestrian and agricultural operations, while connecting the community with the land. This vision has emerged from a rigorous and inspirational process involving the local analysis, and the guidance of the City of Aspen Open Space and Trails mission. Initial inspiration and momentum for the vision came from a special work session at the ranch with Monroe Summers (ranch manager at the time), Aspen City Council, and City of Aspen Open Space and Trails Board members on July 28, 2014. At that session, Monroe captivated Council and Board members with the potential for expanding sustainability across ranch operations, and expanding and enhancing evolve into a innovative sustainable agriculture center. Working together the equestrian, recreation and agricultural operations, such as haying and food production, will continue to provide sustain recreation and open space amenities while promoting land and community health. The City sees sustainability as a concept to be integrated into all aspects of the ranch, and views the hay production and pastured land portions of the equestrian center under the same umbrella as agriculture. During the summer of 2015 visits from renown sustainable agriculture and local food systems experts, Joel Salatin and Eliot Coleman re-inspired the vision for Cozy Point Ranch. The special consultation provided 29 The general site vision is to manage for a sustainable, functioning open space with coexistent relationships among operations. Primary opportunities for the ranch center around Figure h: "Site Sustainability Pillars" ECOLOGY ECONOMYSOCIETY Energy Use, Waste Loops, & Land & Water Quality Workforce, Quality (Efficient)(Healthy) (Just) Preserve Values, Commu- nity Involvment & Empowerment 3.1 GENERAL SITE OPPORTUNITIES & PLANNING ISSUES by the City brought them to tour Cozy Point Ranch as well as other agricultural operations in the valley in order to provide a contextual overview of the valley’s local food network. Salatin’s input emphasized the value of coordination housing on site, and rotational grazing for pasture development opportunities for young farmers and Coleman recognized the property’s potential for showcasing high-altitude and extended-growing- season techniques, serving as a local food hub, and local growers. He also felt there was rich potential for aligning all ranch operations under the umbrella of sustainability. ("Jessica Catto Dialogue", 2015) aspects of the ranch, such as natural resources, agriculture, equestrian operations, archery range, community connection, and overarching general site improvements, are fully addressed in the ensuing subsections of this chapter. Arising out of the broad opportunities described above, the City envisions a landscape that is a sustainable system, connected to the community through trails, natural landscapes, locally-grown food, and access to recreational and educational programs. The ranch holds a great deal of ranching heritage landmark, with its expanses of native habitat and recreational amenities. Cozy Point Ranch will be a place where wildlife and human activities thrive, the land and streams are healthy, and our local ranching heritage is celebrated. developing a coexistence of site operations so that preserved and functional, and the site’s agricultural heritage is preserved for future generations to experience and learn from. These goals can be organized in terms of sustainability and best land management practices. present users without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. This is achieved by supporting economic, societal, and ecological health and vitality (see Figure h). In the context of Cozy Point Ranch, sustainability centers on economic viability of lessees, accomplished in part by providing agricultural land for lease at below market value and the initiative to build and improve employee housing for operations; catering to the community's social values by providing historic preservation, education and empowerment; and responsible land stewardship, such as maintaining three pillars of sustainability, ecology, society, and economy, form a self-regulating system of checks and balances, in which any one pillar that becomes out of balance is brought back into equilibrium by the others. Resources: Sustainability and the U.S. EPA, 2011; Appendix F: Stakeholder Meetings log; Appendix G: Public Comment Analysis COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 30 Under the direction of the City-employed ranch manager, equestrian and agricultural operations will work together to build mutual stewardship goals, a code of conduct helpful in reaching these goals, and measure toward a sustainable operation. Achieved through best management practices for agricultural, equestrian and natural resource management, the collective sustainability goals will provide recreation and open space amenities, promote land and community health, and maintain the vitality of their businesses. The ranch manager will be guided by this management plan in order to prioritize the health of the land, proper use and maintenance of ranch facilities, and lessee operations that meet sustainability and overall coordinated goals. The ranch manager will also work together with Aspen Valley Land Trust in order to optimize the development envelope toward best use of the land, as well as to designate wild land areas and agricultural land areas. Opportunities to improve sustainability on the ranch include collaboration between lessees for wildlife- friendly ranching and farming practices, and the preservation of the rural and historical character. Some of these opportunities will have positive implications on other sustainability goals. For example, the preservation of historical agricultural land by allowing farming practices to continue will not only protect social values for history, but will also provide space for agricultural businesses to thrive. COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS, & ISSUES EDUCATION ENVIRONMENT PUBLIC POLICY IDEAL FOOD SYSTEM EDUCATION ENVIRONMENT PUBLIC POLICY INFRASTRUCTURES INFRASTRUCTURES SOCIO-ECONOMIC SYSTEMS SOCIO-ECONOMIC SYSTEMS PRODUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT PROCESSING DISTRIBUTION CONSUMPTION INFLUENCED BY INFLUENCES MARKETING ACCOUNTING PARTNERSHIPS COLLABORATIONS strong local food system from environmental to economic health 31 OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS & ISSUES COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Facility upgrades that enhance the health and safety of visitors and employees at the ranch are a priority. Several opportunities exist for providing such upgrades and improvements with regard to done is in generating solar electricity on site. The Thermal Consulting partnership reveal areas of potential improvement. The"City of Aspen Solar Feasibility Study" indicates opportunities to install a 136 kW solar system on the barn roof (2016). This infrastructure could help replace conventional energy use on the property and even sell back to for Cozy Point Ranch" report are already underway (see Figure g), however, more can be done to upgrade facilities in this regard (2011). Together energy use on the property. recommend gutting the frame houses in order to conduct a complete renovation inside and out, because so many aspects of these buildings are The renovation would include re-insulating and appliances and lighting, and then putting them back together with their original exterior siding to preserve the homes' rustic charm. These renovations could initiate possible changes to the development envelope. There are several upgrades and improvements to facilities to be done at Cozy Point Ranch, with regard by the Sunsense and C.O.R.E partnership, and the and Aspen Thermal Consulting partnership reveal areas of improvement. The "City of Aspen Solar Feasibility Study" indicates opportunities to install a 136 kW solar system on the barn roof (2016). This infrastructure could help replace conventional energy use on the property and even sell back to for Cozy Point Ranch" report are already under way (see Figure g), however more can be done to upgrade facilities in this direction (2011). Together energy use on the property. Possibilities exist for exploring waste management alternatives in order to address current impacts and manure digester (also known as a methane digester) may be explored as a system that would process manure and yield methane to be converted digester would process manure containing residue of herbicides and/or antibiotics. In a separate waste- stream system, manure free of such residues would be composted and used in agricultural applications. The ranch's rural and historical character is a valuable and important aspect of the property, and must be preserved through the processes of implementing any changes to restore and/or upgrade the property and its facilities. Opportunities that directly meet this mandate include restoring the Pan Abode buildings, renovating unattended barn's restoration work. The following sections provide detailed information about how natural resources may be restored and how equestrian and agricultural operations may be upgraded into the fold of sustainability in coexistent, if not symbiotic, ways. 32 Resources: Fabian Wheeler, "Horse Stables and Riding Design", 2006. COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS, & ISSUES Brush and Cougar Creeks are direct tributaries to the Roaring Fork River, and as such, they present opportunities to manage water quality for both responsibilities to the Roaring Fork Watershed. Riparian zones associated with the creeks create habitat, maintain channel health and connect migration paths across several County and City properties. Their overall existence contributes to the larger network of properties and toward the goals of the municipalities for preserved, healthy wildlands and recreation. Information on options for restoring the riparian areas can be found in Section 4.2 actions. There are opportunities to collaborate with the County and the Town of Snowmass Village upstream. Given the existing, documented use of Cozy Point Ranch land for wildlife migration, year-round habitat, and winter range, opportunities exist for preserving and protecting important corridors and habitat areas, particularly in the northern reaches of the property, including the lower slopes of the adjacent Wildcat Ranch area. These areas of the deer and elk. Additionally, ways to maintain and enhance wildlife connections to Cozy Point South and adjacent open space parcels will be explored. land management extend beyond wildlife habitats and riparian areas. According to Julian Dumanski, an environmental scientist and soil scientist for the World Bank and government of Canada, “Sustainable land management (SLM) requires the integration of technologies, policies and activities in the rural sector, particularly agriculture, in such a way as to enhance economic performance while maintaining the quality and environmental functions of the natural resource base” (1997). Thus, the economic health of the equestrian and agricultural operations and the vitality of the natural areas is dependent in part on the sustainability of the site as a whole. Land operations must focus on water quality, soil health, and nutrient management in order to achieve functioning natural resources and, A section of Cougar creek. Mature cottonwood galleries exist in some areas of Brush and Cougar creek. Photo courtesy of the Western Ecology Resource Inc. The diverse habitats and land use patterns at Cozy Point Ranch present a number of opportunities regarding natural resources. The natural resource planning vision centers around ecosystem health, promoting wildlife diversity, and community education, and ties in directly to the overall sustainability goals for the property. These goals align with the overall site goals and principles of ecological health and the fostering of community health through ecosystem services. Ecosystem health is key to the perpetual use and existence of the agrarian landscape, and as such, restoration of natural resources in areas of an important step. Foremost, is the restoration of Brush and Cougar Creeks and their associated plant communities and sustainable agrarian land management in the areas outside the riparian zones. Restoration of these areas will provide many increased wildlife habitat value throughout all natural land areas on and adjacent to the property, improved water quality and supply for both natural ecosystems and agricultural operations, erosion control, and aesthetic values. 3.2 NATURAL RESOURCE OPPORTUNITIES & PLANNING ISSUES 33 Mare pastures in the winter, photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC 3.3 EQUESTRIAN OPPORTUNITIES & PLANNING ISSUES The current equestrian operation run by Cozy Point Ranch LLC serves our community by providing services, public riding facilities, riding instruction for all ages, and a youth equestrian camp. The City understands the value of this public equestrian valley, and will continue to host and enhance this important facet of the ranch. The vision for the COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Sustainable land management can be achieved management practices. For instance, managing for dynamic ecosystem functions that aid in healthy crop production, reduce erosion, increase stream health, and create overall land resilience. The use of horse manure in the sustainable agriculture program both in order to cycle this material back into the land as fertilizer and as a way of managing quality and aquatic ecosystems on the ranch, is yet another way agricultural activities can improve ecosystem functions and overall site sustainability. More information on sustainable agricultural practices is envisioned in the following Sections 3.3 and 3.4. The ranch manager and lessees will decide which best practices will be used depending on their activities, needs, and capabilities. There is a great opportunity to extend the knowledge gained from healthy land stewardship at Cozy Point Ranch to the community. Educational programming and /or events focusing on the natural environment and land stewardship best practices are additional opportunities related to the property’s natural resources. Site tours or courses addressing ecology and management, and birding are just a few possibilities of many. Information on education and community involvement visions and action items is explained in Sections 3.6 and 4.6, respectively. equestrian operation at Cozy Point Ranch is to become a sustainable equestrian center, which and maintains the historical integrity and rustic character of the ranch. As a major facet of the ranch, the equestrian center will operate under the overall goal of sustainability (generations of healthy and vital social, ecological and economical operations), and integrate with agricultural operations as part of that broad goal. These goals align with other property's vision and principles for safety, environmental and community health and recreation. Tremendous support for the equestrian component at the ranch was expressed through meetings and input from the horse community during the stakeholder inputs and public comment period. Community members have expressed the many values of the program that extend beyond recreational riding and skill-development, to a sense of community, and a strong work ethic among equestrian participants, notably among young women participants. The operation also coordinates equestrian teams for middle school and high school equestrians. These teams are open to riders from Glenwood Springs to Aspen, and are the only school equestrian teams represented on Colorado’s Western Slope. As a major facet of the ranch, the equestrian center will operate under the overarching goal 34 Resources: "What is Sustainable Agriculture?", SARE. "Planning for Food Access and Community-Based Food Systems, 2012 COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS, & ISSUES of sustainability that unites all activities on the property. Sustainable equine operations are similar to agricultural operations. They take into account the ecological, social and economic vitality of the site. Ecological impacts can be mitigated through "manure management impacting soil and water quality, indirect facility impacts on resource use through electricity, water, fossil fuel, and construction materials, as well as the disruption of the local natural habitat" (Shere, 2012). For example, exploring the implementation of a bio- creek. Such a system would also reduce mud and other footing and drainage problems in paddocks (drainage needs addressed in Chapter 3.1). Economic viability is accomplished in part by collaborating with the ranch manager and agricultural operations to provide agricultural land for haying operations, and the initiative to build and improve employee housing; social responsibility caters to the community recreation and historical preservation values. Opportunities exist for integrating equestrian operations with the agricultural component at the ranch toward the ultimate goals of sustainability and safety. The managers of equestrian and agricultural operations will work closely in cooperation with each other and the ranch manager to use resources example, the cattle are currently used to consume hay unsuitable for horses in exchange for fertilizer and income in the beef industry. Collaboration and consultation among these individuals will facilitate practical cooperative activities such as optimizing land through collaborated design, utilizing the horse manure supply toward organic fertilizer and soil amendment applications, or organizing rotational Public comment and research revealed a need to develop smart maintenance and upgrades to existing equestrian infrastructure to address safety and repair needs. The barn as well as paddocks are in need of improvements which will ensure the safety of the animals and people. Exterior improvements include redesigning paddock orientation of paddock fencing stacks paddocks barn entrance. Re-orienting paddock fencing to will help optimize land-use and possibly increase horse-boarding capacity. A more optimal quarantine area will be tied into paddock redesign. Drainage can be further improved by re-grading, addressing footing, and enhancing soil quality in the paddocks. Current conditions become super-saturated during thaw and heavy rain. This poses health risks to the animals and increases soil erosion. Lastly, other hazards in paddock and pasture areas need to be addressed, such as exposed electrical outlets and area. Interior improvements in the barn and arena building will aid in increasing air quality and user experience overall. Ventilation and insulation in both the barn and indoor arena must be addressed in order to temperatures. The footing in the arena and stalls will provide safer longterm use for horses and riders. Providing more appropriate user facilities such as a veterinarian and/or farrier stall, as well as optimized and improved tack rooms, will increase safety by removing these sometimes-hazardous activities from the hallways. Additional upgrades for to create safer and easier access to equestrian facilities, increased equestrian recreation activities and events, and updated infrastructures to adhere to sustainability and safety standards. “We have never seen our daughter so happy as she is when she is at Cozy Point. It is her “thing”, her sport” ~ Ashley Allison 35 There is strong support from the community and from experts consulted, for an expanded agriculture component at Cozy Point Ranch. The vision for this component is a model sustainable agricultural center with an emphasis on food production and ecosystem health, as well as educating and connecting the community with regard to its food system. The City views 'agriculture' as including ranching, farming, equestrian operations, 3.4 AGRICULTURE OPPORTUNITIES & PLANNING ISSUES OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS & ISSUES COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Horse trailer parking and clear signage to increase awareness and safety as visitors make use of facilities and trails and will enhance public access for equestrian activities. Such signs can be placed at trailheads and parking lots, and can educate the public about safety etiquette around horses and their activities. Enhancements toward improving safety in the developed areas include the property’s varied amenities, and that protect horses and equestrians. Additional important safety enhancements include measures that protect horses from injury around all ranch facilities. Increasing recreational opportunities on the ranch includes dedicated equestrian trails, a cross-country jumping course, and equestrian access to neighboring areas. This expansion and enhancement includes a cross-country jumping course to the north of Juniper Hill Road, or wherever the least impact to the environment and greatest safety of riders exists, and other trails such as bridle trails through the south end of the property. Trails that connect riders to adjacent lands are discussed in Section 3.6. Any trail development will be planned with equestrian safety in mind. This may require equestrian design experts for such things as road crossings and trail design. As advised by the horse community, appropriate and safe multi-use trails for horses are limited to hikers and wildlife viewers. Facilitation of additional horse show events, and equine-assisted therapy programming will further diversify the equestrian experience and encourage community interaction. Eliot Coleman's Farm demonstrates the beauty of a modern greenhouse. Photo courtesy of Heritage Prairie Farm haying, and gardening. These goals align with the overall site goals and principles of ecological health, preservation of ranching heritage, and the fostering of community health. Food systems in the Roaring Fork Valley, particularly in the upper valley, are heavily dependent upon the large, centralized, national food industry. Developing local food systems will improve our area's food security, reduce our community's carbon footprint, revitalize our economy, and reconnect the community to our food supply. Ranching and agriculture were once the basis of Aspen’s economy, and our area was once known for the McClure Red Potatoes that were grown here. Further, a reduction in available agricultural land and increased population creates a demand to bolster local food system. With a year-round population of about 9,500 people in the communities of Aspen and Snowmass, a multi-faceted center for sustainable agriculture is a much-needed amenity. Through the unique open space property of Cozy Point Ranch, the City of Aspen is poised to seize an important opportunity to move our community’s food systems forward in a positive direction. (Garcelon, 2015) “Sustainable agriculture involves the successful management of resources for agriculture to satisfy changing human needs, while maintaining or enhancing the quality of the environment and conserving natural resources”. Sustainable 36 productivity enhancement, risk reduction, protection of natural resources, prevention of degradation of the environment, economic viability, and social acceptability. The practice optimizes rather than maximizes external inputs. This is achieved by integrating socio-economic aspects with land quality. Land quality is measured in nutrient balance, soil and water quality, land use diversity, etc. Economic viability can be achieved through a viable work Social considerations include, but are not limited to, culturally appropriate products and practices, empowerment through education and experience, and more. (Dumanski, 1998) Sustainability in agricultural operations is by no means a new idea; however, new advancements in technology make operations on smaller pieces of land like Cozy Point Ranch more viable. Progressive farmers such as Eliot Coleman, Joel Salatin, and those at the Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture Institute begin to demonstrate the power of agricultural practices mixed with new technologies to produce food sustainably. the US Green Building Council, and others, can Ranch, in terms of resources, support, and idea- A great deal of expertise and infrastructure exists around us that may be drawn upon to support our institutions currently exist within the valley, such as Aspen T.R.E.E., ACES’ Rock Bottom Ranch, Sustainable Settings, and the Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture Institute. Such operations however, most of these operations are located in the mid- and lower valley. While the upper valley program operating within the constraints of its limited space at Cozy Point Ranch, many possibilities exist for expanding sustainable agriculture services. Opportunities to expand sustainable agriculture at Cozy Point Ranch start with the restoration of native habitats that exist on the property. Greater ground-water recharge, improved water quality, a higher water table, and rejuvenated, robust to agriculture, including pollination services and natural pest control (i.e. insectivorous birds and in the northern portion of the property and at AspenMass present further opportunities for land restoration. Bringing some of these areas back into agricultural production, as well as restoration and improved management of actively used agricultural land, can contribute to land quality and economic viability. and rotational grazing and crop production are examples of progressive agricultural methods “Ultimately, our kitchens determine how food is produced and what food is produced on the land” ~ Joel Salatin COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS, & ISSUES 37 The existing Archery Range consists of a facility various distances. In recent years, the range has seen an increase in use as archery has gained popularity in the community, especially among youth. The archery community is focused on safety and hunting education. 3.5 ARCHERY RANGE OPPORTUNITIES & PLANNING ISSUES Archery Range north of Juniper Hill road, photo courtesy of Bill Fontana OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS & ISSUES COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN that foster restoration of the property’s existing and potential agricultural land. The City has north of Brush Creek and at Cozy Point South. Further improvements will be done in collaboration with lease holders to assure optimal use. Opportunities centering around local food production at Cozy Point Ranch are diverse, and hold great potential to enrich and empower our community. In addition to providing commercial growing space for small, local growers as independent business could empower the local farming community by addressing research and development of high- altitude and extended-growing season farming and ranching methods; operating a farm stand; providing land and training for the development of demonstrating and educating about wildlife-friendly farming and ranching approaches; and exploring potential for further involvement in local food systems. Additional possibilities include education and outreach classes or workshops for the general public addressing home gardening, canning and food preservation, composting, bee-keeping, animal husbandry, cheese-making, raising egg and meat chickens, and more. Opportunities exist for special community events such as farm-to-table dinners and harvest celebration events. Our area’s farming and ranching heritage could be preserved and shared through educational and interpretive exhibits and/ or events. Examples of such activities may include professional development opportunities for local farmers, a community garden, family events, and more. Integrating the equestrian operation into this process is an additional important opportunity in terms of restoring the land, as well as applying sustainable techniques to overall operations and showcasing those techniques. Techniques such as rotational grazing and bio-dynamic hay production could help reduce erosion and increase soil health (see next chapter for more information). In order to ensure the success of these opportunities, the manager of sustainable agriculture operations will need to work closely with the ranch manager and manager of equestrian operations. They will need to support the overarching goals of this plan by maintaining and being guided by a holistic view of the ranch. Collaboration and consultation among these individuals will facilitate such practical cooperative activities as utilizing the horse manure supply toward organic fertilizer and soil amendment agriculture land. 38 greater overall ease of access to the property and its amenities. There is a need to formalize public access through the Juniper Hill Road entrance, to trailer parking area. Additional infrastructure capable of easing access to Cozy Point Ranch is a soft-surface trail connecting the up-valley bus stop on Highway 82 to the main activity center at Cozy Point Ranch. There are several important opportunities to create trail connections within the ranch and between adjacent parcels. One such opportunity is the need for a formalized trail connection across the Brush Creek Intercept Lot between the AspenMass Trail to the north and Brush Creek Trail to the south. Currently it is unclear to trail users how they should they search for the trail to which they are connecting. (See adjacent properties on Map A) Further, a trail connecting the Aspen Airport Business Center to the Brush Creek Intercept Lot would provide families and other trail users with an commuters with an alternative transportation option between the Intercept Lot and the existing trail network in Aspen. It would also provide families with a car-free alternative to visit Cozy Point Ranch. A third trail connection need is a crossing of Brush Creek Road between the Brush Creek Trail on Cozy Point South and Cozy Point Ranch, as well as a trail within Cozy Point Ranch from that crossing to the main ranch compound. The primary vision for these trail connections is to enable families coming and the trails of Sky Mountain Park without needing to use a car. An additional potential need at the Brush Creek Intercept Lot is dedicated trailhead parking. Currently, trail users are parking in the Intercept Lot and accessing Sky Mountain Park trails from there. The lot is designated for commuter parking only. If Agricultural education classes at Aspen T.R.E.E. Photo courtesy of Aspen T.R.E.E COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS, & ISSUES This section addresses opportunities to enhance public access and passive activities on the ranch, trail connectivity within the ranch and between adjacent parcels, and educational opportunities toward engaging the public with the property’s ranching heritage and natural resources. These opportunities contribute to enhancing public awareness of the property and engaging the public with the property’s resources and ranching heritage. Opportunities toward enhancing public access and passive activities on the ranch include exploring trail development in the north end of the property, 3.6 COMMUNITY CONNECTION OPPORTUNITIES & PLANNING ISSUES There is a need to improve and enhance the Archery Range in order to accommodate the recent increase in use and to provide a better, . Such potential improvements include formalizing parking and footpath access for range users, creating a youth- road between the parking and staging areas, and improving safety by demarcating the range perimeter with a subtle cedar fence or other suitable material. The archery community has expressed interest in at the range. 39 OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS & ISSUES COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN a need is determined, then recreational trailhead parking may need to be formalized as part of this lot. If it is determined that a trail connection is desired to link Cozy Point Ranch with trail systems to the north, this trail alignment would need to be located proximal to Highway 82 in order to avoid impacting wildlife habitat in the northern reaches of the property. At this time, private land constraints to the north prevent such a trail from being created. Public input has indicated a very strong desire to continue to educate and inform citizens, not only agriculture, but also about our natural environment, the history of agriculture and ranching in our valley. This property's rich history and natural resources lend themselves to a perfect outdoor classroom. These opportunities toward connecting people to the land include providing passive and active historical interpretation and education programming, as well as providing environmental education for all ages, such as natural history walks, invasive weed clinics, programs have potential to be done in partnerships with existing organizations in the valley, or through the operations of a lease holder. Ski jouring in the winter months. Photos courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC “Teaching young people to garden is a priceless investment on Aspen’s doorstep” ~ Michael Thompson 40 “It was the best camp I’ve ever attended. We got to go find wild cucumbers and goose berries and Paul taught me to eat cabbage burritos - all out of their garden” ~ Soren Tudge 8-years-old COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 41 4.0 RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 4.1 GENERAL SITE MANAGEMENT ACTIONS Parking Lots and Driveways The following are short-term actions: Re-grade drainage. Re-pave the parking lot at the Ranch personnel only. Close and restore the social road at the Archery Range. Buildings As a Short-term action, assess capacity for planning area. Research this through the Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Department, Aspen Valley Land Trust, Aspen Pitkin County Housing the land and goals set forth by this management plan, the current City-employed part-time ranch position. A request for proposal (RFP) process to determine lease holders will begin following the adaption of this plan. Lessees will provide expertise that will help carry out the City’s vision and goals for the property and operations as it pertains to their respective businesses. The ranch manager and lessees will work together to identify land use areas and create sustainability habitat, agricultural operations and equestrian Manuel Morales works for Cozy Point Ranch LLC and is an integral part of operations. Photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC in various subsections of Chapter 4, and others, such as waste management, are integrated into agricultural practices. In the mid-term, sustainability measures and actions decided during the collaborative planning term shall be implemented. To ensure the adaptive management of the open space and operations, this the 5 - 10 year time period. This will ensure the that goals and needs are met and adapted to available resources. Sustainable Sites Initiatives (sustainable landscape Global Services), and others. The following subsections describe ways in which the general site can improve toward a more sustainable functioning open space with coexistent relationships among operations. 42 Cozy Point Ranch red barn underwent renovation to structural components, COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS Restore historical buildings and landscapes. A side of Juniper Hill road needs to be assessed for either restoring back to productive land or re- establishing wildlife habitat in the short-term. term as agricultural needs are better understood. There are three existing Pan-Abode buildings on the property, two of which have been previously restored and are currently used as the ranch Cozy Point. The third Pan-Abode building is not restored and not in use. Identify a proposed use for housing, and restore this building accordingly. As a mid-term action, continue renovation of the historic red barn, as recommended by the historical assessment. This barn is currently undergoing roof replacement work and stabilization work to address the failing foundation. Additional restoration work will be necessary in order to preserve this historic structure. ("Historical Structure Assessment and Preservation Plan", 2014) 4.1.2 Historical Preservation Authority, and other entities and/or factors that may hold regulatory control over such development. It is the Parks Department's hope to have additional housing built within the mid-term range. Short-term improvements to buildings on site requires the City to continue to upgrade the energy use to meet the recommendations of the 2011 survey For example, the two historic frame houses that currently serve as employee housing must be gutted and fully renovated with new insulation, sealing measures, and new, efficient appliances, in order to address the many energy efficiency problems these structures have. This renovation work must be done in a way that retains and preserves the homes' rustic, historical character. ("Energy Audit for Cozy Point Ranch", 2011) The mid-term goal involves exploring the recommended upgrades to energy production and strategies to reduce energy waste on site as stated by the 2016 study by the Thermal Consulting partnership. On example of such upgrades is the possible application of roof-top solar panels to generate electricity. The combined has potential to realize a goal of net zero energy use on site. Decisions and implementation of these plans must be implemented in the long-term ("City of Aspen Solar Feasibility Study", 2016) Waste Management In the short-term, begin researching ways to best manage manure waste, and identify a suitable an energy-producing manure digester can provide resources and energy to other site components. issues and speed up the composting process. The composted end-product is to be integrated into the agricultural activities. Implement compost design by the mid-term. Recycling system improvements throughout the site, including bins and signs, will help organize and streamline recyclable and reusable material. This is to be accomplished in the short term. Appendix D: Concept Stream Restoration 43 4.2 NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACTIONS An initial short-term action under natural resource management, is to create a plan using information from the biological and historical survey, as well and delineates exactly where land areas will be restored and/or preserve. Examples of such areas include severely impacted locations where back to functional ecological health: areas along Brush Creek that will be converted into riparian habitat as that riparian corridor is widened as part of the Brush Creek restoration work, areas impacted by CDOT staging activities during the expansion of Highway 82, the informal parking area at the Archery Range, and other areas. This plan will help track where and why certain land areas will be 4.2.1 Brush Creek Restoration Select and implement a restoration plan for Brush Creek. This action is to be initiated in the short-term work on Brush Creek will focus on the reach of the creek that runs through Cozy Point Ranch, with the goals of stabilizing the stream channel and restoring the resiliency and ecological integrity of riparian and aquatic habitats. Presently, this reach of Brush Creek lacks lateral stability and functional erosion, and lacks healthy riparian vegetation. RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN Addressing these problems will restore the native riparian plant community, renew connectivity events. The restoration work will result in improved wildlife habitat conditions and higher water quality. Additional short-term actions: The following are three alternative restoration plans from which to and treatment options. Level 1 The “Do Nothing” Approach This plan would rely on natural geomorphic and biologic processes, beaver activity, and vegetation growth to heal the system over time. While costing little in terms of monetary expense, this approach may require many decades or longer to become stabilized, and these processes may progress in ways that are contrary to the intended land use. Beaver, as non-controlled partners in stream acceptable. Additionally, geotechnical engineering should be consulted to evaluate possible risks to homes upslope to the west of the stream channel where bank erosion is occurring. Level 2 The Limited Approach This approach would include measures to create and protect a wider riparian corridor, address only the most severely eroding banks, treat deeply incised stream bed sections to limit further scouring, and manage beaver populations. Installing wildlife-friendly fencing around a 200- to 250-foot wide riparian corridor would exclude grazing horses and cattle and allow willows and other riparian vegetation to help stabilize banks with their root masses. Bio-engineered bank treatments would stabilize banks and reduce sediment loads and land loss. Such treatments involve installing locally available large woody materials (such as root wads with extended tree trunks), and live willow Upper Cougar Creek. Photo courtesy of Aspen T.R.E.E Appendix D: Concept Stream Restoration 44 4.2.3 Dry Land Habitat Conservation The following are short-term actions: Preserve the high-quality elk and deer habitat in the northern portion of Cozy Point Ranch, on the lower slopes of the Wildcat area. These habitat areas serve as migration corridors and winter range. The below these slopes are to be explored for developing COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 4.2.2 Cougar Creek Restoration Select and implement a restoration plan for Cougar Creek. This action is to be initiated in the short wattles or brush mattresses. Stream bed treatments such as constructing cobble channel. Other stream treatments may include boulder cross vane structures or log structures in habitat. Riparian plantings and seedings would be used only on banks with the most severely eroded slopes. Plantings and seedings would follow species and methods guidelines as outlined in the hydrology report cited below. Encouraging and managing beaver activity where woody vegetation is lacking in many places, could Using Beaver Dam Analogues (BDAs), which are human-created beaver dams, is an adaptive approach that allows for longer restoration timeframes and also the possibility of failure (given the unpredictable nature of beavers as players in stream restoration work). The best way to include beavers into a management plan, is to view them as a closely managed component but not necessarily a player to be counted on. Level 3 The “Do Everything” Approach This approach would incorporate the restoration measures of Level 2, and apply them to the entire 5,000-foot project reach. Other areas, in addition to high priority areas, would be stabilized. No BDAs would be created, and beavers would be highly managed to increase success of woody riparian measures would provide a greater assurance of stabilizing existing erosion problem areas and prevent new erosion problems from developing. A greater amount of riparian plantings and seedings would further improve bank stabilization and habitat value. Appendix D: Concept Stream Restoration Upstream of the Archery Range access road, fairly functional. Downstream of the access road, however, the channel is incised and lined with large cobbles and boulders. Two small concrete weirs are located there as well. Additionally, a large manure compost pile may shed nutrient-laden water into the stream during heavy precipitation events. Overall goals of restoration work on Cougar Creek include enhancing and restoring the limited function of the northern reach of this stream. Addressing the incised streambed, limited habitat function, and sediment/nutrient issues is advised in order to improve value to wildlife, improve water quality, and protect the Roaring Fork River which Cougar Creek choices for restoring Cougar Creek: Level 1 Alternative This plan includes plantings of native trees and shrubs to improve wildlife habitat quality. This plan functions, as the channel would remain narrow and deep. Level 2 Alternative This plan would involve reshaping the high left bank of Cougar Creek, removing the existing cobble and boulders, and planting native wetland and riparian plants. The creek bed would be reshaped or drop pools would be created in order to better control quality. 45 Photo courtesy of Cozy Point Ranch LLC 4.3.1 Equestrian Infrastructure Updates Sustainability Short-term actions: The major site goal of sustainable practices is achieved through handling inputs and outputs of barn and paddock areas, as well as wise hay production. Much of the infrastructure in the barn and paddock areas can such as net zero energy use described in Section 4.3 EQUESTRIAN MANAGEMENT ACTIONS RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN a cross-country jumping course. Consider returning agricultural use and consider installing irrigation systems in these areas. Continue to implement a comprehensive, integrated weed monitoring and management plan. Restore and enhance the wetland, riparian, and aquatic habitats of Brush and Cougar Creeks (see these detailed action items in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2). Creek. For the mid-term, integrating horse manure into the general site composting system for more the nutrient cycle loop. lands include expanding economic capacity and healthy land stewardship by using some of productions, and using best agricultural practices to yield said hay. More on this is found in Chapter 4.4 Agricultural Actions. These sustainability actions and measures will be further developed during the collaborated sustainability plan created by the lease holders and ranch manager following the adoption of this plan. The following sub-sections are a series of updates necessary for the health and safety of the existing infrastructure. Replace Fences Short-term actions: Replace and/or repair existing no-climb horse fencing, and add an electric wire and wood board at the top edge. New fencing material is to be buried 6 inches or more below grade to protect horses from getting tangled in fencing at ground-level. The electric wire will discourage curious horses from investigating the no-climb fencing and will further prevent entanglement or other mishaps involving the no-climb fence. Repair existing metal bison fencing as needed and install no-climb horse fence just inside bison fencing as a secondary fence for the safety of horses. Wildlife- friendly fencing materials will be used for any fencing outside the paddock areas. Paddock Drainage Short-term actions: Re-grade and re-orient paddock areas as needed to improve drainage, ease of access, and land optimization. This work is to be done concurrently with re-grading associated with fence repair, and replacement work. Orient heavily used and rotated paddocks closer to barn, rotate 46 used land closer to riparian area to reduce impacts. more optimal space. Explore improvements to the soil substrate within paddocks as a further measure toward better drainage and durability. Additionally, improvements to the quarantine area to ensure animals are kept from others, and the removal hazards to horses from the paddock area, such must be made. Barn/Arena Improvement Short term actions pertaining to the barn and indoor arena involve both indoor and outdoor items. Indoor actions include: improve ventilation, replacing insulation material, exploring options for dust control in the arena, tack room repairs and improvements, and optimizing tack storage in other spaces currently used for this purpose. The dust control system may be water-based or may utilize a dust-control substance that is both human- and horse-safe. Outdoor actions include: painting the exterior of the barn and arena buildings, re-grading the ground outside to close gaps at the bases of Inspect Horse Shelters Inspect and explore options for replacing horse shelters in individual outdoor horse paddocks with safer structures. Current structures are metal and less safe for horses when they bump or kick the walls. This is to be implemented as a short-term action. Horse Servicing Entrance/Facilities As a mid-term action, convert an existing stall in the southwest corner of the metal equestrian barn into a horse clinic. Build a separate entrance door for this facility to be used as a dedicated personnel entrance for veterinarians, farriers, and associated personnel. This will serve to separate veterinarian 4.3.2 Equestrian Recreation & Public Access Equestrian Trails and Permanent Cross-country/ Recreation Elements Short-term actions are: Re-explore opportunities for developing a cross-country jumping course in the north portion of the planning area. Design and construct a dedicated equestrian loop trail in the portion of the planning area to the north of Juniper Hill Road. The proposed trail will utilize be accessible to hikers. Formalizing public horse trailer parking in the north parking lot and in the main parking area will help create easier public access to the new equestrian recreational facilities. Safe Road Crossings Establish a safe equestrian crossing of Juniper Hill Road at a location to be determined somewhere between the driveway entrance at the metal equestrian barn and the mare pasture to the north of the indoor arena building. If this crossing is located adjacent to the mare pasture, an additional fence will be required to protect turned-out horses from riders. In the mid-term, revisit a design for crossing Brush Creek road that will help connect the Cozy Point property and its equine users to the adjacent Sky Mountain Park (see Chapter 4.6) and farrier activities from general equestrian activities for greater safety and convenience. Increase Hay and Grain Storage Explore opportunities to build an additional stand- alone pole barn to expand current hay storage capacity by two or three times. The structure should be both weather- and elk-proof. This is a mid-term action. An additional mid-term action is to replace the semi trailer used for grain storage with an appropriate facility. RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 47 RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 4.4.1 Model Agricultural Land Ecosystem Health The short-term general site action to collectively be used in agricultural operations. After the areas are determined, best agricultural practices that promote and protect the function of both agricultural and wild lands will be collaborated and designed in the collective sustainability measures. These measures will care for and enhance land quality, nutrient cycles, ecosystem services, and economic balance of agricultural activities. Agricultural management not limited to, continued implementation of a comprehensive, integrated weed management plan, rotational grazing techniques, seeding, and natural soil amendments. This action is expected to be initiated in the short-term and carried out continuously (see Section 4.1). In addition, the general site action geared towards reducing inputs and outputs that apply to agricultural uses include a waste management system. This action will include researching potential issues creek due to its close proximity to both livestock areas and Brush Creek. 4.4 AGRICULTURE MANAGEMENT ACTIONS Cozy Point Ranch LLC grows much of their hay on private land, making Land Use Optimization Short-term actions: The collaboration with lease holders and the ranch manager to designate land use and implement sustainable practices will also help to optimize land. These actions may include, but are not limited to, restoring and/or maintaining the health of existing agricultural land for production. Additionally, exploring additional opportunities to enhance food production through innovative technologies, such as extended growing optimize use of land. composting system in order to handle manure volume and contribute to food production, and expanding food production in the unattended north 4.1.2, to optimize agricultural food production where appropriate. In the long-term, if necessary, food production on the adjacent AspenMass property will be explored. Expansion of food production will be done while consulting with other lease holders to ensure the sustainability of all operations. As short-term actions, fully utilize water rights associated with the property and upgrade existing expand irrigation systems to areas in the northern portion of the planning area that will be returned to agricultural use. Explore opportunities to expand irrigation systems to portions of the AspenMass Open Space, as a long-term action. An additional short-term action is to address the management of the entire ditch running from Cougar Creek through the north end of the property. This action includes working with the ditch owner to encourage more environmentally sensitive ditch maintenance approaches in order to avoid such 48 4.4.2 Education & Community Connection Expand Facilities Short-term actions: Work closely with all lessees to identify areas for expansion of the farm and garden learning center into adjacent land on the property. Identify suitable access points to Brush Creek for educational program use. Explore on site. Also, as mentioned in the above section on environmental health, research potential issues agriculture education center. As a mid-term action, work with the Aspen Historical Society to identify opportunities to showcase agricultural history as a mid-term action, and conduct a feasibility study for the concept and design of a community garden at the ranch. Access As short-term actions, provide an exclusive, dedicated operational access route for the farm and garden learning center in order to enhance safety and general ease of operations. Provide and formalize visitor access to the farm and garden learning center by creating improved signage and a Safety In the short-term, improve pedestrian and horse Dedicated separate operational entrances for agricultural equipment will aid in reducing exposure to horses. Increase safe user behavior messaging through signage. COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS Resources: "Equine" Penn State Extensions, 2017. Current archery targets located north of Juniper Hill Road. Photo courtesy of City of Aspen Parks Dept. 4.5.1 Facilities Parking and Access for Archery Range users and create an access trail between parking and the range. The preferable parking area location is close to the existing compost pile. Shade Structures and Picnic Tables Provide shade structures and picnic tables for Archery Range users. These facilities will be located directly adjacent to the shooting area to provide range users with staging space. This is to be implemented in the short-term. Target Grounds Improvements As short-term actions, improve approach paths within the range between the shooting area and Move existing targets farther apart to improve range safety. Provide opportunities for children to practice archery skills by replacing the shortest-range target with a softer target designed for young archers shooting with lower velocity. 4.5 ARCHERY RANGE MANAGEMENT ACTIONS impacts to vegetation and habitat as excavated soil piles and other damage caused by operating machinery for ditch work. 49 As a mid-term action, explore opportunities to increase access to surrounding properties, including assessing potential for a multi-use trail to serve as a safe pedestrian/bike/equestrian crossing on Brush Creek Road as a connection among the open space parcels of Cozy Point Ranch and Cozy Point South, and Brush Creek Intercept Lot (a large public parking and transit facility). Further, as a long- term action, develop multi-use trails connecting the property to the regional trails. Additional mid-term trail access actions include researching the feasibility of a multi-use trail alignment in conjunction with a possible above- grade crossing of Brush Creek Road, connecting to the main ranch center. This trail planning would take into consideration safety of all trail users, and would be separate from equestrian trails. Building of these possible trails would be long-term actions, and would be done in cooperation with Pitkin County, CDOT, and the EOTC. Connect people to the land through hands-on experience with ranching and the environment. This can be accomplished both passively and through programs developed by lessees in the short-term. An additional opportunity for connecting people to the land could be to provide a community garden where people interact directly with growing their food. This could be accomplished in the mid-term. In the long-term, further enhance historical ranching resources for educational purposes and restore existing resources mentioned in Section 4.1.2 to expand the historical and environmental educational aspects of the site. 4.6.2 Adjacent Property Access 4.6.3 Environmental & Ranching History RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 4.6 COMMUNITY ACCESS MANAGEMENT ACTIONS As a short-term action, formalize all public access through Juniper Hill Road, as recommended by intersection infrastructure at Highway 82 and Juniper Hill Road. Also, create a soft-surface pedestrian trail connecting the bus stop at Juniper Hill Road to the agricultural and equestrian center. Currently, bus users must walk along Highway 82 and Juniper Hill Road in order to access Cozy Point Ranch; the addition of the soft-surface trail will provide safer and more direct access for visitors arriving by RFTA bus. Additional short-term actions are: Formalize vehicular access to the Archery Range on the present access road by delineating a parking area adjacent to the existing manure compost pile. Design, fabricate, and install comprehensive signage for outdoor areas and trails as well as indoor 4.6.1 Access & Activity Cozy Point Management Plan review with Joel Salatin, Spring 2016. Photo courtesy of the Aspen Parks Dept. 4.5.2 Events As a mid-term action, evaluate the site for opportunities for public archery events. spaces to clearly mark entrances/exits, area uses, vehicles. Formalize public horse trailer parking to create easier public access to the new equestrian recreational facilities. These actions are to be implemented in the short-term. 50 APPENDIX A Site Survey APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 51 52 APPENDIX B Conservation Easement, Aspen Valley Land Trust APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 53 54 APPENDIX B APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 55 56 APPENDIX B APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 57 58 APPENDIX B APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 59 60 APPENDIX B APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 61 62 APPENDIX B APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 63 64 APPENDIX B APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 65 66 APPENDIX B APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 67 68 APPENDIX B APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 69 70 APPENDIX B 71 APPENDIX C Biological & Historical Resource Survey, Western Ecological Resource, Inc. & Wildlife Specialties LLC, February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys Aspen Parks and Open Space Cozy Point, Cozy Point South, Aspen Mass, Mills and CDOT Intercept Lot Pitkin County, Colorado prepared for: City of Aspen Parks and Open Space 530 E. Main St. Suite 300, Aspen, CO 81611 prepared by: Western Ecological Resource, Inc. 711 Walnut Street, Boulder, CO 80302 & Wildlife Specialties, LLC PO Box 1231, Lyons, CO 80540 February 2016 72 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space i Table of Contents Section / Title Page 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Wildlife Resources ................................................................................................................. 2 3.1 Federally Listed Species ...................................................................................................... 2 3.2 BLM and USFS Sensitive and MIS Species ........................................................................... 2 3.3 Avian Species ..................................................................................................................... 4 3.4 Nocturnal Birds and Bats .................................................................................................... 4 3.5 Rare and Nocturnal Mammals ............................................................................................. 5 3.6 Wildlife Habitat Mapping ................................................................................................... 5 3.7 Agency Coordination .......................................................................................................... 5 4.0 Vegetation Resources ............................................................................................................. 6 4.1 Rare Plants ......................................................................................................................... 6 4.1.1 Methods ....................................................................................................................... 6 4.1.2 Federally Listed Plant Species ....................................................................................... 6 4.1.3 BLM and USFS Sensitive Plant Species ......................................................................... 6 4.1.4 State Rare Plants and Plant Communities ...................................................................... 7 4.2 Vegetation Mapping & Descriptions .................................................................................... 7 4.2.1 Douglas-Fir Forests ....................................................................................................... 8 4.2.2 Mountain Shrublands ................................................................................................... 9 4.2.3 Sagebrush Shrublands .................................................................................................. 9 4.2.4 Agricultural Grasslands .............................................................................................. 10 4.2.5 Shale Barrens ............................................................................................................. 10 4.2.6 Riparian & Wetland Habitats ...................................................................................... 11 4.3 Noxious Weeds ................................................................................................................ 13 4.4 Floristic Inventory and Quantitative Sampling. .................................................................. 14 5.0 Geologic and Soil Resources ................................................................................................ 14 5.1 Geology ........................................................................................................................... 14 5.2 Soil Mapping .................................................................................................................... 14 5.3 Soil Sampling in Disturbed Sites ....................................................................................... 15 6.0 Historical Resources ............................................................................................................. 18 7.0 Management Recommendations ........................................................................................... 20 8.0 References ........................................................................................................................... 23 9.0 Figures ................................................................................................................................. 27 10.0 Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 36 Appendix A. 2015 USFWS IPAC Report ............................................................................ A1-A9 Appendix B. 2015 Colorado BLM Sensitive Species List .................................................. B1-B11 Appendix C. 2015 USFS Region 2 Sensitive Species List ................................................. C1-C23 Appendix D. Natural History of Select Wildlife Species ................................................... D1-D4 Appendix E. Natural History of Sensitive Plant Species ....................................................... E1-E2 Appendix F. Roaring Fork at Brush Creek Potential Conservation Area ............................... F1-F3 APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 73 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space ii List of Figures Number / Title Page Figure 1. Project Location Map – Cozy Point Ranch Parcels ........................................................ 28 Figure 2. Brewer’s Sparrow Habitat Type Map ............................................................................ 29 Figure 3. Virginia Warbler Habitat Type Map ............................................................................. 30 Figure 4. Mule Deer Habitat Type Map ...................................................................................... 31 Figure 5. Elk Habitat Types Map ................................................................................................. 32 Figure 6. Vegetation Types – Cozy Point Parcels......................................................................... 33 Figure 7. Soil Associations and Soil Sampling Locations .............................................................. 34 Figure 8. Historical Resource and Land Patent Map .................................................................... 35 List of Tables Number / Title Page Table 1. BLM, Forest Service and MIS Wildlife Species with Potential Habitat ............................... 4 Table 2. BLM and USFS Sensitive Plant Species Potentially Present ............................................... 7 Table 3. Vegetation Types ............................................................................................................ 8 Table 4. Riparian/Wetland Habitats Rated as Functional at Risk (FAR) ......................................... 13 Table 5. Noxious Weeds Identified In Project Area ..................................................................... 13 Table 6. Soil Associations within the Project Area ....................................................................... 15 Table 7. Summary of Disturbed Sites and Soil Samples ............................................................... 16 Table 8. Soil Amendment Recommendations for Disturbed Sites ................................................ 16 Table 9. Land Patent Details for Project Area .............................................................................. 18 74 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 1 1.0 Introduction The City of Aspen is currently developing a Master Plan for Cozy Point Ranch, which is considered to be the gateway of the Aspen community. A total of four open space parcels would be potentially affected by proposed project activities, including Cozy Point Ranch, Cozy Point South, Aspen Mass, and Mills. While the City of Aspen owns the Cozy Point Ranch and Aspen Mass parcels, Pitkin County is a joint owner, with the City of Aspen, of both the Cozy Point South and Mills parcels. In addition, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) owns and manages the Intercept Lot, which is used for public parking for the Roaring Fork Transportation Agency as well as for event parking. Collectively, these five parcels are referred to as the Cozy Point Ranch parcels. In 2011, Western Ecological Resource, Inc., in conjunction with Wildlife Specialties, LLC, performed a detailed Biological and Historical Resource Survey of the four open space parcels as well as nine additional parcels (Western Ecological Resource and Wildlife Specialties, 2011). This report summarizes the biological and historical resource surveys conducted on the four parcels during 2011, integrates new information based on 2015 field visits, and concludes with recommendations for future management. In total, the five Cozy Point Ranch parcels comprise approximately 400 acres and include a variety of mountain shrublands, small stands of conifer forests, shale badlands, agricultural grasslands, and wetland and riparian habitats. The properties provide important habitat for mule deer and a variety of songbirds and small mammals, and support diverse wetland and riparian plant communities. These properties also have a rich historical tradition which exemplifies the ranching and farming activities of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. 2.0 Environmental Setting The Cozy Point Ranch, Cozy Point South, Aspen Mass, and Mills properties occur at the intersection of U.S. Highway 82 and Brush Creek Road, approximately six miles north of the City of Aspen (Figure 1). These parcels consist of alluvial terraces and adjacent mountain slopes. The project area is bordered by the Roaring Fork River on the east and is bisected by Brush Creek, a perennial tributary to the Roaring Fork River. The Sky Mountain Park Open Space (formally Droste parcel) is located to the south and adjacent to the Cozy Point South parcel. The elevations of these parcels range from a high of 8,200 feet on Cozy Point South to a low of 7,340 feet along the Roaring Fork River in the Mills Open Space. The Cozy Point Ranch parcel currently supports a large equestrian boarding and training facility as well as an archery range and a greenhouse. In addition, both Cozy Point Ranch and the meadow on Cozy Point South are actively irrigated and hayed. The Aspen Mass and Mills parcels are currently used for recreation, and one of the pedestrian trails has been recently rerouted on the Aspen Mass parcel. All four of these parcels are receiving increased recreational pressure due to the recent trail openings on Sky Mountain Park. Finally, the CDOT Intercept Lot located adjacent to the Mills parcel is also being included in the planning process. The CDOT parcel contains developed and undeveloped parking areas and two areas of wetlands in drainage basins; however, no detailed on-the-ground environmental studies have been conducted on the CDOT Intercept Lot to date. The climate of the project area is generally characterized by long, cold and moist winters, and short, cool, dry summers. Based on climate data from the Aspen 1 SW Weather Station (elev. 8,163 ft.), the average annual precipitation is 23.26 inches and the mean annual temperature is 40.8°F, with a mean high temperature of 77.2°F in July and a mean low of 7.4°F in January (NCDC, 2002). The growing season length based on a 28°F air temperature is 127 days, generally occurring between May 24 and September 28, and the average annual snowfall is 187.3 inches (NRCS 2002). APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 75 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 2 3.0 Wildlife Resources In 2011, a variety of wildlife baseline surveys of all the parcels included at that time were conducted for two reasons. The first was to establish a baseline index of species currently using the parcels; the second was to identify species which could potentially use the parcels. Survey techniques included Terrestrial Vertebrate Encounter Surveys to identify rare, elusive, or hard to detect species; avian point-count surveys incorporating distance sampling to develop a species list and a baseline population estimate for more common species; owl surveys using tape play-back call techniques to document species presence; nocturnal and diurnal amphibian surveys using calls and visual identification; scent stations with infrared cameras to detect nocturnal rare carnivores and other species; and pedestrian surveys of the parcels to specifically look for wildlife and sign which may not have been detected using other survey techniques. A complete description of the methodology, locations of where the surveys were conducted, etc. are included in the 2011 report (Western Ecological Resource and Wildlife Specialties, 2011). 3.1 Federally Listed Species The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information, Planning, and Consultation System (USFWS, 2015) was used to generate the current list of federally protected, candidate, and proposed wildlife species for the project area (Appendix A). There are eight wildlife species protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that could potentially occur in the project area, however none of these federally protected species are expected to occur as appropriate habitat is lacking. No designated critical habitat exists for any listed species within the project area. 3.2 BLM and USFS Sensitive and MIS Species Sensitive species considered in this report are based on the June 2015 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Colorado State Director's Sensitive Species List (BLM, 2015) and the August 2015 U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Region 2 Sensitive Species List (USFS, 2015). These species lists are contained in Appendices B and C. The project area potentially provides suitable habitat for the following four species: Townsend's big-eared bat (Plecotus townsendii), Brewer’s sparrow (Spizella breweri), northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), and the bluehead sucker (Catostamus discobolus) (Table 1). However, the 2011 surveys only resulted in the detection of one of these species: the Brewer’s sparrow, which was detected on the northern end of the Cozy Point Ranch parcel. Although not a BLM or USFS Sensitive Species, the Virginia’s warbler (Vermivora virginiae) is annually monitored across its range as a Management Indicator Species (MIS) representing the oak-shrub community. MIS are animals with special management needs which must be met through coordination with other open space uses (i.e. recreation and trails). Additionally, population estimates for MIS are annually updated. Virginia’s warbler population trends and the species’ distributional range are tracked within Colorado through monitoring programs (e.g. Monitoring Colorado’s Birds Partnership Program and Partners In Flight). By monitoring population trends for MIS, the impact and effectiveness of management actions can be assessed and modified as needed. A brief discussion of each of the four BLM and/or USFS Sensitive Species, as well as the one MIS are described below. For further information, please see Appendix D, which provides a more detailed overview of the natural history of these species. Townsend’s big-eared bat is widely distributed in Colorado except on the eastern plains (Armstrong et al. 1994). Habitat includes open montane forests, semidesert shrublands, and pinyon/juniper shrublands. These bats are generally solitary or gather in small groups; during summer females may form larger maternity colonies located in mines, caves, abandoned structures, and crevices in rock cliffs, in woodlands and forests to elevations above 9,500 feet (Armstrong et al., 1994, Fitzgerald et al., 1994). They are relatively sedentary and do not move 76 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 3 long distances from hibernacula to summer roosts (Fitzgerald et al., 1994). There are about 350 historical records of individuals in Colorado, 250 of which are from 1990 or later (Pierson et al., 1999). About 170 mine roosts and 15 cave roosts have been documented since 1990. All but one of these roosts has populations believed to be less than 30 individuals. Because of the wide range of habitats used, Townsend’s big-eared bats could forage over the Cozy Point Ranch parcels, but no hibernacula or maternity colony habitat occurs within the project area. No individuals were located on the subject parcels during the 2011surveys. Critical Brewer’s sparrow habitat was mapped on the northern end of Cozy Point and the southeast corner of Aspen Mass during the 2011 surveys (Figure 2). These areas were mapped as critical habitat because they are the only large intact stands of sagebrush habitat remaining in these parcels. In 2011, the recommendation was to restore the inactive agricultural lands within these parcels to native sagebrush shrubland habitat, if possible. The idea was to increase the amount of potential breeding habitat within these parcels and have sagebrush habitat at different seral stages. However, any restoration of the inactive agricultural lands adjacent to Brewer’s sparrow mapped habitat would not significantly increase the local and regional Brewer’s sparrow population. Brewer’s sparrow was detected on the far northern end of the Cozy Point Ranch parcel in 2011. The northern leopard frog is distributed throughout Colorado from an elevation of below 3,500 feet on the plains of the northeastern corner of the state to over 11,000 feet in the San Juan Mountains in the southwestern corner (Hammerson, 1999). Although formerly abundant throughout its range, the northern leopard frog has become rare or been extirpated from many areas, especially high elevation populations, due to changes in habitat conditions (Hammerson 1999, CPW 2011). Northern leopard frogs have diverse habitat requirements including wet meadows, the banks and shallows of marshes, ponds (glacial kettles or beaver [Castor canadensis] ponds), lakes, streams, or irrigation ditches. According to Hammerson (1999), northern leopard frogs occurred throughout western Colorado where suitable habitat was available including locations within the vicinity of the project area. Most of the riparian habitat along Brush Creek within the Cozy Point Ranch area is degraded, but potential habitat associated with beaver ponds may be present. Restoration of Brush Creek and the riparian corridor would increase the quality of the habitat. No individuals were located on the subject parcels during the 2011surveys. The bluehead sucker is a fish found throughout a variety of habitats from headwaters to large rivers (Woodling, 1985). Water must be moderate to fast in velocity and streams must have a rock substrate. The species feeds on algae and invertebrates. Breeding occurs in late April to early May before high flows associated with spring runoff occur. Population declines have occurred where white (Catostomus commersonii) and longnose (Catostomus catostomus) suckers from the Front Range have entered waters historically occupied by bluehead suckers. Threats associated with the project area include alteration of water quality within Brush Creek resultant of environmental contaminants or an increase in sedimentation. Restoration of Brush Creek would result in more suitable habitat. No individuals were located on the subject parcels during the 2011surveys. The Virginia’s warbler breeds west of the continental divide in Colorado and into north central New Mexico. Within Colorado, the species breeds in dense shrub-dominated oak forest habitats between approximately 5,000 and 9,000 feet above mean sea level, with pinyon-juniper woodlands and dense shrubby cover along riparian systems also frequently used. General habitat requirements include a dense shrub component. The majority of the statewide population in Colorado occurs in the western portion of the state within an approximately equal distribution from north to south. Critical Virginia’s warbler habitat is located on Cozy Point South within the large oak-shrub stands (Figure 3). In 2011, this species was detected in the oak shrubland on the Mills parcel. However, the habitat is very small and would not support minimum viable population, and therefore it is not considered critical habitat. The Virginia warbler sighting in this area occurred in early spring and likely represented a recent migrant arrival. APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 77 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 4 Table 1. BLM, Forest Service and MIS Wildlife Species with Potential Habitat Common Name/ Agency Scientific Name Habitat Species Detected?* Parcel(s) Mammals Townsend’s big- eared bat (BLM, USFS) Plecotus townsendii Semidesert shrublands, piñon-juniper woodlands and open montane forests below 2,900 m (9,500 ft.). Requires caves or abandoned mines for roost sites during all seasons and stages of its life cycle, and its distribution is strongly correlated with the availability of these features. No All Birds Brewer’s sparrow (BLM, USFS) Spizella breweri Sagebrush and other shrubs species with similar stand characteristics including greasewood, hopsage, and saltbush. Yes (Cozy Point Ranch) Aspen Mass and Cozy Point Ranch Virginia’s warbler (USFS MIS) Vermivora virginiae Dense shrub-dominated oak forest. Yes (Mills) Cozy Point South and Mills Amphibians/Reptiles Northern leopard frog (BLM, USFS) Lithobates pipiens Wet meadows and the banks and shallows of marshes, ponds, glacial kettle ponds, beaver ponds, lakes, reservoirs, streams, and irrigation ditches. Egg laying can only occur in areas with very slow to no current. No Cozy Point Ranch and Cozy Point South. Fish Bluehead sucker (BLM, USFS) Catostamus discobolus Variety of aquatic habitats from headwater streams to large rivers. No Cozy Point Ranch and Cozy Point South *Based on surveys conducted in 2011 3.3 Avian Species In 2011, avian species richness and abundance were quantified using point counts and distance sampling methods as described by Farnsworth et al. (2005) and Seavy et al. (2005). A complete description of the methodology is contained in the 2011 Biological and Historical Resource Survey report. The 2011 point count surveys resulted in a total of 923 detections from all point count locations and encompassed 64 avian species. Sensitive species (i.e. Brewer’s sparrow) were not detected on the Cozy Point Ranch parcels. By repeating point count surveys (three survey efforts per point within one sampling season) on an annual or semiannual basis, population trends can be identified. These trends would indicate how management activities are influencing the local avian community. Data collected in 2011 forms the basis for comparison for future analysis. Surveys would need to occur at all of the survey points established in 2011 in order to generate enough detections of each species to estimate the local population sizes for those species with a high enough detection rate. Surveys could be completed on the currently analyzed parcels for the sole purpose of recording presence at these parcels. 3.4 Nocturnal Birds and Bats No surveys for bats were conducted per the direction of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, and Town of Snowmass Village. Based on species distribution and elevational limits (Fitzgerald et al., 1994), little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus), long-legged myotis (Myotis volans), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), silver-haired bat (Lasioncycteris noctivagans), big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), and Townsend’s big-eared bat (Plecotus townsendii) all have the potential to occur on or use the 78 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 5 project area. However, use of the project area likely would be sporadic and would occur mainly during migration. No habitats such as old mines, which are suitable for use as a nursery colony or hibernacula, are known to exist within the project area. In 2011, owl surveys were conducted only in areas where potentially suitable nesting habitat was present from locations designed to provide the best coverage. No owls were detected at any of the call locations. 3.5 Rare and Nocturnal Mammals Infrared cameras and associated scent stations were used to detect rare and nocturnal mammals during the 2011 surveys, and techniques are provided in the 2011 report. However, no cameras were installed on the current subject parcels. Over 10,000 photos were recorded by all cameras and wildlife species were recorded at all locations. A total of 569 photographs of five mammal species (coyote, deer, elk, red fox, and mountain cottontail rabbit [Sylvilagus nutallii]) and two avian species (dusky flycatcher [Empidonax oberholseri] and American robin [Turdus migratorius]) were recorded. Of these, elk was the most common species photographed (72%), followed by deer (16%) and coyote (7%); the remaining species comprised the remaining 5%. 3.6 Wildlife Habitat Mapping The Cozy Point Ranch parcels are mapped by Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) as overall range for mule deer and elk. Mule deer winter range habitat is mapped at the northern end of Cozy Point (this area includes the mapped Brewer’s sparrow critical habitat) (Figure 4) and elk winter range and severe winter range habitat is mapped on the hillsides of Cozy Point South (Figure 5). These winter habitat types are considered essential to elk and mule deer population sustainability. In addition to the mapped mule deer and Brewer’s sparrow habitat on the north end of Cozy Point, a small amount (< 0.001 acre) of a much larger mapped resident elk population area is also present. Critical habitat type definitions are provided in the 2011 Biological and Historical Inventory report. The area between Cozy Point and Cozy Point South is mapped as an elk migration corridor and an elk highway crossing area. In 2011, elk migration corridors were mapped along Brush Creek Road. At that time, the migration corridor that crosses Brush Creek Road at Highway 82 was reported to be used occasionally by elk, but not as heavily or as often as locations further to the west up Brush Creek. Regardless of the amount of use, the current situation does not provide a safe alternative for wildlife to cross Brush Creek Road near Hwy 82. No data on the number of annual elk-vehicle collisions on Brush Creek Road is available; in 2011, elk-vehicle collisions were not considered to be a problem on Brush Creek Road. The CPW data also shows an elk highway crossing along Highway 82 near its intersection with Brush Creek Road for approximately 0.5 miles. A review of the CDOT Wildlife Program data (CDOT 2016) for the section of Highway 82 between mile markers 30 and 40 (mile marker 35 is within the referenced mapped highway crossing) shows a few elk-vehicle collisions do occur in this area. For the period of 2011-2015, a total of five elk-vehicle collisions occurred near mile marker 35. Though any elk-vehicle collision is not good, the data shows that elk-vehicle collisions are not a significant problem in this area. 3.7 Agency Coordination In 2011, six local wildlife professionals were coordinated with to determine what the local consensus is for managing the parcels. These professionals were not contacted again and no new contacts occurred as part of the current analysis. The general consensus among these professional, experienced biologists in 2011 was that the core properties of Cozy Point, Cozy Point South, Droste, Hidden Valley, Seven Star Ranch (I & II), and Upper North Mesa were the critical pieces necessary to maintain viable wildlife populations within the general area, and these parcels should be managed in concert with each other. The biologists all also stated that ‘the bare APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 79 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 6 minimum of trails’ (generally recommending few trails only in locations where trails currently exist), as well as the continuation of the seasonal closures which existed for some of these properties and the ban on dogs, would be very beneficial to wildlife. 4.0 Vegetation Resources 4.1 Rare Plants 4.1.1 Methods A detailed literature review for the subject parcels was conducted for the 2011 Biological and Historical Resources Survey. Since that time, however, the federal, USFS and BLM lists have been updated and were re-analyzed for the current study. More specifically, the following literature sources were reviewed in 2015 in reference to the subject parcels. No additional field work was conducted in 2015. The 2015 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information, Planning, and Consultation System (IPAC System, 2015) for a current list of federally protected, candidate, and proposed plant species for the project area. (Appendix A) The 2015 U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Region 2 Sensitive Species List (Appendix B). The 2015 Bureau of Land Management State Director’s Sensitive Species List (Appendix C). The 2015 Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) information for rare plants and plant communities species occurrences and Potential Conservation Areas (PCA). 4.1.2 Federally Listed Plant Species Only one federally listed plant species, the Ute ladies’ tresses orchid (Spiranthes diluvialis) is known to occur or has the potential to occur on lands within Pitkin County, Colorado (USFWS 2015). The nearest location of this federally threatened plant is approximately 10 miles north of the project area in open subirrigated meadows adjacent to the Roaring Fork River at an elevation of 6,300 feet. The project area does not contain any suitable habitat for this orchid along the Roaring Fork River, and although some subirrigated open meadows do occur on the Brush Creek floodplain, these areas are at least 1,500 feet higher in elevation than the orchid is known to occur. Therefore, it is concluded that the project area does not contain suitable habitat for this orchid and it will not be discussed further. 4.1.3 BLM and USFS Sensitive Plant Species Three BLM and/or USFS sensitive species have habitat within the project area, however none were detected during the field surveys conducted in 2011 (Table 2). The first, Harrington penstemon (Penstemon harringtonii), typically occurs in open sagebrush or sagebrush with encroaching pinyon/juniper at elevations ranging from 6,500 to 9,200 feet. However, it also has been found in the area by the author within open rocky Gambel oak - serviceberry woodlands on ridgetops. The closest known populations of Harrington penstemon occur approximately four miles north of the project area in the Williams Hill PCA. Within the project area, the most suitable habitat for this plant occurs on rocky sagebrush-hillsides. However, no individuals or populations of Harrington penstemon were identified during the field surveys for this plant in 2011, and the habitat on the subject parcels appears to be marginal at best. The second species, Park milkvetch (Astragalus leptaleus) is an inconspicuous perennial herb in the pea family. Suitable habitat for Park milkvetch includes sedge-grass meadows, swales and hummocks, wetlands, aspen glades, and streamside willow communities between 7,675 and 9,500 feet in elevation. The best habitat for this species occurs along Brush Creek on the Cozy Point South parcel, however none of these plants were found during onsite field reconnaissance. 80 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 7 Finally, yellow lady’s slipper (Cypripedium calceolus ssp. parviflorum) is a perennial forb that grows as a single plant or in a colony. It is 10 to 80 cm in height with three to six alternate green leaves and topped with one or rarely two conspicuous flowers which are colored yellowish-green to purplish-brown (Mergen, 2006). In Colorado, the plant occurs at elevations between 5,800 and 12,683 feet in aspen, lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, narrowleaf cottonwood, and spruce-fir- aspen forests. The most suitable habitat for this species occurs on the low terrace of the Mills open space adjacent to the Roaring Fork River. However, no plants were discovered during extensive field reconnaissance in 2011. Appendix E provides additional life history details of these three species. Table 2. BLM and USFS Sensitive Plant Species Potentially Present Scientific Name Common Name Status* Habitat Habitat Present? Species Detected? Penstemon harringtonii Harrington penstemon BLM, USFS Sensitive Open sagebrush or sagebrush sites with encroaching pinyon/ juniper. Soils are typically rocky loams and rocky clay loams derived from coarse calcareous parent materials (basalt); 6,500 to 9,200 ft. Yes No Astragalus leptaleus Park milkvetch USFS Sensitive Sedge-grass meadows, swales and hummocks, wet aspen, streamside willows, sagebrush transition to wet. 6,000 – 9,000 ft. Yes No Cypripedium parviflorum Yellow lady’s slipper USFS Sensitive Riparian and riparian transition to cottonwood, aspen, ponderosa, Douglas fir, spruce-fir and lodgepole pine. 7,400 – 12,500 ft. Yes No *Species Status Source: 2015 State BLM Sensitive Species List and 2015 USFS R2 Sensitive Species List. 4.1.4 State Rare Plants and Plant Communities No state rare plants tracked by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) were documented within the Cozy Point, Cozy Point South, Aspen Mass, or Mills parcels (Western Ecological Resource and Wildlife Specialties, 2011). However, one tracked plant community was documented on the Aspen Mass and Mills parcels: the globally vulnerable Montane Riparian Forest comprised of narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia), blue spruce (Picea pungens) and alder (Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia) (G3/S3). This plant community is part of the Roaring Fork at Brush Creek PCA. PCA’s are preliminary conservation planning boundaries which represent the best estimate of the primary area needed to support the long-term survival of the targeted species or plant community. They are not legally binding boundaries and merely delineate ecologically sensitive areas where land-use practices should be carefully managed for compatibility with protection of natural heritage resources and sensitive species. See Appendix F for further details. 4.2 Vegetation Mapping & Descriptions Vegetation types were originally mapped and described in the 2011 Biological and Historical Resources Survey Report. Vegetation types were remapped based upon new six-inch resolution aerial photography from 2014 and the field reconnaissance conducted in 2011. The aerial photography was obtained from the Pitkin County website. Each vegetation type was classified based on the International Vegetation Classification/U.S. National Vegetation Classification System APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 81 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 8 (IVC/NVC), a system used by NatureServe and the CNHP. Descriptions of each vegetation type are listed below and include dominant and associated plant species, structure, relative plant vigor, insect damage, and disease (if present). Wetland and riparian habitats were additionally described as to their functional status using the Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) Assessment Method (USDOI BLM, 1998 & 2003). Finally, all resources were digitized into ArcView 10.0 Geographic Information System (GIS). No significant changes have occurred since mapping was conducted in 2011 except for a pedestrian trail re-route on the Aspen Mass parcel. The vegetation types for the subject parcels are listed and described below. See Table 3 and Figure 6. Table 3. Vegetation Types Vegetation Type Acres % of Area Douglas-Fir Forest 1.3 0.3% Mountain Shrubland 133.2 33.5% Sagebrush Shrubland 35.8 9.0% Active Agriculture 95.7 24.1% Abandoned Agricultural Grassland 40.6 10.2% Shale Barren 18.2 4.6% Riparian/Wetland 34.8 8.8% Aquatic Habitat 7.4 1.9% Disturbed 24.1 6.1% Unvegetated 5.8 1.5% TOTAL 396.9 100.0% 4.2.1 Douglas-Fir Forests Douglas -fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forests occur in a few small isolated gullies on the Cozy Point South parcel and comprise approximately 0.3% of the project area. These small stands of trees are surrounded by the mountain shrubland vegetation type. The herbaceous cover is generally low in deep shade but may include mountain lover (Paxistima myrsinites), heartleaf arnica (Arnica cordifolia) and Oregon grape (Mahonia repens). This plant community best fits the Douglas Fir – Gambel Oak Community which is globally secure and state apparently secure (G5/S4). Douglas-fir is one of the most widespread and economically important trees in western North America. In Colorado, Douglas-fir forests at elevations between 6,000 and 8,500 feet and are generally confined to sheltered, north-facing slopes and cool ravines at lower elevations, but can occur on all slope aspects at higher elevations (Benedict, 1991). Douglas-fir is not a true fir, but belongs to an entirely different genus found only in western North America and in the mountains of China, Japan, and Taiwan. Douglas-fir is most easily distinguished by its cones that hang down and have a 3-pointed bract that protrudes between the cone scales. Douglas-fir first-year seedlings survive and grow best under light shade, especially on southerly exposures, but older seedlings require full sunlight. Competing shrub vegetation may create intolerable levels of shade, while grasses may compete strongly for available moisture. Douglas-fir is susceptible to several insect pests, the most significant being the western spruce budworm (Choristoneura occidentalis). The spruce budworm most often results in reduced growth rates, although repeated defoliation sometimes results in top-killing. In addition, trees infected with western spruce budworm are more susceptible to bark beetles, such as the Douglas-fir beetle (Dendroctonus pseudotsuqae). No evidence of spruce budworm or Douglas-fir beetle activity was detected within the project area during the 2011 surveys. 82 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 9 4.2.2 Mountain Shrublands Mountain shrublands cover approximately 33.5% of the project area. These shrublands are comprised of two vegetation communities as defined by NatureServe: the Gambel Oak - Serviceberry Shrubland and the Gambel Oak - Sagebrush Shrubland. Each of these communities is described below. Gambel Oak - Serviceberry Shrubland. For this community, both Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) and serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) appear to be co-dominant with an understory of elk sedge (Carex geyeri), tuber starwort (Pseudostellaria jamesiana), lanceleaf bluebells (Mertensia brevistyla), balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata), ballhead waterleaf (Hydrophyllum capitatum), and violet (Viola vallicola). Other shrubs/subshrubs present include chokecherry (Prunus virginiana var. melanocarpa, Oregon grape (Mahonia repens) and snowberry (Symphoricarpos rotundifolius). Non-natives include agricultural species such as Kentucky bluegrass and houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), a noxious weed. The structure of this plant community is variable, with some thickets that are relatively impenetrable and other areas which are more navigable. Gambel Oak - Sagebrush Shrubland. The Gambel Oak - Sagebrush Shrubland occurs near the transition to sagebrush shrublands. Here moderately dense stands of Gambel oak form a mosaic with sagebrush shrubs. Other commonly occurring shrubs include green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus), snowberry and Woods' rose (Rosa woodsia). As with other oak shrublands, elk sedge, tuber starwort and northern bedstraw (Galium septentrionale) are common, along with a variety of sagebrush associates such as Indian paintbrush (Castilleja chromosa), lupine (Lupinus argenteus), junegrass (Koeleria macrantha), green needlegrass (Nassella viridula), sulphur flower (Eriogonum umbellatum), and butterweed groundsel (Senecio integerrimus). The mountain shrublands provide big game winter range and habitat for a variety of local wildlife including nesting birds and raptors. In a healthy community, a variety of grasses and forbs are present in the understory and the stands show vigorous growth. In fact, Gambel oak is most valuable for wildlife when it is between 12 and 50 years old (Ringer 2011). Decadent and over- browsed vegetation shows hedging, clubbed terminal sprouts, and a lack of understory species diversity. Some shrublands exhibit a high density of stems in a uniform age class, while other areas have shrub clumps surrounded by sparsely vegetated ground or sagebrush shrublands. Although the mountain shrublands within the project area are variable in structure and species composition, almost all have been isolated from natural disturbance regimes such as fire. Gambel oak is a fire-adapted species, and fire triggers vegetation sprouting and new plant growth, which introduces age class diversity, increases forage quantity and quality, increases associated species diversity, and improves its capability to support wildlife species. 4.2.3 Sagebrush Shrublands Sagebrush shrublands comprise approximately 35.8% of the project area. The dominant community is the Sagebrush/Balsamroot Shrubland which predominates the northern end of Cozy Point and portions of Aspen Mass. Snowberry shrubs are often co-dominant with sagebrush in some areas, along with the minor presence of serviceberry and chokecherry. Overall, numerous native graminoids and forbs may be present in all three sagebrush communities, including graminoids such as balsamroot (Balsamorrhiza saggitata), junegrass, green needlegrass, needle- and-thread grass (Hesperostipa comata), squirreltail (Elymus elymoides), western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii), and Kentucky bluegrass, and forbs such as phlox (Phlox multiflora), ballhead sandwort (Eremogone fendleri), sulphur flower, lupine, Indian paintbrush (Castilleja chromosa and C. linariifolia), Rocky Mountain penstemon (Penstemon strictus), mariposa lily (Calochortus gunnisonii), pussytoes (Antennaria parvifolia, A. pulcherrima), lambstongue groundsel (Senecio integerrimus), and numerous others. Sagebrush shrublands used to encompass approximately 156 million acres (63 million ha) of the Western United States, but little of this area has remained unaltered since Euro-American APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 83 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 10 settlement. It has been estimated that 50-60% of sagebrush shrublands have been converted to nonnative grasslands (West, 2000), and other tracts have been lost to agriculture, urbanization, and other human activities. Furthermore, less than three percent of sagebrush shrublands are protected in National Parks or other Federal reserves (Knick et al., 2003). The increasingly rapid and widespread degradation, fragmentation and, in some areas, near total loss of sagebrush has resulted in its being rated one of the most imperiled ecosystems in North America (Noss and Peters, 1995). Sagebrush habitats support a unique biodiversity. Several bird and mammal species are almost entirely dependent on sagebrush for survival: greater sage-grouse, Gunnison sage-grouse, sage sparrow, Brewer’s sparrow, sage thrasher, pygmy rabbit, and sagebrush vole. In addition, sagebrush hosts 16 species of paintbrushes and seven species of owl-clovers, all facultative root hemiparasites (Boyle and Reeder, 2005). Overall, the sagebrush shrublands within the project area appear to be healthy and have a high species diversity. Unlike Gambel oak, sagebrush is not fire-adapted and must reseed in order to grow after wildfire. It is likely that big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) did not historically occur in or adapt to an environment with a high severity fire regime. The lack of grazing over the last several decades over much of the project area has also likely benefitted sagebrush communities by allowing the native grasses and forbs to grow and flourish. In fact, the largest threat to sagebrush within the project area may be the invasion of non-native annual grass species such as cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), which is much more fire-prone than native bunchgrasses and could potentially increase the natural fire-return interval. 4.2.4 Agricultural Grasslands No native grasslands were observed within the project area. However both active and abandoned agricultural grasslands comprise 34.3% of the total. These grasslands occur on the Cozy Point, Cozy Point South and Aspen Mass Parcels. The active agricultural lands are currently being irrigated and hayed, and are also the location of Cozy Point Ranch, an equestrian facility. The abandoned agricultural grasslands are characterized by non-native agricultural species and weeds. Common graminoids include smooth brome (Bromus inermis), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum), timothy (Phleum pretense), and Kentucky bluegrass. Quackgrass (Elytrigia repens) and intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium) also occur occasionally. Non-native forbs and weeds present include alfalfa (Medicago sativa), black medic (Medicago lupulina), white Dutch clover (Trifolium repens), yellow sweet clover (Melilotus officinalis), field pepperweed (Neolepia campestris), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides), and houndstongue. In some areas, native shrubs such as sagebrush and rubber rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus) have begun to invade the abandoned agricultural habitats. Because these habitats are not natural, they do not fit into any of the NatureServe vegetation community descriptions. Dense stands of weeds, such as Canada thistle, plumeless thistle and musk thistle (Carduus nutans subsp. macrolepis) are also problematic in many of these areas, however weed control was observed during the 2015 site visit. 4.2.5 Shale Barrens Shale barrens typify the ridge tops and steep slopes of Mancos Shale on the Cozy Point and Cozy Point south parcels and comprise 4.6% of the total. These areas are characterized by extremely low vegetative cover of 30% or less, and they are exposed to harsh wind, desiccation and sheet erosion. The soils are typically shallow, calcareous, alkaline and clayey, and are often capped by a thin gravel layer. These shale barrens are best described by the Indian Ricegrass Shale Barren Community which is ranked as globally and state imperiled by the CNHP. It should be noted, however, that although Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) is present in almost all shale barrens, it is not dominant or any more common than numerous other native plants that grow in these areas. Species commonly occurring on the shale barrens within the project area include scattered shrubs of mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus), bitterbrush (Purshia tridentate), Gambel oak, serviceberry, and snowberry; graminoids such as Indian ricegrass, junegrass, and western wheatgrass; and forbs such as tapertip onion (Allium acuminatum), largeflower hawksbeard (Psilochenia occidentalis), two-form pussytoes (Antennaria dimorpha), balsamroot, 84 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 11 Douglas pincushion (Chaenactis douglasii), Rocky Mountain spring parsley (Cymopterus planosus), evening primrose (Oenothera caespitosa), mat penstemon (Penstemon caespitosus), Osterhout penstemon (Penstemon osterhoutii), and point-tip twinpod (Physaria floribunda). In addition, the silverleaf milkvetch (Astragalus argophyllus var. martini) a state rare plant, occurs in this vegetation community. The major threat to this community was likely eliminated with the end of livestock grazing, however grazing by elk and deer still impacts this community. Historical disturbances within the shale barren community are extremely slow to recover given the lack of soil development and sheet erosion that these areas are subject to. 4.2.6 Riparian & Wetland Habitats Wetland and riparian habitats occur along the Roaring Fork River on the Mills and Aspen Mass Parcels, along Brush Creek on the Cozy Point Ranch and Cozy Point South parcels, along Cougar Creek and the Brush Creek Ditch on the Cozy Point Ranch Parcel, and on the CDOT Intercept Lot. Each of the wetland and riparian habitat types on these parcels is described below. 1. Roaring Fork River. The riparian forest along the Roaring Fork River is best described as a narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia) - blue spruce (Picea pungens) /thinleaf alder (Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia) forest, which is ranked as globally and state vulnerable (G3/S3) by the CNHP. This vegetation community is well developed on the floodplains of the Roaring Fork River and contains trees up to 70 feet tall. Natural regeneration is occurring, as both young blue spruce and narrowleaf cottonwood trees were observed. Common understory species include a variety of shrubs, graminoids and forbs. These include shrubs such as alder, bush honeysuckle (Distegia involucrata), serviceberry, chokecherry, dogwood (Cornus sericea), and whitestem gooseberry (Ribes inerme), as well as subshrubs such as mountain lover and Oregon grape. Common graminoids include beaked sedge (Carex utriculata) in permanently flooded wetlands and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), an aggressive non-native grass, adjacent to the river's edge. In upland riparian areas, there are numerous stands of agricultural grasses such as smooth brome, orchardgrass and Kentucky bluegrass. Native graminoids occur less often, with elk sedge being most common. Other natives commonly present include field horsetail (Equisetum arvense) and scouring rush (Hippochaete hyemalis), which are both fern allies, as well as forbs such as cow parsnip (Heracleum sphondylium), Richardson's geranium (Geranium richardsonii), bluntseed sweet cicely (Osmorhiza depauperata), heartleaf arnica, northern bedstraw, baneberry (Actaea rubra), and starry false Solomon's seal (Maianthemum stellatum). The striped coralroot orchid (Corallorhiza striata) was also observed within this riparian habitat. Although not tracked by the CNHP, this plant is relatively uncommon and should be protected. Noxious weeds observed throughout this community include houndstongue and Canada thistle. Overall, this riparian habitat appears to be in proper functioning condition; however, it is being threatened by invasive plant species. Another threat is increased use of this area by the public for fishing access. 2. Brush Creek. Brush Creek traverses the Cozy Point South and the Cozy Point Parcels. The majority of the creek supports a scrub-shrub wetland/riparian habitat type and primarily consists of mountain willow (Salix monticola), Bebb willow (Salix bebbiana), and sandbar willow (Salix exigua), along with hawthorn (Crataegus erythropoda), alder and river birch (Betula fontinalis). Whitestem gooseberry, bush honeysuckle, Woods' rose, and chokecherry are also frequently present. The creek banks are often dominated by the invasive reed canarygrass, and scattered stands of beaked sedge, water sedge (Carex aquatilis), and swordleaf rush (Juncus ensifolius) occur in the annual floodplains. Common forbs include cow parsnip, largeleaf avens (Geum macrophyllum), Macoun's buttercup (Ranunculus macounii), chiming bells (Mertensia ciliata), monkshood (Aconitum columbianum), and starry false Solomon's seal. Pasture grasses are also extremely common, including smooth brome, orchard grass, timothy, and Kentucky bluegrass. Portions of this willow riparian area are highly degraded by invasive plants and noxious weeds including reed canarygrass, ox-eye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare), houndstongue, Canada thistle, and plumeless thistle. APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 85 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 12 The Brush Creek Riparian/Wetland is best described by the Mountain Willow/Mesic Forb Shrubland, which is common in the upper montane valleys of Colorado (NatureServe, 2011). In addition, there is a small stand of mature narrowleaf cottonwood which once lined the driveway to the Feinsinger house before the house was moved up valley (Droste, 2011). The understory of this forest stand is mainly comprised of smooth brome along with orchardgrass and Kentucky bluegrass, all introduced grasses. Houndstongue, yellow sweet clover, tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), and burdock (Arctium minus) are all common weeds. One crack willow (Salix fragilis) also occurs here. This community does not fit any of the IVC/NVC classification systems because it is not a natural community type. Noxious weeds threaten this area and should be controlled. The Brush Creek stream reach appears to be experiencing significant to severe erosion and lacks well developed riparian vegetation in many areas, particularly through the active portion of the Ranch. Overall, Brush Creek is rated as Functional-at-Risk. Factors that may be impacting the stream include livestock grazing, roads, bridges, diversions, rock check dams, possible historic channelization, upstream development including the Snowmass Ski Area, and beaver activity. Depending on the extent of stream channel degradation and instability, enhancement and bank stabilization options can range from relatively simple treatments of only the most severe problems to full stream channel restoration involving realignment and extensive riparian vegetation re- establishment. In addition, some of the horse corrals are directly adjacent to the stream channel, which may allow nutrient laden manure runoff to enter the stream, degrading water quality. The benthic macroinvertebrate community shows signs of an impaired water quality (Malone and Emerick, 2007). 3. Cougar Creek. Another riparian/wetland shrubland occurs along an unnamed intermittent drainage north of the Cozy Point Ranch. This riparian shrubland is dominated by native willows and hawthorns (Crataegus erythropoda), but is being threatened by an adjacent disturbed area which contains stockpiled manure compost and topsoil. The nutrient-laden runoff from the manure pile is likely washed into the drainage during high precipitation events. In addition, portions of the right bank lack the stabilizing presence of willows, and the lower portion of this drainage appears to have been ditched and lined with large cobbles which prevents the development of a healthy riparian corridor. This stream reach is rated as Functional-at-Risk. 4. Brush Creek Ditch. The northern portion of the Cozy Point parcel contains a segment of the Brush Creek Ditch. The headgate of the ditch is located in the Hwy 82 right-of-way between the north and south bound lanes. Over the last hundred years or so since the ditch was created in the late 1800's, narrowleaf cottonwoods have colonized and formed a narrow riparian community. A dense herbaceous stand of smallfruit bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus) lines the ditch, along with scattered stands of water sedge and beaked sedge. Understory shrubs include sandbar willow, chokecherry, serviceberry, and snowberry. Weeds are present as well, and include Canada thistle, burdock, houndstongue, ox-eye daisy, and yellow sweet clover. This community does not fit any of the NatureServe classification systems. The hydrologic source for this riparian-wetland plant community is totally dependent on irrigation ditch water rights. Noxious weeds threaten this area and should continue to be controlled. 5. CDOT Stormwater Detention Ponds. The CDOT Intercept Lot supports two stormwater detention facilities. The first, a 0.25 acre pond, is located approximately 100 feet north of the existing parking lot, is completely fenced, and lacks any well-developed riparian or wetland vegetation. The second feature, located 900 feet north of the parking lot is a herbaceous wetland 1.3 acres in size and is comprised of dense stands of cattails (Typha spp.). Additional plantings of native trees and shrubs around these features would likely enhance their ecological value. Those riparian and wetland habitats on the project site rated as Functional-at-Risk are listed below in Table 4, including the reason for the rating and recommendations for improvement. 86 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 13 Table 4. Riparian/Wetland Habitats Rated as Functional at Risk (FAR) Name Vegetation Reasons for FAR Rating Recommendations Brush Creek (Cozy Point Ranch Parcel) Scrub-Shrub (Willows) Bank erosion, lack of well- developed riparian vegetation, runoff from ranching operations. Perform a geomorphological assessment of the stream reach. Develop plan to stabilize creek and replant riparian vegetation. Continue to control noxious weeds and monitor water quality. Cougar Creek (Cozy Point Ranch Parcel) Scrub-Shrub (Willows) Manure compost piles are directly adjacent, lower end has been ditched and lined with cobble. Move manure compost piles, plant willows, design and implement stream restoration plan for cobble-lined and ditched portion of creek. 4.3 Noxious Weeds The following noxious weeds were identified in the project area during the 2011 field reconnaissance (Table 5). These weeds are currently being controlled on the subject properties. The most abundant weed observed in 2015 on the Cozy Point Ranch parcels was plumeless thistle. However, musk thistle and Canada thistle were also observed. The majority of these weeds are currently being managed. In addition, there was a small population of leafy spurge (Tithymalus esula) present along the new recreation path on the Mills parcel. Table 5. Noxious Weeds Identified In Project Area Scientific Name Common Name Noxious Weed Class Comment Perennial Graminoids Elytrigia repens Quackgrass b Occasional in agricultural areas Perennial Forbs Artemisia absinthium Absinth wormwood b Infrequent Cardaria draba Hoary cress; Whitetop b Infrequent Cichorum intybus Chicory c Infrequent Cirsium arvense (Breea) Canada thistle b Common in moist soil Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed c Agricultural meadows and adjacent sagebrush Leucanthemum vulgare (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) Ox-eye daisy b Common along Brush Creek Linaria vulgaris Yellow Toadflax b Infrequent Potentilla recta Sulphur cinquefoil b Infrequent Tanacetum vulgare Common tansy b Infrequent Tithymalus esula (Euphorbia esula var. esula) Leafy spurge b Along new recreation path on the Mills parcel Annual/Biennial Forbs Arctium minus Common burdock c Infrequent Carduus acanthoides Plumeless thistle b Common throughout project area Conium maculatum Poison hemlock c Infrequent APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 87 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 14 Table 5. Noxious Weeds Identified In Project Area Scientific Name Common Name Noxious Weed Class Comment Cynoglossum officinale Houndstongue b Present in low densities throughout project area. Erodium cicutarium Redstem filaree b Infrequent Matricaria perforata Scentless chamomile b Infrequent Verbascum thapsus Common mullein c Infrequent Annual Graminoids Anisantha tectorum (Bromus) Cheatgrass c Infrequent 4.4 Floristic Inventory and Quantitative Sampling. A thorough floristic inventory was conducted as part of the 2011 Biological and Historical Resource Survey. No new floristic surveys were conducted in 2015. In addition, the 2011 Report included the results of quantitative sampling of 30 permanent vegetation transects for vegetative cover, species richness, and Floristic Quality. These transects were recently resampled by Golder & Associates (Golder, in prep). There has been no specific floristic inventory for the Brush Creek parcels. 5.0 Geologic and Soil Resources 5.1 Geology The geologic bedrock of the project area consists primarily of the upper member of the Mancos Shale Formation. The Mancos Shale is a dark-gray shale and silty shale with a few outcrops of persistent olive-gray sandstone up to 40 feet thick (Bryant, 1972). The upper Mancos Shale member was laid down in the Upper Cretaceous Period 99 to 65 million years ago (mya) by mudrock that accumulated in offshore and marine environments of the Cretaceous North American Inland Sea. Holocene alluvial fan deposits (Qf) and older Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits (Qof) occur along many of the gentle sagebrush shrublands as well as along Brush Creek. Areas near the Roaring Fork River are dominated by Glaciofluvial deposits (Qgb), which include poorly sorted outwash gravels from the Pleistocene. 5.2 Soil Mapping The United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (USDA-SCS) completed a soil survey of the Aspen area in 1992 and mapped several soil units within the project area (Table 6, Figure 7). The most common soil on the project parcels is the Kobar silty clay loam (Map Unit 71), which dominates the relatively flat terraces of the Cozy Point Ranch, Cozy Point South, and western portion of the Aspen Mass and Intercept Lot parcels. Overall, this soil comprises 45.5% of all the soils present. The Kobar silty clay loam is a deep, well-drained soil present on alluvial fans and terraces which formed in alluvium derived from Mancos shale. Both the surface layer and subsurface layer are silt clay loams which are calcareous throughout. Water permeability is slow and available water capacity is high, runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This soil type has typically been used for irrigated hay meadows. The Dollard-Rock Outcrop–Shale Complex (Map Unit 30) is also quite common and comprises 24.0% of the soils mapped. This soil occurs on ridges and mountain sides from 12% to 65% slopes. The Dollard soil is moderately deep and well drained, and formed in residuum derived from Mancos shale, which is the underlying bedrock of the project area. Typically, the surface layer is grayish brown clay loam about 4 inches thick which is underlain by a substratum of clay loam about 29 inches thick. The soil is calcareous throughout. Also present in this mapping unit 88 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 15 is the Rock Outcrop, which consists of slightly weathered consolidated exposures of Mancos shale. Overall, this mapping unit has a low available water capacity, high shrink-swell potential, slow permeability, rapid runoff, shallow depth and/or exposed bedrock, severe erosion hazard, and low strength. It occurs on the steeper slopes of the Cozy Point Ranch, Cozy Point South, Mills, and Intercept Lot Parcels. The Torriorthents-Rock Outcrop Complex (Map Units 104 and 105) occurs at the higher elevations of the Cozy Point parcels and the steep slope of the Mills and Aspen Mass parcels. This unit is about 45% Torriorthents, 20% Camborthids, and 15% Rock Outcrop. The Torriorthents are shallow to moderately deep, well drained soils and the surface is covered with stones. The surface layer is reddish-brown to brown in color and the soil texture ranges from fine sandy loam to clay loam. The depth to the shale or sandstone bedrock is 4 to 30 inches. The Camborthids are similarly well drained and have a light colored surface layer with a clay loam or loam texture. Water runoff is rapid and the hazard of water erosion is severe for both soils of this map unit. Overall, these two soil complexes comprise 16.3% of the project area. The eastern part of the Aspen Mass and the Intercept Lot parcels are dominated by the Uracca Moist-Mergel Soil Association (Map Unit 108). This deep, well-drained soil formed in alluvium derived from mixed igneous and metamorphic materials or in glacial outwash. The surface layer is typically a cobbly sandy loam or cobbly loam and the surface is covered with boulders, stones, cobbles and gravels. Large stones and boulders can also be present just below the soil surface. Permeability is moderate to moderately rapid, runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is slight. These soils comprise 7.1% of the project area. Fluvaquents (Map Unit 42), a wetland soil, occurs along Brush Creek in the Cozy Point Ranch and South parcels and comprises 5.3% of the project area. This mapping unit consists of deep, somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soils on floodplains and alluvial valley floors. These soils are reported to be stratified and vary widely in texture and in depth. Table 6. Soil Associations within the Project Area Soil Name Map Unit Acres Percent Kobar silty clay loam 71 180.7 45.5% Dollard-Rock outcrop-shale complex 30 95.1 24.0% Torriorthents-Rock outcrop complex 104, 105 64.5 16.3% Uracca moist-Mergel 108 28.4 7.1% Fluvaquents 42 21.0 5.3% Water 120 7.2 1.8% TOTAL 396.9 100.0% 5.3 Soil Sampling in Disturbed Sites In 2011, a total of 17 disturbed sites exhibiting low vegetative cover were visited by David Buscher, a professional certified soil scientist, who described the nature and extent of the disturbances and sampled the soils for nutrients and organic matter content. Of the 17 soils samples, 7 were described from the parcels included in this study and the results are summarized below. The disturbed sites visited and the samples collected are summarized in Table 7 and recommendations are provided in Table 8. Please refer to the 2011 Report for details on methodology and results of the laboratory analysis. To date, no soil samples have been examined from the CDOT Intercept Lot. APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 89February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 16 Table 7. Summary of Disturbed Sites and Soil Samples Sample ID General Location Nature of Disturbance and Composition Sample Depth (in.) 5. Mills Road “Fishing Access” Old road southeast of Highway 82 and Brush Creek Road. Old road that is cut into steep escarpment of glacial terrace. Soil very rocky derived in glacial drift. 0-6 6. Cozy Pt. S. – Electric Pipeline Pipeline corridor west of Highway 82 and south of Brush Creek Road. Buried electric pipeline on north facing hillslope composed of shale. Some erosion on upper 1/3 portion, which has convex slope, and has shallow, clay-rich soil with weathered shale fragments. Lower 2/3 portion has deeper soil and no erosion. 0-12 9. Aspen Mass Field Grass field east of Highway 82 and south of Smith Hill Way (south portion of field). Grass field with areas of sparse vegetation, soil is clay-rich with weathered shale fragments. 0-6 10. Aspen Mass Field-2 Grass field east of Highway 82 and south of Smith Hill Way (north portion of field). Grass field with areas of sparse vegetation, appears topsoil has eroded off, soil is very sandy and gravelly and was derived in glacial drift. 0-6 11. Aspen Mass Pipeline Pipeline corridor east of Highway 82 and south of Smith Hill Way. Buried gas pipeline on very steep, north facing escarpment of glacial terrace. Soil is loamy and very rocky, no topsoil. Shrubs are beginning to colonize area. 0-6 12. Aspen Mass Road Old road east of Highway 2 and south of Smith Hill Way. Old road cut into glacial terrace escarpment. Soil is sandy loam and very rocky. 0-6 13. Cozy Pt. Field Grass field west of Highway 82 at the north end of the properties. Grass field with areas of sparse vegetation, shallow clay-rich soil with weathered shale fragments. 0-6 Table 8. Soil Amendment Recommendations for Disturbed Sites Sample ID Soil Amendment Recommendations Landform & Vegetation Recommendations 5. Mills Road “Fishing Access” If the road prism is to be maintain but road will be closed, apply and incorporate 2500 lbs/acre of organic-rich topsoil into upper several inches of soil then apply 100 lbs/acre P205 fertilizer Apply native seed mix. 6. Cozy Pt. S. – Electric Pipeline Till, then apply and incorporate 2,500 lbs/acre of organic-rich topsoil into the upper several inches, then apply 200 lbs/acre P205 fertilizer; apply tackifier such as Startak 600 by Chemstar in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications Plant with native Gambel oak and Serviceberry shrubs. Use of temporarily irrigation and a mycorrhizal dip for shrubs is strongly encouraged. Competition from existing agricultural grasses may be an issue for shrub survival. 90 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 17 Table 8. Soil Amendment Recommendations for Disturbed Sites Sample ID Soil Amendment Recommendations Landform & Vegetation Recommendations 9. Aspen Mass Field Apply and incorporate 2500 lbs/acre of organic-rich topsoil into upper several inches of soil to areas of sparse vegetation then apply 100 lbs/acre P205 fertilizer Area could be converted agricultural land use or reclaimed into native pasture and/or shrubland. 10. Aspen Mass Field-2 Apply and incorporate 2500 lbs/acre of organic-rich topsoil into upper several inches of soil to areas of sparse vegetation then apply 100 lbs/acre P205 fertilizer Area could be converted agricultural land use or reclaimed into native pasture and/or shrubland. 11. Aspen Mass Pipeline Very steep slope, shrubs are reestablishing site, any additional disturbance of site will accelerate erosion. Apply a native seed mix. 12. Aspen Mass Road If the road prism is to be maintain but road will be closed, apply and incorporate 2500 lbs/acre of organic-rich topsoil into upper several inches of soil then apply 100 lbs/acre P205 fertilizer Apply a native seed mix. This area is now a new pedestrian trail. 13. Cozy Pt. Field Apply and incorporate 2500 lbs/acre of organic-rich topsoil into upper several inches of soil to areas of sparse vegetation then apply 200 lbs/acre P205 fertilizer Reclaim area to native sagebrush shrubland. * Phosphorus is the nutrient that most often stimulates excessive growth of aquatic plants, leading to a variety of problems known collectively as eutrophication. Avoid applying phosphorus fertilizer in areas where it could potentially leach or runoff from the soil into the aquatic habitats. Control of noxious weeds is also recommended for all disturbed sites. APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 91 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 18 6.0 Historical Resources The first settlers came to the Roaring Fork Valley in 1879 in search of silver. Almost all of them arrived from Leadville, Colorado, via Independence Pass. The largest silver nugget in the world, weighing over one ton, was found in Smuggler Mine on Aspen Mountain in 1894. After Aspen's mining economy started to decline in the late 1800's, farmers and ranchers who had been supporting the miners became economically prominent and a small-scale mixed farm and ranch economy developed. Between 1900 and 1950, families grazed their cattle on USFS land during the summer, and used their farmland to produce hay, potatoes, grain and vegetables (Gilbert, 1992). The parcels of land included in this study exemplify the rich farming and ranching history of the Roaring Fork Valley. The 2011 Biological and Historical Resources report details the way in which many of the first settlers obtained land from the federal government, including direct cash sales, the Homestead Act, the Stock Raising Homestead Act, and the Desert Lands Act. In addition, the 2011 report illustrates the location of the early land patents and describes who these early settlers were (Figure 8). In addition, during the 2011 field surveys, notes were kept on any new potential historical structures found that were not already recorded by the county. Such new structures included historic farming equipment and an old cabin on Aspen Mass. Structures previously documented by Pitkin County include many of the ranch buildings on Cozy Point Ranch. The original land patent maps, available through the BLM’s General Land Office Records website, show land ownership in a much different configuration than today (Table 9). The first transfer of land ownership from the federal government occurred in 1882, in which the northern portion of the Cozy Point parcel in Section 16 was granted to the state of Colorado for school revenue. The earliest land purchases were in 1890 through cash sales. For example, Jotham M. (Jote) Smith purchased land within the Cozy Point Ranch. True A. Smith, Jote Smith's son, purchased land north of his father's land in 1892, and William Lemond later expanded his ranch to the south through the Homestead Act in 1899. In 1897, Alexander Cruikshank homesteaded lands where the Aspen Mass and Mills parcels now lie, and he purchased a small ranch along Brush Creek on the Cozy Point South parcel in 1889. Table 9. Land Patent Details for Project Area Year Last Name First Name Open Space Parcel Patent or Accession No. Authority 1882 Colorado State Cozy Point NA State Grant 1890 Smith Jotham M Cozy Point, Cozy Point South, Aspen Mass 1159 Cash Sale 1892 Smith True A. Cozy Point 561 Cash Sale 1895 Rex Augustus H Cozy Point 564 Cash Sale 1897 Cruikshank Alexander (Heirs of) Aspen Mass & Mills 369 Stock Raising HA Original Homestead Act 1889 Cruikshank Alexander Cozy Point South 50 Cash Sale 1907 Smith True A. Cozy Point 93 Desert Land Act 1923 Wiese Charles H Cozy Point South Acc# 920617 Cash Sale Each one of these pioneers has a unique and interesting history; however, many of them are difficult to trace through time and we know little about them. Below is a brief history of some of the prominent ranching families. 92 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 19 Jotham and True A. Smith Jotham Smith and his son True A. Smith were prominent ranchers where the Cozy Point Ranch stands today. True was born in Colorado in 1864. His father, Jotham was born in Maine and his mother was born in Iowa. According to the Rocky Mountain Sun (Oct. 3, 1885): "The largest ranch, and perhaps the most profitable, is that of Jote Smith, at the mouth of the [Brush] Creek. Mr. Smith purchased this ranch in 1883, of several parties, and has over 300 acres of land. He has this year 90 acres of oats, of heavy yield, part of which will go 60 bushels to the acres. He will have between 3,500 and 4,000 bushes of oats from this field. This crop is worth $6,000 at least. He has a fine garden and has set out a number of fruit trees, some of which are doing well." On June 15, 1892, True married the daughter of another prominent ranching family along Woody Creek, the Bourgs who were from France. Together, True and Nettie lived on the ranch, referred to as Rathbone or Watson which were two nearby stations along the Midland Railroad. However, their marriage wasn't always picture perfect. True's wife Nettie was badly injured one year out on the farm when True accidently nailed her with a pitchfork. The Aspen Tribune (August 3, 1898) describes it this way: "Mrs. True Smith of Watson is in the city for surgical treatment…Mrs. Smith received a wound from a pitchfork in a most unexpected and lamentable way. She was watching her husband at work in a field, he being on top of a haystack. After a time she sat down…to rest. Mr. Smith, busy with his work, noted her disappearance and supposed she had gone to the house. When it came time to quit he carelessly tossed his pitchfork to the ground…a sharp cry from his wife warned him, however, that…the fork had struck her, one prong going through the flexor muscles of her leg below the knee…” True and Nettie had at least four children, the first being born in 1900. According to the Aspen Daily Times (January 28, 1900), "True A. Smith of Brush Creek near Rathbone Station on the Midland Railroad, is the father of a 9 pound boy, born Saturday morning. True calls him a hay bailer." True also bred horses and was a member of the Roaring Fork Percheron Horse Breeding association. An advertisement in the Aspen Daily Times (April 3, 1906) read: “Wanted at once. A first class horseman to handle the Percheron stallion ‘Boston' for the season 1906. None but a sober, competent man need apply. See True A. Smith, Rathbone." By 1930, True had sold the ranch and was living in Aspen with his wife, brother-in-law and two of his adult daughters. Both True and Nettie are buried in the Aspen Cemetery. True died in 1939 and Nettie passed away in 1956. Alexander Cruikshank Mr. Alexander Cruikshank was another pioneer of the Brush Creek Valley. The Cruikshank Ranch was located just south and east of the Smith Ranch. Mr. Cruikshank came here with his family in 1881. He was a carpenter by trade, but also had several valuable mining properties on Aspen Mountain. Unfortunately, Mr. Cruikshank died in 1886 at the age of 65 in a terrible accident. According to the Rocky Mountain Sun (Oct. 2, 1886): "It seems that about a quarter of a mile up Brush Creek from Mr. Cruikshank’s ranch, the horses the old gentleman was driving became frightened at a dead mule by the side of the road. They ran up the side of the hill, the wagon tipping over, and becoming uncoupled. He was pitched forward, and dragged some 20 rods. The horses ran up the creek two miles to Burke Brothers...Mr. Cruikshank's hired man was helping here, saw the horses, surmised trouble and he and Brandis went down the creek and found the body from which life was extinct" APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 93 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 20 In 1889, one of Mr. Cruikshank's daughters, Emma Foster, married Lee Sherwood and they lived on the ranch for a little over a decade. In 1902, "the country home known to all railroaders as Cozy Point,” was sold to Mr. Weise due to the ill health of Emma Foster. Another one of Mr. Cruikshank's daughters, Lottie, was a famous opera singer with the Chicago Ideal Opera Company. Lottie Cruikshank originally married Mr. John Wutsum, a mining operator of the Mother Shipton mine. However, in 1884 at the age of 42, Mr. Wutsum died in a terrible storm up at the mine on Aspen Mountain. According to the Rocky Mountain Sun (July 5, 1884), Mr. Wutsum was killed when "a large tree fell and crushed him to the earth". He left behind his wife Lottie and one child. Lottie continued her career as an opera singer and travelled around the country. On a trip back to Aspen in the late 1880's Lottie met Judge Joshua Deane and the two were married. Unfortunately, their son died at the age of 38 in a mining accident, and their daughter in-law and grandson moved to Chicago. The Deane's grandson, Had Deane, however, continued to visit his grandparents during the summers. When Had grew up he moved back to Aspen with his wife Lou Deane and together they purchased and developed a ranch on Maroon Creek and called it the T-Lazy Seven Ranch, which is a western ranch guesthouse to this day. Lou Deane is featured in the book, "The Story of Aspen" by M.E. Hayes. The Name of Cozy Point According to the United States Geologic Survey 7.5’ Quadrangle Map, the name Cozy Point refers to the top of the steep shale bluff just west of Hwy 82 on the Droste Property. But how did this shale bluff get its name? The answer is revealed by a quote from Ellamae Huffine Phillips in the book “Aspen The Quiet Years” (Daily and Guenin 1994, p. 387). "A long time ago, down by Shale Bluffs, there used to be a tunnel. That was the railroad. The Midland was running and the Rio Grande was running, too. I have to tell you why they call it the Cozy Point. There was a tunnel along that shale. The boys would get their girlfriends and buggies - we didn't have anything but wagons. If you had a car, you were rich. So, they would get together and a bunch of them would go in that tunnel and smooch. They would drive their buggies in. That is how it got the name Cozy Point. Trains didn't run at night.” 7.0 Management Recommendations The following management recommendations are provided in order to aid in future planning by the City of Aspen and Pitkin County Open Space. All open space parcel management should be adaptive. Managers should make management decisions, implement these decisions, and then monitor the effects of the management actions and adjust them accordingly based on the monitoring results. 1)Limit new equestrian, hay fields and crop production facilities to the abandoned agricultural areas. These areas were historically farmed and ranched and contain little wildlife habitat value. 2)Consider restoring abandoned agricultural areas that are not used for equestrian or agricultural activities to sagebrush shrubland. Prior to restoration, research on the appropriate subspecies of sagebrush to use, planting and/or seeding method, etc. should be conducted. Such activities could provide a useful educational tool on native landscape restoration as well as enhance Brewer’s sparrow habitat. 3)When designing new trails, reduce habitat fragmentation and adverse impacts to wildlife by using existing trails and/or ranch roads or by aligning the new trails along Hwy 82. 4)Do not allow mountain bikes on any trails if the trails are designed for equestrian use. If mountain biking is desired, then there will need to be specific days of the week when 94 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 21 either biking or equestrian riding are the only allowed activity. This is necessary so that there is little chance of conflict between the two user groups and makes for a safer, more pleasurable experience. 5)Prohibit dogs on any new equestrian trails and trails that do not connect with trails on other open space parcels that allow leashed dogs. Maintain compatibility with dog regulations on adjacent open space parcels. 6)Continue to allow leashed dogs on existing trails on the Aspen Mass parcel. The presence of dogs on trails may help to keep some wildlife from approaching Highway 82 and attempting at-grade crossings, putting themselves and motorists at risk. 7)Remove all fencing that is not absolutely necessary from all parcels. Fences can present serious problems for wildlife, and prior to construction of any new fence, one must consider whether the fence will separate wildlife from their accustomed water sources, food sources, fawning/calving grounds, migration routes, or security cover. If fencing is needed, then construct such fencing to be wildlife friendly and per CPW design standards. Also remove the old “sheep fence” along the Highway 82 ROW. 8)Continue to implement a comprehensive integrated weed management and monitoring plan for priority noxious weed species within the project area. 9)Maintain adequate vegetated buffers between intensive agricultural use and wetlands and streams. Buffer width should be determined based on the intensity of adjacent activity and potential for pollutants and sediment to migrate to wetlands and streams. Ideally, a 75 to 100 foot wide buffer from the edge of the stream is recommended along Brush Creek on the Cozy Point Ranch parcel. 10)Restore disturbed areas which lack adequate vegetative cover. Disturbed areas that should be prioritized include those areas adjacent to wetland and riparian habitats that may be a source of sediment or excess nutrients and disturbed areas containing dense stands of noxious weeds or noxious weed seed. More specifically, the manure storage area adjacent to Cougar Creek should be relocated or appropriate buffers should be constructed to capture and process nutrient laden runoff. 11)Restore and enhance wetland riparian habitats rated Functional at Risk. These areas include Brush Creek on the Cozy Point Ranch parcel and Cougar Creek to the north of Brush Creek. The restoration plan should be developed with input from a fluvial geomorphologist or hydrologist in order to determine the most effective methods of stabilizing these creeks. 12)Conduct a formal biological resource inventory on the CDOT Intercept Lot to aid in future planning. The study should include an assessment of current wildlife use, a wetland habitat assessment, and a description of existing vegetation, weeds, and soils. 13)Conduct fishery and macroinvertebrate sampling in Brush Creek within the project area. Fishery sampling in Brush Creek was conducted in 1993, but not within the project area (Bakich, 2011). Previous benthic macroinvertebrate sampling showed signs of an impaired water quality (Malone & Emerik, 2007). Together, these two components will provide managers with useful information on the health of Brush Creek and help to formulate future management actions. 14)Develop a robust public education plan. At a minimum, post signs in strategic locations that will inform the public about the rich historical, geological and ecological value of these parcels. At all trailheads, provide an informative kiosk that details the importance of these properties to wildlife and the social and economic values of preserving open space and wildlife habitat. 15)An underpass of sufficient size where Brush Creek passes under Brush Creek Road would allow for seasonal wildlife migration without the current threat of being hit while crossing Brush Creek Road at-grade. The underpass could be used to move both wildlife and APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 95 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 22 humans safely across Brush Creek Road. Additionally, Brush Creek would flow through the same structure, creating an enhanced movement corridor. The Colorado Department of Transportation has shown that a structure 12 feet in height by 24 feet in width does allow for wildlife movement while maintaining a feeling of ‘openness’. 16)Conduct, in cooperation with the CPW, both mule deer and elk movement and habitat use studies to better define critical habitats and movement corridors within the Roaring Fork Valley and on the Cozy Point Ranch parcels. A study on elk movement and habitat use was conducted in 2004 (Green, 2004), but significant changes to a variety of habitat types have occurred since that time which may have changed use patterns. No such studies on mule deer movement and habitat use have occurred within the Roaring Fork Valley near the project area. 96 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 23 8.0 References Ackerfield, J. 2015. The Flora of Colorado. Colorado State University. Fort Collins, Colorado. 818 pp. Allen, K. 2002. Species Data Collection Form for Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens for the White Mountain National Forest, Laconia, New Hampshire. Unpublished report on file at Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests and Thunder Basin National Grassland Supervisor's Office, Laramie, WY. Altman, B. and R. Sallabanks. 2000. Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/502doi:10.2173/bna.502 Andrews, R., Righter, R. 1992. Colorado birds: a reference to their distribution and habitat. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, Colo. 442pp. Armstrong, D.M., R.A. Adams, and J. Freeman. 1994. Natural history inventory of Colorado, No. 15: Distribution and ecology of bats of Colorado. University of Colorado Museum, Boulder, CO. Bakich, K. 2011. Personal e-mail communication between Kendall Bakich, Colorado Division of Wildlife Aquatic Biologist, and Jerry Powell, Wildlife Specialties LLC. Benedict, A.D. 1991. A Sierra Club Naturalist's Guide: The Southern Rockies. Sierra Club Books. San Francisco, CA. 578 pp. Birds of North America Online. 2010. Available at: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species. Blakesley, J. A. 2008. Population densities and trend detection of avian Management Indicator Species on the White River National Forest. Supplemental Report M-MCB-USFS07-02. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, Brighton, CO. 10 pp. Boyle, S. A. and D. R. Reeder. 2005. Colorado sagebrush: a conservation assessment and strategy. Grand Junction: Colorado Division of Wildlife. Bryant, B. 1972. Geologic Map of the 7.5' Highland Peak Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado. USGS Map GQ-932. Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 1999. Roaring Fork Watershed Biological Inventory. 1997-1999. Prepared for Pitkin County, the Aspen Wilderness Workshop, and the Roaring Fork Valley Audubon Society. Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2009. Colorado Floristic Quality Assessment Database. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Data exported Feb 12, 2009. Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2015a. Element Occurrence Tracking Lists, by County and Quadrangle name. Downloaded January 20, 2016 from: http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/download/list.asp Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2015b. Potential Conservation Area Reports Online. Downloaded January 20, 2016 from http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/download/reports.aspx CONPS (Colorado Native Plant Society). 1997. Rare Plants of Colorado, second edition. Falcon Press Publishing Co. Inc., Helena, Montana and Rocky Mountain Nature Association, Estes Park, Colorado. APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 97 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 24 Dobkin, D.S. 1994. Conservation and management of Neotropical migrant landbirds in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains. University of Idaho Press, Moscow. 222 pp. Droste, Bruce. 2011. Personal communication with Rea Orthner of Western Ecological Resource on July 18, 2011. Ellison, L.E., T.J. O’Shea, M.A. Bogan, A.L. Everette, and D. M. Schneider. 2003. Existing data on colonies of bats in the United States: summary and analysis of the U.S. Geological Survey’s bat population database. Pages 127-237 in T.J. O’Shea and M.A. Bogan, editors. Monitoring trends in bat populations of the United States and territories: problems and prospects. U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resource Discipline, Information and Technology Report, USGS/BRD/ITR –2003-003. Fahrig, L. 2003. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Evolutionary Systematics. 34: 487-515. Farnsworth, G.L., J.D. Nichols, J.R. Sauer, S.G. Fancy, K.H. Pollack, S.A. Shriner, and T.R. Simons. 2005. Statistical approaches to the analysis of point count data: a little extra information can go along way. In Ralph, C.J. and T.D. Rich editors. 2005. Bird conservation, implementation, and integration in the Americas: Proceedings of the third International Partners in Flight Conference. 2002 March 20-24. Asilomar, California; Vol. 2. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-191 Albany CA Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture: 643 pp. Fitzgerald, J.P., C.A. Meaney, and D.M. Armstrong. 1994. Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History and University Press of Colorado. 467 pp. Green, L. 2004. Snowmass Village elk monitoring study. Final report for the Colorado Division of Willdife and Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. December. 12 pages. Gruver, J.C. and D.A. Keinath. 2006. Townsend’s Big-eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/townsendsbigearedbat.pdf [Accessed August 3,, 2011]. Hammerson, G.A. 1999. Amphibians and Reptiles in Colorado. 2nd edition. University Press of Colorado and Colorado Division of Wildlife. 484 pp. Knick, S. T.; Dobkin, D. S.; Rotenberry, J. T.; Schroeder, M. A.; Vander Haegen, W. M.; Van Riper, C., III. 2003. Teetering on the edge or too late? Conservation and research issues for avifauna of sagebrush habitats. The Condor. 105: 611–634. Kotliar, N.B. 2007. Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/olivesidedflycatcher.pdf [Accessed August 4, 2011]. Ladyman, J.A.R. 2006a. Atragalus leptaleus Gray (park milkvetch): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://wwwfs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/astrgalusleptaleus.pdf [August 27, 2007]. Leukering, T., M. F Carter, A. Panjabi, D. Faulkner, and R. Levad. 2000. Monitoring Colorado's Birds: The Plan for Count-based Monitoring. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, Brighton, Colorado. Malone, D.G. and J.C. Emerick. 2007. Catalog of Stream and Riparian Habitat Quality for the Roaring Fork River and Tributaries, Central Colorado. Prepared by the Roaring For, Stream Health Initiative. 98 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 25 Mergen, D.E. 2006. Cypripedium parviflorum Salisb. (lesser yellow lady's slipper): a technical conservation assessment. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available online: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/cypripediumparviflorum.pdf. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). 2002. Climatography of the United States No. 81. Monthly Station Normals of Temperature, Precipitation, and Heating and Cooling Degree Days. 1971-2000. National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2002. WETS Station Data available (1980-2000) obtained from http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ftpref/support/climate/wetlands/co/08097.txt NatureServe. 2010. NatureServe Explorer. Available online at: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ Nature Serve. 2011. Nature Serve Explorer. http://www.Natureserve.org. Accessed July 6 2011. Noss, R. F.; Peters, R. L. 1995. Endangered ecosystems. A status report on America’s vanishing habitat and wildlife. Washington, DC: Defenders of Wildlife. 132 p. Olson, C.R. and T.E. Willson. 1999. Virginia's Warbler (Oreothlypis virginiae), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/477doi:10.2173/bna.477. Accessed September 1, 2011. Panjabi, S.S. and D.G. Anderson. 2006. Penstemon harringtonii Penland (Harrington’s beardtongue): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/penstemonharringtonii.pdf. Peterson, J. M. C., and C. Fichtel. 1992. Olive-sided flycatcher, Contopus borealis. Pages 353-367 in K. J. Schneider and D. M. Pence, editors. Migratory nongame birds of management concern in the Northeast. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, Massachusetts. 400 pp. Pierson, E.D., M.C. Wackenhut, J.S. Altenbach, P. Bradley, P. Call, D. Genter, C.E. Harris, B.L. Keller, B. Lengus, L. Lewis, B. Luce, K.W. Navo, J.M. Perkins, S. Smith, and L. Welch. 1999. Species Conservation assessment and strategy for Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii and Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens). Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, ID. Potter, K. 2006. Management Indicator Species Monitoring Protocol Virginia’s Warbler Mountain Shrub Habitat White River National Forest. March 2006 Rotenberry, J. T., M. A. Patten and K. L. Preston. 1999. Brewer's Sparrow (Spizella breweri), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online. Available at: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/390doi:10.2173/bna.390 Seavy, N.E. S. Quader, J.D. Alexander, and C.J. Ralph. 2005. General linear models and point count data: statistical considerations for the design and analysis of monitoring studies. In Ralph, C.J. and T.D. Rich editors. 2005. Bird conservation, implementation, and integration in the Americas: Proceedings of the third International Partners in Flight Conference. 2002 March 20-24. Asilomar, California; Vol. 2. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-191 Albany CA Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture: 643 pp. Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado Rare Plant Field Guide. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S.D.A. APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 99 February 2016 Biological & Historical Resource Surveys – Aspen Parks and Open Space 26 Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. USDA Forest Service (USFS). 2015. FSM 2600 – Wildlife, Fish, and Sensitive Plant Habitat Management. Chapter 2670 – Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plants and Animals. Supplement 2600-2015-1. Effective August 29, 2015. Rocky Mountain Region, Colorado. USDA, NRCS. 2009. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5 (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA. USDA-SCS. 1992. Soil Survey of Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties. U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1998. A User Guide to Assessing Proper Functioning Condition and the Supporting Science for Lotic Areas. Technical Reference 1737-15. U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2003. A User Guide to Assessing Proper Functioning Condition and the Supporting Science for Lentic Areas. Technical Reference 1737-16. U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2009. BLM Colorado State Director's Sensitive Species List, November 20, 2009. U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2015. BLM Colorado State Director's Sensitive Species List, June 22, 2015. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1995. Ute Ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) recovery plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado. 46 pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2015. Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) Trust Resource Report. Generated December 7, 2015 for the Aspen Parks and Open Space Resource Surveys project area in Pitkin County, Colorado. Walker, B. 2004. Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Brewer's Sparrow. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/literatr/grasbird/brsp/brsp.htm (Version 12AUG2004). Weber, W. A. and R. C. Wittmann. 2001. Colorado Flora: Western Slope (Third Edition). University Press of Colorado. Boulder, Colorado. 488 pp. West, N. E. 2000. Synecology and disturbance regimes of sagebrush steppe ecosystems. In: Entwistle, P. G.; DeBolt, A. M.; Kaltenecker, J. H.; Steenhof, K., comps. Proceedings— sagebrush steppe ecosystems; 1999 July 21–23; Boise, ID. Pub. ID-PT-001001+1150USDI. Boise, ID: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Idaho State Office: 15–26. Western Ecological Resource and Wildlife Specialties. 2011. Biological & Historical Resource Surveys. Pitkin County, City of Aspen & Snowmass Village Open Space, Pitkin County, Colorado. Prepared for Pitkin County Open Space & Trails. October 2011. Woodling, J. 1985. Colorado’s Little Fish. Colorado Division of Wildlife. 77pp. 100 Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed 106°51'30"W 106°51'30"W 106°52'0"W 106°52'0"W 106°52'30"W 106°52'30"W 106°53'0"W 106°53'0"W 106°53'30"W 106°53'30"W 106°54'0"W 106°54'0"W 39°16'30"N39°16'30"N39°16'0"N39°16'0"N39°15'30"N39°15'30"N39°15'0"N39°15'0"N39°14'30"N39°14'30"NGrid Lat/Long WGS 1984 Figure 1. Project Location Map Cozy Point Ranch Open Space Parcels Pitkin County, Colorado COLORADO Map Location Ü 1:30,000Scale 1 inch = 2,500 feet Cozy Point South Cozy Point Ranch Aspen/Mass Mills CDOT Intercept Lot 28 APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 101 335600 335600 336000 336000 336400 336400 336800 336800 337200 337200 337600 337600 338000 338000 338400 338400 338800 338800 339200 339200 339600 3396004344400434440043448004344800434520043452004345600434600043460004346400434640043468004346800434720043472004347600434760043480004348000434840043484004348800434880043492004349200Legend Parcel Boundaries Brewer's Sparrow Critical Habitat prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cozy Point Ranch Figure 2. Brewer's Sparrow Habitat Cozy Point Ranch Open Space Parcels 1 inch = 2,000 feet Ü 1:24,000 Date: February, 2016 Background: Bing Maps Aerial Grid: UTM NAD 83 Zone 13 North Cozy Point South Aspen Mass Mills CDOT Intercept Lot 29 102 335600 335600 336000 336000 336400 336400 336800 336800 337200 337200 337600 337600 338000 338000 338400 338400 338800 338800 339200 339200 339600 3396004344400434440043448004344800434520043452004345600434600043460004346400434640043468004346800434720043472004347600434760043480004348000434840043484004348800434880043492004349200Legend Parcel Boundaries Virginia Warbler's Critical Habitat prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cozy Point Ranch Figure 3. Viriginia Warbler Habitat Cozy Point Ranch Open Space Parcels 1 inch = 2,000 feet Ü 1:24,000 Date: February, 2016 Background: Bing Maps Aerial Grid: UTM NAD 83 Zone 13 North Cozy Point South Aspen Mass Mills CDOT Intercept Lot 30 APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 103 335600 335600 336000 336000 336400 336400 336800 336800 337200 337200 337600 337600 338000 338000 338400 338400 338800 338800 339200 339200 339600 3396004344400434440043448004344800434520043452004345600434600043460004346400434640043468004346800434720043472004347600434760043480004348000434840043484004348800434880043492004349200Legend Parcel Boundaries Highway Crossing Migration Corridors Winter Range prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cozy Point Ranch Figure 4. Mule Deer Habitat Types Cozy Point Ranch Open Space Parcels 1 inch = 2,000 feet Ü 1:24,000 Date: February, 2016 Background: Bing Maps Aerial Grid: UTM NAD 83 Zone 13 North Cozy Point South Aspen Mass Mills CDOT Intercept Lot 31 104 335600 335600 336000 336000 336400 336400 336800 336800 337200 337200 337600 337600 338000 338000 338400 338400 338800 338800 339200 339200 339600 3396004344400434440043448004344800434520043452004345600434600043460004346400434640043468004346800434720043472004347600434760043480004348000434840043484004348800434880043492004349200Legend Parcel Boundaries Highway Crossings Resident Population Area Migration Corridors Severe Winter Range Winter Concentration Area Winter Range prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cozy Point Ranch Figure 5. Elk Habitat Types Cozy Point Ranch Open Space Parcels 1 inch = 2,000 feet Ü 1:24,000 Date: February, 2016 Background: Bing Maps Aerial Grid: UTM NAD 83 Zone 13 North Cozy Point South Aspen Mass Mills CDOT Intercept Lot 32 APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 105 335600 335600 336000 336000 336400 336400 336800 336800 337200 337200 337600 337600 338000 338000 338400 338400 338800 338800 339200 339200 339600 3396004344800 43448004345200434520043456004345600434600043460004346400434640043468004346800434720043472004347600434760043480004348000434840043484004348800434880043492004349200Legend Parcel Boundaries Douglas-Fir Forest Mountain Shrubland Sagebrush Shrubland Shale Barrens Active Agriculture Abandoned Agricultural Grassland Riparian - Wetland Aquatic Habitat Disturbed Unvegetated prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cozy Point Ranch Figure 6. Vegetation Types Cozy Point Ranch Open Space Parcels 1 inch = 2,000 feet Ü 1:24,000 Date: February, 2016 Background: Bing Maps Aerial Grid: UTM NAD 83 Zone 13 North Cozy Point South Aspen Mass Mills CDOT Intercept Lot Brush Creek Brush Creek Cougar Creek 33 106 335600 335600 336000 336000 336400 336400 336800 336800 337200 337200 337600 337600 338000 338000 338400 338400 338800 338800 339200 339200 339600 3396004344400 4344400434480043448004345200434520043456004345600434600043460004346400434640043468004346800434720043472004347600434760043480004348000434840043484004348800434880043492004349200Legend Parcel Boundaries ^_Soil Sample Locations Soil Type Dollard-Rock outcrop-shale, 30 Fluvaquents, 42 Kobar silty clay loam, 71 T-C Rock outcrop, 104 & 105 Uracca moist-Mergel, 108 Water, 120 prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cozy Point Ranch Figure 7. Soil Associations and Soil Sampling Locations Cozy Point Ranch Open Space Parcels 1 inch = 2,000 feet Ü 1:24,000 Date: February, 2016 Background: Bing Maps Aerial Grid: UTM NAD 83 Zone 13 North Cozy Point South Aspen Mass Mills CDOT Intercept Lot 34 APPENDIX C APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 107 335600 335600 336000 336000 336400 336400 336800 336800 337200 337200 337600 337600 338000 338000 338400 338400 338800 338800 339200 339200 339600 3396004344400434440043448004344800434520043452004345600434600043460004346400434640043468004346800434720043472004347600434760043480004348000434840043484004348800434880043492004349200Legend Parcel Boundaries Land Patents prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cozy Point Ranch Figure 8. Historical Land Patent Map Cozy Point Ranch Open Space Parcels 1 inch = 2,000 feet Ü 1:24,000 Date: February, 2016 Background: Bing Maps Aerial Grid: UTM NAD 83 Zone 13 North Cozy Point South Aspen Mass Mills CDOT Intercept Lot 35 108 Concept Stream Restoration Plan Cozy Point Ranch City of Aspen Open Space Pitkin County, Colorado prepared for: City of Aspen Parks and Open Space 530 E. Main St. Suite 300, Aspen, CO 81611 prepared by: Western Ecological Resource, Inc. 711 Walnut Street, Boulder, CO 80302 & Black Creek Hydrology, LLC 10998 Patterson Court, Northglenn, CO 80234 July 2016 APPENDIX D Concept Stream Restoration Plan, Western Ecological Resource, Inc. & Black Creek Hydrology LLC, July 2016 APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 109 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space i Table of Contents Section / Title Page 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Methods ................................................................................................................................. 1 4.0 Brush Creek Concept Restoration Plan .................................................................................... 1 4.1 Existing Condition .............................................................................................................. 1 4.1.1 Geomorphology ........................................................................................................... 1 4.1.2 Beaver Activity ............................................................................................................. 2 4.1.3 Wetland and Riparian Habitat ...................................................................................... 3 4.2 Desired Condition .............................................................................................................. 3 4.3 Design Alternatives ............................................................................................................. 4 4.3.1 Level 1 - The "Do Nothing" Approach .......................................................................... 4 4.3.2 Level 2 - The Limited Approach .................................................................................... 5 4.3.3 Level 3 – The “Do Everything” Approach ..................................................................... 8 4.4 Costs .................................................................................................................................. 8 5.0 Cougar Creek Concept Restoration Plan ................................................................................. 9 5.1 Existing Condition .............................................................................................................. 9 5.2 Desired Condition .............................................................................................................. 9 5.3 Design Alternatives ............................................................................................................. 9 6.0 Future Tasks ......................................................................................................................... 10 6.1 Grading Plan .................................................................................................................... 10 6.2 Permits & Clearances ........................................................................................................ 10 6.2.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Permit ........................................................... 10 6.2.2 Pitkin County Permits ................................................................................................. 10 6.2.3 FEMA Permits ............................................................................................................ 10 7.0 References ........................................................................................................................... 11 8.0 Figures ................................................................................................................................. 12 9.0 Photos .................................................................................................................................. 18 Appendix A. Summary of Beaver Dam Analogue Restoration Technique .................................... 32 110 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space ii List of Figures Number / Title Page Figure 1. Project Location Map ................................................................................................... 13 Figure 2. Brush Creek – Aerial View ........................................................................................... 14 Figure 3. Typical Woody Material Bank Stabilization Treatment ................................................. 15 Figure 4. Concept Stream Restoration Plan ................................................................................. 16 Figure 5. Cougar Creek Riparian Habitat Restoration Map........................................................... 17 List of Tables Number / Title Page Table 1. Native Wetland Riparian Seed Mix ................................................................................. 6 Table 2. Native Upland Riparian Seed Mix .................................................................................. 6 Table 3. Recommended Native Tree & Shrub Plantings ................................................................ 7 APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 111 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space iii List of Photos Number / Title Page Photo 1. Reference reach of Brush Creek on the Cozy Point South Parcel. .................................. 19 Photo 2. Severe bank erosion with a high bank and evidence of channel migration. ................... 19 Photo 3. Evidence of channel migration. .................................................................................... 20 Photo 4. Example of severe bank erosion and tall bank. .............................................................. 20 Photo 5. Eroding bank below house. .......................................................................................... 21 Photo 6. Eroding and under-cut bank below houses. ................................................................... 21 Photo 7. Erosion of an old slump below houses. ......................................................................... 22 Photo 8. Typical bank erosion problem on Lower Brush Creek. .................................................. 22 Photo 9. Typical eroding bank and migrating bend. Note lack of woody vegetation. .................. 23 Photo 10. Eroding bank adjacent to horse pasture threatening fenceline. .................................... 23 Photo 11. Typical bank erosion and slumping on Lower Brush Creek. ........................................ 24 Photo 12. Incised channel but with good riparian vegetation on Lower Brush Creek. .................. 24 Photo 13. Formerly eroding Lower Brush Creek bank stabilized with rocks. ................................ 25 Photo 14. Large beaver dam on Lower Brush Creek. ................................................................... 25 Photo 15. Small beaver dam on Lower Brush Creek. ................................................................... 26 Photo 16. Example of a washed-out beaver dam on Lower Brush Creek. ..................................... 26 Photo 17. Bank erosion where Brush Creek flows around a beaver dam. .................................... 27 Photo 18. Bank erosion below a beaver dam on a fast moving section of Brush Creek. ............... 27 Photo 19. Natural cobble riffle on Lower Brush Creek. ............................................................... 28 Photo 20. Existing rock check dam on Lower Brush Creek. ......................................................... 28 Photo 21. Reference area along Cougar Creek, upstream of road. ............................................... 29 Photo 22. Mature cottonwood grove along Cougar Creek along west property boundary. ........... 29 Photo 23. Cougar Creek just below the road. The left bank is lacking in riparian shrubs. ............. 30 Photo 24. Cougar Creek near Hwy 82. Most of the riparian habitat has been eliminated. ........... 30 Photo 25. Manure compost piles adjacent to Cougar Creek (left side of photo)............................ 31 Photo 26. Old culvert in need of replacement. ........................................................................... 31 112 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 1 1.0 Introduction The City of Aspen is currently developing a Master Plan for the Cozy Point Ranch Open Space, the gateway of the Aspen community. Brush Creek, which bisects this property, is an actively adjusting stream channel that includes sections of deeply incised stream bed and areas of severe bank erosion and an overly narrow riparian habitat. The stream system is presently influenced by beaver activity, encroachment by historic ranch activities, upstream watershed development, diversions, and natural geomorphic functions. Some of the impacts to the stream system by these influences are subtle, while others are quite dramatic. A concept-level restoration plan for Brush Creek is presented in this report in order to facilitate discussion of the approach to restoring this stream channel and the important wetland and riparian habitats it supports. In addition, a brief concept level restoration plan for Cougar Creek, a small intermittent stream north of Brush Creek, is presented in Section 5.0. 2.0 Environmental Setting Cozy Point Ranch is located at the intersection of U.S. Highway 82 and Brush Creek Road, approximately six miles north of the City of Aspen (Figure 1). The project area is bordered by Hwy 82 on the east, Cozy Point South and Sky Mountain Park Open Space to the south, and residential development on the high mountain slopes to the west. The elevations along Brush Creek range from a high of 7,560 feet on the south to a low of 7,490 feet where Brush Creek exits the parcel. Cozy Point Ranch currently supports a large equestrian boarding and training facility as well as an archery range and a greenhouse. Portions of the ranch are actively irrigated and hayed. 3.0 Methods A preliminary geomorphic function assessment of the stream channel was performed during site visits on May 24 and July 1, 2016 by Mr. Steve Belz of Black Creek Hydrology, LLC. During those visits, the stream reach was walked and evaluated during high spring runoff flow conditions and later at lower, more typically summer flow. During the site visits the stream channel was examined for stability, function, geomorphic processes, and local impacts to the system. Measurements of channel profile, cross section, or substrate particle size were not made during the visits. Rea Orthner, a plant ecologist with Western Ecological Resource, Inc., also visited the site on May 24 in order to assess the functioning of the existing wetland and riparian vegetation and provide recommendations for specific vegetation improvement. 4.0 Brush Creek Concept Restoration Plan 4.1 Existing Condition 4.1.1 Geomorphology The Brush Creek project reach through the Cozy Point Ranch parcel is approximately 5,000 feet in length and has a watershed of 15 square miles. Brush Creek drains Snowmass Village and much of the Snowmass Ski Area. These developments likely influence runoff timing and flow magnitude in Brush Creek due to impermeable roof tops and road surfaces, openings in the tree canopy, and increases in snow storage due to snow-making operations. Increases in the overall quantity of runoff and magnitude of flow events may affect the ability of the stream channel to mobilize and transport silt, sand and gravel sediments through the system. Such increases in stream flow can transport material in quantities greater that what historically occurred during the formation of the present channel. This increased mobilization and transport of bed materials can result in bed scour that leads to channel incisement and results in less connection between the active channel APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 113 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 2 and the floodplain and riparian corridor. Channel incisement in turn allows the erosive forces of high flows to undercut protective woody riparian species which promotes bank erosion and excessive lateral migration of the stream channel. Other current and historic impacts to Brush Creek include livestock grazing, roads, bridges, diversions, rock check dams, and beaver activity. Beaver can present a particular challenge in a wildland/urban interface since they are a normal part of natural stream systems but urban encroachment is generally not conducive to beaver operations. Bankfull flow at the project site is estimated to be around 100 cfs and the USGS StreamStats stream flow model indicates a 100-year event peak flow rate of 350 cfs. Based on the USGS 7.5’ topographic map, the channel slope is about 1%. However, a preliminary review of photographs and GoogleEarth images found that Brush Creek has plan form sinuosity greater than might be expected for a stream channel with a 1% slope. Causes of the high sinuosity could include redirection of flow by historic, failed beaver dams or historic agricultural activities. Many of the stream banks are unstable and appear to be experiencing significant to severe erosion that likely contributes to excessive lateral migration of the channel. Given the historic land use and upstream impacts to the watershed, these conditions are not unexpected because increases in flow in steep, high energy stream channels that pass through finer materials can cause stream banks on the meander bends to be easily eroded and allow for rapid lateral channel migration. Excessive channel bed scour leading to incisement can also occur when the stream flow regime is increased unless coarse bed materials are present to resist down-cutting, or natural or artificial grade control structures are present. The upstream segment of Brush Creek on Cozy Point South Open Space and the downstream segment on Cozy Point Ranch show vastly different stream morphologies likely related to the presence of beaver and historic and current agricultural activities. The upstream segment shows a fairly wide riparian habitat of 200 to 300 feet, good floodplain connectivity and little bank erosion. Because the upstream segment on Cozy Point South appears to be in a fairly healthy and proper functioning condition, it could be considered as a reference against which downstream restoration success can be evaluated (Photo 1). The downstream segment of Brush Creek on Brush Creek Ranch, on the other hand, has a much narrower wetland/riparian plant community, which either lacks the deep binding root mases of willows and other riparian shrubs, or supports riparian shrubs in a 100 foot wide corridor. In addition, the stream is experiencing excessive lateral stream channel migration, and contains substantial severe bank instability. Bank stability in this reach appears to be a function of the amount of woody riparian species and bank height. Willows and other woody shrubs appear to provide substantial bank protection where banks are not undercut. Locations with tall, unprotected banks provide little to no resistance to bank erosion since the eroding bank toes are below the rooting depth of the woody species. The project reach contains numerous examples of where erosion has gotten below the rooting depth of riparian species, undercut and collapsed the stream bank, and allowed the channel to migrate laterally unimpeded. Photos 2 through 13 depict numerous examples of bank instability found within Lower Brush Creek. 4.1.2 Beaver Activity Both active and historic (breached) beaver dams were observed throughout the project reach (Photos 14 through 18). By constructing dams that impound water and retain sediment, beaver substantially alter the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the surrounding river ecosystem, providing benefits to plants, fish, and wildlife. Such benefits potentially include higher water tables, reconnected floodplains, an increase in wetland habitat, improved water quality, and increased habitat heterogeneity and complexity (Pollock et al., 2015). However, beaver also pose potential problems, such as clogging up culverts, creating areas of ponded water where it is not wanted, flooding adjacent infrastructure, and cutting down valuable landscape trees. Such conflicts generally arise from an overlap of preferred habitats by both humans and beavers, misunderstandings of how beavers modify their habitats, a lack of management of beaver 114 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 3 populations and predators, or a lack of planning or use of adaptive management on restoration projects. Beaver populations often need to be managed in systems occupied by both humans and beaver. The historic removal and suppression of beaver was and is a common practice on ranches in order manage agricultural operations. However, when beaver are removed and the dams are not activity maintained, they become breached, allowing streams to cut through accumulated sediments and become incised. The present high sinuosity and stream incisement on Lower Brush Creek may be the result of ancient beaver dams that captured sediments, failed, and allowed the stream to cut around dams and then cut down through those captured sediments. These conditions are in strong contrast to the stable, ponded, well-vegetated and somewhat “swampy” conditions found on Upper Brush Creek where flow is relatively slow, spread out and stepped down through numerous beaver ponds. On single thread stream systems where beaver dams back-up water, flow around the edges of the dams can be directed at and erode stream banks around the dam. In addition, the turbulent flow of water passing over a beaver dam on steep, single-thread channels can cause significant erosion of the stream banks below the dam, especially where the stream channels are located in fine grained substrates, are incised, and have high banks such as on Lower Brush Creek. Thus, if beaver are to be a component of the future restoration of Brush Creek, then a dedicated wide riparian corridor will be needed to allow stream corridor movement as a result of beaver dam activity (Photos 17 &18). 4.1.3 Wetland and Riparian Habitat Where present, the riparian habitat of Brush Creek consists of a scrub-shrub wetland/riparian habitat type that primarily consists of mountain willow (Salix monticola), Bebb willow (Salix bebbiana) and sandbar willow (Salix exigua), along with hawthorn (Crataegus rivularis; C. erythropoda), alder (Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia) and river birch (Betula fontinalis). Whitestem gooseberry (Ribes inerme), bush honeysuckle (Distegia involucrata), Woods' rose (Rosa woodsia), and chokecherry (Prunus virginiana ssp. melanocarpa) are also frequently present. The creek banks are often dominated by the invasive reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), and scattered stands of beaked sedge (Carex utriculata), water sedge (Carex aquatilis) and swordleaf rush (Juncus ensifolius) occur in the annual floodplains. Common forbs include cow parsnip (Heracleum sphondylium ssp. montanum), largeleaf avens (Geum macrophyllum), Macoun's buttercup (Ranunculus macounii), chiming bells (Mertensia ciliata), monkshood (Aconitum columbianum), and starry false Solomon's seal (Maianthemum stellatum). Pasture grasses are also extremely common, including smooth brome (Bromus inermis), orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata), timothy (Phleum pretense), and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis). Portions of this willow riparian area are highly degraded by invasive plants and noxious weeds including reed canarygrass, ox-eye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), and plumeless thistle (Carduus nutans). Many areas of the creek bank lack woody riparian vegetation as well. The Brush Creek Riparian/Wetland is best described by the Mountain Willow/Mesic Forb Shrubland, which is common in the upper montane valleys of Colorado (NatureServe, 2011). In addition, there are scattered small individuals and stands of narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia). One particularly large stand of cottonwoods occurs on Cozy Point South where the trees where originally planted along the driveway to the Feinsinger house before the house was moved up valley (Droste, 2011). 4.2 Desired Condition The overall goal of the project is to stabilize the morphology of Lower Brush Creek to restore and maintain the resiliency and ecological integrity of the riparian and aquatic habitats of this area. Currently, Lower Brush Creek lacks lateral stability and floodplain connectivity. Severe bank erosion is occurring, and the riparian zone and vegetation are overly narrowed or completely APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 115 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 4 lacking in some sections. By stabilizing the stream channel with natural materials, elevating the stream bed in select locations, allowing a managed population of beaver as part of the overall management plan on portions of the stream system, and seeding and planting with native woody and herbaceous wetland/riparian plants, a diverse, native and healthy functioning ecosystem will be created. In addition, the newly created habitats will allow for natural connectivity between the stream and the floodplain, which will improve groundwater recharge, stream velocity reduction, erosion protection, and floodwater retention/peak flood reduction. In addition the water quality functions sediment removal and nutrient retention and removal will be improved, as will wildlife habitat functions. 4.3 Design Alternatives Depending on the extent of stream channel degradation and instability, enhancement and bank stabilization options can range from relatively simple treatments of only the most severe problems to full stream channel restoration involving realignment and extensive manipulation of riparian vegetation. One of the challenges of working on small, highly sinuous stream channels is that, although the creek may be small, each meander bend has the potential to require treatment. This can lead to high design and construction costs relative to the size of the channel. However, “band-aid” treatments may not address the full scope of the problems and might require that additional treatment be performed in the future. Treatment materials often include natural large rock and/or large woody materials that can both be incorporated to create a natural, stable system and also provide excellent fishery habitat. Other treatments may include the use of cobble size materials for stream bed enhancement. Given the existing riparian conditions of Brush Creek, the use of large woody materials incorporated into the stream banks may be the preferred option. However, other treatment methods offer benefits as well. Three alternative levels of stream restoration for Lower Brush Creek are presented here for consideration. A Level 1 restoration will include a "do-nothing" approach, and rely on the natural geomorphic and biologic processes, beaver activity and vegetation encroachment to heal the stream system over time. However, those processes are not controlled and can require many decades if not longer to become stabilized. Therefore, human intervention is often needed to speed up the stream processes and geomorphic evolution that naturally occur. A Level 2 approach would include addressing the most severely eroding stream banks with bioengineering techniques while also managing the existing beaver population. Finally, a Level 3 approach would be to remove beaver from the system or aggressively manage populations, and use bioengineering techniques and plantings to restore the entire stream corridor. 4.3.1 Level 1 - The "Do Nothing" Approach The “Do Nothing” approach may be adequate for some shorter sections of the project reach, but there would likely be adverse implications if applied to the entire project reach. Under normal geomorphic processes including channel adjustment to impacts and catastrophic events, stream channels move around and movement can be excessive during the adjustment period. Human encroachment on a stream system often places limits on the amount of channel migration found to be acceptable. In addition, as noted above, beaver can and will modify systems in ways that redirect creeks and back up water to locations that are not acceptable for the intended land use. Another consideration is that beaver populations fluctuate based on predator populations and food supply, but their impacts to the landscape tend to be more permanent than their populations. Additional considerations of the “Do Nothing” approach should include the existing bank erosion to the toe of the hill slope below the houses to the west of the channel. Geotechnical engineering should be consulted to evaluate the risk that this bank erosion may or may not present to those homes. 116 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 5 4.3.2 Level 2 - The Limited Approach A limited approach to the restoration of Lower Brush Creek would include creating and protecting a wider riparian corridor, addressing only the most severely eroding banks with bioengineering, treating incised portions of the stream bed to provide resistance to bed scour, and actively managing beaver populations in order to allow active beaver dams where they can be sustained and provide benefits. Protected Riparian Corridor. Protecting the 200 to 250 foot wide riparian corridor with fencing to exclude horse and cattle grazing on riparian vegetation would promote greater bank stability and the regeneration of the willows and other riparian species. Alterations to the agricultural hayfield and horse corrals will likely be necessary, and all fencing should be wildlife friendly. Bio-Engineered Bank Treatments. Bank erosion causes land loss and increases the sediment load in the stream. Bank stabilization methods that use natural materials will address the severely eroding banks and prevent excessive lateral migration of the creek. Such locations include areas where the more severe and tall bank erosion problems exist, and where the creek is eroding the toe of the hill slope below existing homes. Bank stabilization could be accomplished by moving the channel up to 20 feet to make space for bio-engineered bank treatments that incorporate large and small woody materials (e.g. root wads with extended tree boles) and smaller quantities of rock materials. The type and amount of woody materials to use would be based on local availability. Figure 3 provides a typical plan and profile view of woody bank treatment. Live willow wattles or brush mattresses would also be used as part of the bank treatments in order to help promote revegetation of the willow shrub riparian plant community. Figure 4 illustrates the location of proposed high priority treatment areas on a map that would be implemented under this Level 2 approach Stream Bed Treatments. Stream bed treatments will provide resistance to bed scour and channel incisement. Currently, the stream has an overall slope of around 1%. At this steep gradient, bankfull flow in Brush Creek can mobilize and transport 3-inch to 4-inch diameter cobble. Most gravel and cobble materials observed in Brush Creek are much smaller and, therefore, vulnerable to being moved out of the system. In order to stabilize the stream bed, a series of cobble riffles could be constructed. These would occur in locations to be determined based on a channel profile survey and possibly hydraulic modeling of bankfull discharge. In order to complete the streambed treatment, large cobble materials (3-inch to 12-inch diameter) would be imported and installed in locations to be determined. Photo 29 depicts a natural cobble riffle on Lower Brush Creek. Other stream treatments could include the installation of boulder cross vane structures in order to promote deep pool fishery habitat or log structures (Photo 20). Large woody materials would be incorporated into the cross vane structures to provide fish cover and macroinvertebrate habitat. Log structures would require that logs be driven into the stream bed to secure them and then attach additional woody materials to the driven logs. When properly constructed, the rock structures tend to be more stable and secure than log structures, but log structures initially have a softer aesthetic appeal. Riparian Plantings and Seeding. Riparian plantings and seeding would be limited in scope only to those bank treatments on the most severely eroding slopes. The following seeding and planting guidelines are recommended. Seeding Guidelines. Following establishment of the final grade of the stream channel and its floodplain, the soil would be tilled and the native seed would be hand-broadcast and raked into the soil surface. Mycorrhizae should be applied along with the seed mix to aid in plant establishment. The project will likely require at least two different seed mixes for the different habitat types. After seeding, a hydromulch and tackifier would be applied to the seeded areas. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 117 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 6 Examples of native wetland and upland riparian seed mixes are presented below in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1. Native Wetland Riparian Seed Mix Scientific Name Common Name Wetland Status** PLS lbs/acre Broadcast Perennial Graminoids Calamagrostis canadensis Bluejoint reedgrass FACW 1 Carex microptera Smallwing sedge FAC 1 Carex praegracilis Clustered field sedge FACW 1 Deschampsia caespitosa Tufted hairgrass FACW 1/2 Glyceria striata Fowl mannagrass 4 Hordeum brachyantherum Meadow barley FACW 8 Juncus arcticus ssp. ater Baltic rush FACW 1/8 Juncus longistylis Long styled rush FACW 1/16 Poa palustris Fowl bluegrass FAC 1/2 Perennial Graminoids Subtotal 16 3/16 Perennial Forbs Geum macrophyllum Largeleaf avens FAC 3 Heracleum sphondylium ssp. montanum Cow parsnip FAC 2 Iris missouriensis Rocky Mountain iris FACW 2 Mimumuls guttatus Monkey flower OBL 1 Perennial Forbs Subtotal 8 TOTAL 24 3/16 Table 2. Native Upland Riparian Seed Mix Scientific Name Common Name PLS lbs/acre Perennial Graminoids Elymus elymoides Squirreltail 1 Elymus glaucus Blue wildrye 1 Elymus trachycaulus Slender wheatgrass 4 Festuca idahoensis Idaho fescue 1 Koeleria macrantha Junegrass ¼ Oryzopsis hymenoides Indian ricegrass 1 Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass 4 Poa fendleriana Muttongrass ¼ Poa secunda Sandberg bluegrass ½ Stipa viridula Green needlegrass 3 Perennial Graminoids Subtotal 15 3/4 Perennial Forbs Achillea lanulosa Yarrow 1/8 Penstemon strictus Rocky Mountain penstemon 1/8 Rudbeckia ampla Goldenglow 1/8 Perennial Forbs Subtotal 3/8 TOTAL 161/8 Based on 80 pure live seeds (PLS) per square foot, drill seeded. Double this rate if broadcast. Cost is approximately $100/acre. 118 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 7 Planting Guidelines. The planting plan will identify the species to be planted; the number to plant; planting locations, times and methods; and discuss the need for any supplemental watering. We highly recommend the use of native willow (Salix spp.) cuttings salvaged from nearby populations and planted along the banks of the stream and in appropriate habitats on the floodplain. In addition, large pole plantings of native narrowleaf cottonwood could be used. Finally, planting nursery grown native cottonwood trees would also provide important benefits; however, any nursery grown stock will have to be effectively wrapped with wire up to 4 feet high to prevent being cut by beaver. Table 3 lists native trees and shrubs recommended for planting. Table 3. Recommended Native Riparian Tree & Shrub Plantings Scientific Name Common Name Family Trees Populus angustifolia Narrowleaf cottonwood Salicaceae Shrubs Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia Thinleaf alder Betulaceae Amelanchier alnifolia Serviceberry Rosaceae Betula fontinalis River birch Rosaceae Cornus sericea (C. stolonifera) Redosier dogwood Cornaceae Crataegus rivularis River hawthorn Rosaceae Pentaphylloides floribunda Shrubby cinquefoil Rosaceae Prunus virginiana var. melanocarpa Native chokecherry Rosaceae Ribes aureum Yellow currant Grossulariaceae Ribes cereum Wax currant Grossulariaceae Rosa woodsii Wood rose Rosaceae Salix bebbiana Bebb willow Salicaceae Salix eriocephala var. ligulifolia Strapleaf willow Salicaceae Salix exigua Sandbar willow Salicaceae Salix monticola Mountain willow Salicaceae Symphoricarpos rotundifolius Snowberry Caprifoliaceae Because beaver occur in the project area, all nursery grown riparian plants or plantings of larger diameter tree poles should be effectively fenced off to avoid the damaging effects of beaver. Wire mesh cages have been shown to be the most effective method of protecting woody riparian vegetation. The following guidelines are per Pollock et al. 2015: Wire mesh gauge should be reasonably heavy (e.g., 6 gauge) to prevent beaver from chewing through it. Chicken wire is not recommended. Mesh size should be 6 x 6 inches or smaller. The cage should be 1 to 2 feet in diameter larger than the tree trunk. The cage should extend 3 to 4 feet above the ground or, in colder climates, above the anticipated snow line. Wire fencing can be used to encircle multiple trees. Beaver Management. The use of beaver in restoring stream channels is an emerging science. The Beaver Restoration Guidebook: Working with Beaver to Restore Streams, Wetlands, and Floodplains (Pollock et al. 2015) provides a practical synthesis of the best available science for using beaver to improve ecosystem functions. As evidenced by Upper Brush Creek, beaver are successful in creating a resilient and healthy wetland and riparian ecosystem. However, it may be difficult to establish beaver in those portions of Brush Creek that have a long history of human influence, and particularly in areas which lack woody riparian vegetation. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 119 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 8 One possible solution would be to create Beaver Dam Analogues (BDA) which are based on human-created beaver dams, as detailed in the Beaver Restoration Guidebook. However, BDAs should be used with extreme caution unless an adaptive management approach can be implemented that allows for a longer time frame for restoration and the possibility of failure. Appendix A contains excerpts on BDAs from the Guidebook; please refer to the Guidebook for further information. One advantage of using BDAs, and thus enticing beaver to restore portions of Brush Creek, could be that this method may be a more affordable, yet also effective restoration technique. However, a short coming and perhaps consequence of relying on beaver activity for channel restoration is their lack of predictability. Beaver are mobile and may move into areas where they are not desired. Efforts are already required on Upper Brush Creek to prevent them from plugging a diversion. The inclusion of beaver into a management plan would be best viewed as them being a closely managed component of that plan but not necessarily a player to be counted on. In addition, restoration projects involving beaver are typically completed on longer timeframes than “traditional” restoration techniques. If beaver are to be seriously considered as part of the restoration plan, then a detailed beaver habitat assessment should be performed by a qualified individual and additional data should be collected to identify the specific areas where beaver dams would be beneficial for the stream corridor. 4.3.3 Level 3 – The “Do Everything” Approach A Level 3 approach would essentially incorporate the stream restorations of Level 2, and apply them to the entire ±5,000 foot project reach. In addition to those high priority areas identified on Figure 4, other areas of the bank would also be stabilized. No BDAs would be created and beaver would be highly managed and very limited in number to increase the success of woody riparian plantings. Level 3 actions would include significant bank and bed stabilization and provide greater assurance of preventing the creek from turning existing low/moderate severity erosion problems into moderate/high severity erosion problems, and well as decreasing the risk of new erosional problems from developing. See Figure 4 for the locations of all proposed bank treatment areas. In addition, the Level 3 approach would include a higher number of riparian habitat plantings and seedings corresponding to the larger number of bank stabilization treatments. 4.4 Costs Costs to perform enhancements on streams similar in size to Brush Creek can range from as little as $20 per linear foot to well over $100 per linear foot. Lower cost options typically include only the installation of occasional bank and bed treatments at specific locations to address specific problems. Higher cost options address more systemic issues and often include at least some channel realignment to create a more naturally functioning and stable stream system. Variables that influence construction costs include the degree to which the existing channel is eroding and out of equilibrium, the planned use of the stream, the type of materials used in treatments, and the distance to haul treatment materials to the project site. Overall, there are approximately 1,000 linear feet of bank treatments in the “High Priority” category which would cost between $20,000 and $100,000 to install. If all bank treatments are to occur, then the total bank treatment length would be approximately 1,500 feet and the total costs for stabilization could run in the range of $30,000 to $150,000. Additional costs would include any state, county or federal permits, baseline surveying, and preparation of a construction grading plan. Likewise, planting and seeding costs will vary depending on the acreage to treat. Typically, seedbed preparation, seeding with native seed, and mulching can cost $2,000 per acre. The installation of large nursery grown cottonwoods is often $300-$500 dollars per tree installed, depending on size, while smaller 5 gallon nursery stock shrubs are on the order of $40-$50 per shrub installed. Lower cost options include using native willow stock to “sprig” areas, which reduces both labor and material costs and is strongly encouraged. Other costs may include the 120 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 9 installation of temporary irrigation systems for any nursery planted trees and shrubs, and the installation of wire mesh cages to protect plantings from beaver. Overall, the total cost of seeding and planting will depend on the acreage to seed and the number and density of live plants to install. 5.0 Cougar Creek Concept Restoration Plan 5.1 Existing Condition Cougar Creek is a small intermittent stream north of Brush Creek on the Cozy Point Ranch Open Space parcel (Figure 5). The majority of the riparian habitat consists of river hawthorn and strapleaf willow (Salix eriocephala var. ligulifolia) with minor amounts of chokecherry, serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), whitestem gooseberry, and Woods’ rose. Upstream of the access road, the riparian habitat has a fairly wide floodplain with good channel geomorphology and floodplain connectivity. There is a stand of mature cottonwoods along the western property boundary as well (Photos 21 and 22). Downstream of the road, however, the channel is much more incised, and adjacent to Hwy 82 the stream channel lacks well developed riparian shrubs, and is instead lined with large cobbles and boulders and has two small concrete weirs (Photos 23 and 24). In addition, the manure compost pile lies adjacent to Cougar Creek and it is possible that during heavy precipitation events, nutrient laden water may enter the stream system (Photo 25). Finally, the culvert under the existing access road appears to be very old and should be replaced (Photo 26). 5.2 Desired Condition The overall goal of the Cougar Creek restoration is to enhance and restore the limited function of the northern reach of this stream. The narrow incised stream channel provides very limited floodwater retention/peak flood reduction and sediment removal and nutrient retention removal functions. In addition, the wildlife habitat function is low as there is a lack of structural diversity in the vegetation. Because this stream is a direct tributary to the Roaring Fork River, it is recommended that the stream and its adjacent wetland and riparian habitat be enhanced to improve water quality functions. 5.3 Design Alternatives Two concept design Alternatives for Cougar Creek are presented here. A Level 1 Alternative would include planting additional native trees and shrubs along the steep bank of the northern reach of Cougar Creek in order to create additional woody riparian habitat that would be beneficial to wildlife. However, this alternative would not enhance water quality or floodwater retention/peak flood reduction functions as the channel would remain narrow and incised. A Level 2 Alternative would involve excavating the high left bank of Cougar Creek in the area identified in Figure 5. The side slopes should be reshaped to a more gentle slope of 3:1 or 4:1 and the cobble and boulders should be either buried or removed. Next, high quality topsoil or soil amendments should be added and the site would be seeded and planted with native wetland and riparian plant species. The channel of Cougar Creek could be reshaped to a more sinuous geometry, or several small pools with rock drop structures could be created in order to better control the intermittent and ephemeral flows of this stream. By restoring the landform of this small “flashy” creek, not only will the ecological health of this stream system be restored, but it will also contribute to maintaining the high water quality of the Roaring Fork River just downstream. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 121 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 10 6.0 Future Tasks 6.1 Grading Plan The development of a grading plan for design and permitting will require a detailed survey of the channel and adjacent floodplain in order to topographically map the plan, profile and cross section of the channel. This will be a difficult task given the dense vegetation along much of the creek and would be performed during the fall after leaves have dropped and when the stream flow is low. The survey will provide information on the channel gradient, profile inflection points and channel dimension which will be needed for project design as well as flow modeling, if required. 6.2 Permits & Clearances Several county and federal permits would be required in order to complete the project. 6.2.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Permit The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Section 404 Clean Water Act permit is required for dredging or placing fill in waters of the United States, including rivers, lakes, streams, creeks, and wetlands. Therefore, prior to construction, the wetland boundary must be delineated and flagged according to procedures outlined in the USACE 1987 Manual and 2010 Mountain West Regional Supplement. Then, a wetland permit application will be prepared and sent to the USACE. This project will likely fall under Regional General Permit 12, for Aquatic Habitat Improvements for Stream Channels in Colorado. This permit requires coordination with Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW), including a pre-application consultation preferably on-site. 6.2.2 Pitkin County Permits Ordinarily, Pitkin County requires a Floodplain Development Permit for any work within the designated 100-year floodplain, including bank stabilization, bridges, dredging, installation of irrigation equipment, and revegetation. The permit requirements include maps, an elevation certificate, a revegetation plan, documentation of water rights (if applicable), a site plan showing all existing and proposed contours, a construction management plan, and a USACE permit. In addition, a public hearing would be necessary. However, because the property is owned by the City of Aspen, only a Location and Extent Review would likely be required. This review would include a public hearing to ensure that the proposed plan is consistent with the applicable Pitkin County Master Plan. 6.2.3 FEMA Permits Brush Creek has a mapped 100-year floodplain (FEMA Map #08097C0203C). If the proposed project would impact the floodplain so that the floodplain elevation is raised, then a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) would be required by FEMA. This typically involves HECRAS modeling, which measures the hydrologic or hydraulic characteristics of a flooding source. This information would be provided to FEMA and result in the modification of the existing regulatory floodway, the effective Base Flood Elevations, or the Special Flood Hazard Areas. Once the project is completed, a request must be made to revise the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) to reflect the project. As-built survey data will be needed to support the revision request. FEMA then revises the FIRM and Flood Insurance Study report, if appropriate, by issuing a Letter or Map Revision (LOMR). Early coordination with the Pitkin County Floodplain Development Coordinator is recommended in order to determine if the selected alternative would require a FEMA permit. 122 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 11 7.0 References Nature Serve. 2011. Nature Serve Explorer. http://www.Natureserve.org. Accessed July 6, 2011. Pollock, M.M., G. Lewallen, K. Woodruff, C.E. Jordan and J.M. Castro (Editors). 2015. The Beaver Restoration Guidebook: Working with Beaver to Restore Streams, Wetlands, and Floodplains. Version 1.02. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 189 pp. Online at: http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/ToolsForLandowners/RiverScience/Beaver.asp APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 123 Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed 106°51'30"W 106°51'30"W 106°52'0"W 106°52'0"W 106°52'30"W 106°52'30"W 106°53'0"W 106°53'0"W 106°53'30"W 106°53'30"W 106°54'0"W 106°54'0"W 39°16'30"N39°16'30"N39°16'0"N39°16'0"N39°15'30"N39°15'30"N39°15'0"N39°15'0"N39°14'30"N39°14'30"NBASE: USGS 7.5' Highland Peak & Woody Creek, Colorado Quadrangles Grid Lat/Long WGS 1984 Figure 1. Project Location Map Brush Creek Concept Restoration Plan Cozy Point Ranch Pitkin County, Colorado COLORADO Map Location Ü 1:30,000Scale 1 inch = 2,500 feet Cozy Point South Reference Reach Cozy Point Ranch Project Reach Cougar Creek July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 13 124 336800 336800 337200 337200 337600 337600 338000 3380004345600 434560043460004346000434640043464004346800434680043472004347200Legend Riparian - Wetland Habitat Aquatic Habitat Open Space Parcel Cozy Point Ranch Cozy Point South prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cozy Point Ranch Barn and Office Buildlings Figure 2. Riparian Habitat Map - Aerial View Brush Creek Concept Restoration Plan Cozy Point Ranch Pitkin County, Colorado 1 inch = 750 feet Ü 1:9,000 Date: July, 2016 Background: Bing Maps Aerial Grid: UTM NAD 83 Zone 13 North Brush Creek Project Reach Brush Creek Reference Reach July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 14 APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 125July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space15 126 ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ H H H H H H H H H H 7 5 4 3 2 1 15 14 13 12 11 10 Notes Comment 1 Existing functional beaver dam 2 10 ft tall bank cut 3 Steep bank cut 4 Stream is undercutting steep bank below homes 5 Bank cut and old culvert exposed 7 Install riffle below existing beaver dam 10 Steep bank cut and exposed fence footers 11 Lateral stream migration is threatening road 12 Existing healthy cottonwood 13 Construction debris should be moved 14 Horse entry to water; install cobble to reduce erosion 15 Existing rock grade control structure Legend Existing Aquatic Habitat Existing Riparian Habitat Proposed Riparian Habitat Proposed Bank Stabilization Proposed Bank Stabilization High Priority (H) Proposed Constructed Riffle ^_Notes 10 ft Contours prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Figure 4. Concept Brush Creek Stabilzation Plan Map Brush Creek Concept Restoration Plan Cozy Point Ranch Pitkin County, Colorado 1 inch = 250 feet Ü 1:3,000 Date: July, 2016 Background: 2014 PCOS Aerials July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 16 APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 127 Legend 10 ft Contour Cougar Creek (Intermittent) Existing Riparian - Wetland Habitat Proposed Riparian Expansion Area prepared by: Western Ecological Resource Inc. 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 449-9009 FAX (303) 449-9038 Cougar Creek Project Reach Figure 5. Riparian Habitat Restoration Map Cougar Creek Concept Plan Cozy Point Ranch Pitkin County, Colorado Archery Range Mature Cottonwoods Manure Compost Piles Old Stockpond Proposed Riparian Expansion Area 1 inch = 150 feet Ü 1:1,800 Date: July, 2016 Background: 2014 PCOS Aerials Cougar Creek Reference Reach July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 17 128 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 19 Photo 1. Reference reach of Brush Creek on the Cozy Point South Parcel. Photo 2. Severe bank erosion with a high bank and evidence of channel migration on Lower Brush Creek. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 129 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 20 Photo 3. Evidence of channel migration. Photo 4. Example of severe bank erosion and tall bank. 130 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 21 Photo 5. Eroding bank below house. Photo 6. Eroding and under-cut bank below houses. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 131 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 22 Photo 7. Erosion of an old slump below houses. Photo 8. Typical bank erosion problem on Lower Brush Creek. 132 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 23 Photo 9. Typical eroding bank and migrating bend. Note lack of woody vegetation. Photo 10. Eroding bank adjacent to horse pasture threatening fenceline. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 133 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 24 Photo 11. Typical bank erosion and slumping on Lower Brush Creek. Photo 12. Incised channel but with good riparian vegetation on Lower Brush Creek. 134 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 25 Photo 13. Formerly eroding Lower Brush Creek bank stabilized with rocks. This method is not recommended. Photo 14. Large beaver dam on Lower Brush Creek. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 135 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 26 Photo 15. Small beaver dam on Lower Brush Creek. Photo 16. Example of a washed-out beaver dam on Lower Brush Creek. 136 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 27 Photo 17. Bank erosion where Brush Creek flows around a beaver dam. Photo 18. Bank erosion below a beaver dam on a fast moving section of Brush Creek. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 137 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 28 Photo 19. Natural cobble riffle on Lower Brush Creek. Photo 20. Existing rock check dam on Lower Brush Creek. 138 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 29 Photo 21. Reference area along Cougar Creek, upstream of road. Photo 22. Mature cottonwood grove along Cougar Creek along west property boundary. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 139 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 30 Photo 23. Cougar Creek just below the road. The left bank is lacking in riparian shrubs. Photo 24. Cougar Creek near Hwy 82. Most of the riparian habitat has been eliminated and the stream is lined with cobble and rock. 140 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 31 Photo 25. Manure compost piles adjacent to Cougar Creek (left side of photo). Photo 26. Old culvert in need of replacement. APPENDIX D APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 141 July 2016 Concept Stream Restoration Plan – Cozy Point Ranch – Aspen Parks and Open Space 32 Appendix A. Summary of Beaver Dam Analogue Restoration Technique From the Beaver Restoration Guidebook (Pollock et al., 2015): Beaver dam analogues are the latest iteration in a long history of constructing channel spanning structures for the purposes of restoring stream habitat (p. 82). The addition of BDAs to a fluvial ecosystem with beaver should increase both the abundance and life span of natural dams, which in turn should promote reconnection of floodplain surfaces and an overall increase in both instream and riparian habitat heterogeneity and quality (p. 82). Because BDAs are intended to mimic beaver dams, they require ongoing maintenance and repair, similar to beaver dams (p. 86). There are several ways of constructing beaver dam analogues: (1) constructing starter dams using vertical posts with willow woven between the posts (wicker weave) and fill material (such as cobble, vegetation and mud) placed upstream to create a water-retaining structure, and (2) installing just post lines with wicker weaves, which are highly permeable and may or may not initially retain water, depending on stream discharge; and (3) simply reinforcing existing natural beaver dams with vertical posts (pp. 88-89). Beaver dam analogues have several advantages over natural beaver dams. For example, because they are constructed using posts pounded into the stream bed, they are less susceptible to failure from overtopping flow than are natural beaver dams (overtopping flow is a common failure mechanism for natural dams). Thus they can be placed in incised streams and other locations where the stream power per unit width is higher than what natural beaver dams would be able to tolerate. Another advantage of BDAs is that they can be placed at a specific location and designed to increase the likelihood of a specific outcome. Structure width and height can be controlled, and adjustments can be made as needed to facilitate restoration objectives (p. 88). Similar to the multiple dams found in beaver colonies, placement of multiple BDAs is critical. Multiple placements will increase the overall effectiveness of the system and decrease the likelihood of failure during a large flood (p. 88). 142 ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance AUTHORIZED AGENT: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS AVE. 3RD FLOOR ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970-925-1766-PHONE 970-925-6527-FAX 877-217-3158-TOLL FREE E-MAIL ADDRESS: TITLE MATTERS: CLOSING MATTERS: Nola Warnecke (nola@sopris.net) TJ Davis - (tjd@sopris.net) Brandi Wolfe (pctb@sopris.net) Joy Higens - (joy@sopris.net) Issued By Home Office: 875 Concourse Parkway South, Suite 200 Maitland, FL 32751 Telephone (407) 629-5842 APPENDIX E Title Commitment APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 143 ALTA Commitment Form (6-17-06) COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Westcor Land Title Insurance Company, a California Corporation,("Company"), for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedule A and B and to the Conditions of this Commitment. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company. All liability and obligations under this Commitment shall cease and terminate within six (6) months after the Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed and these presents to be signed in facsimile under authority of its by-laws on the date shown in Schedule A. Issued By: WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned: Authorized Signature CO 1045 * * Pitkin County Title, Inc. 601 E. Hopkins #3 Aspen, CO 81611 144 CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. The term "mortgage", when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed or other security instrument. 2. If the Proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the Proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien or encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named Proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the Proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the Proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. 5. The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $2,000,000.00 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org. APPENDIX E APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 145 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: June 24, 2016 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT24782W2 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-(6/17/06) Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: TO BE DETERMINED (b) ALTA Loan Policy-(6/17/06) Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: (c) ALTA Loan Policy-(6/17/06) Amount$ Premium$ Proposed Insured: Rate: 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: CITY OF ASPEN PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: See Attached Exhibit "A" PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E. HOPKINS, ASPEN, CO. 81611 This Commitment is invalid 970-925-1766 Phone/970-925-6527 Fax unless the Insuring 877-217-3158 Toll Free Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. AUTHORIZED AGENT Countersigned: 146 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land situated in Sections 16 and 21, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M. being a portion of the Cozy Point Ranch as described in Book 690 at Page 5 of the Pitkin County records described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly boundary of the Dedicated Open Space Parcel of the Cozy Point Ridge Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 22 at Page 26 of the Pitkin County records whence the Northwest corner of Section 16 (1913 Brass Cap) bears N 20°21'49" W 502.66 feet; thence N 69°23'59" E 674.16 feet to the Northwesterly right of way of Colorado State Highway No. 82; thence Southerly along the Westerly right of way of Colorado State Highway No. 82 as described in Book 157 at Pages 538, 539 & 540 and Book 575 at Page 976 as follows: S 41°33'37" E 395.21 feet; 591.57 feet along the arc of a curve to the right whose radius is 1,382.50 feet (chord bears S 29°18'07" E 587.07 feet); S 17°02'37" E 1,360.80 feet; 130.20 feet along the arc of a curve to the right whose radius is 2,815.00 feet (chord bears S 15°43'07" E 130.19 feet); S 14°23'37" E 2,435.30 feet; 131.14 feet along an arc of a curve to the left whose radius is 5,780.00 feet (chord bears S 15°02'37" E 131.14 feet); S 15°40'45" E 912.95 feet; S 74°21' W 20.0 feet; S 02°47' W 63.2 feet; S 15°39' E 50.0 feet; S 64°28'14" E 53.22 feet; S 15°40'45" E 2,039.41 feet; S 15°41'37" E 2,084.63 feet to the Northerly right of way of Brush Creek County Road; thence Westerly along the Northerly right of way of Brush Creek County Road as follows: S 43°43'17" W 116.15 feet; S 73°32'00" W 145.71 feet; 404.44 feet along an arc of a curve to the left whose radius is 1,005.70 feet (chord bears S 62°00'46" W 401.72 feet; thence N 19°44' W 38.62 feet to the Southeast corner of Brush Creek Village Subdivision Filing 2 as Platted; thence Northerly along the Easterly line of Brush Creek Village Subdivision Filing 2 as Platted as follows: N 19°44' W 390.00 feet; N 31°25' W 732.00 feet; N 24°00' W 1,831.29 feet; N 64°55' W 340.50 feet to the Easterly line of the Elay Parcel described in Book 228 at Page 599 of the Pitkin County Records; thence Northerly along the Easterly line of said Elay Parcel as follows: N 25°48'20" E 153.17 feet; 370.63 feet along an arc of a curve to the left whose radius is 531.95 feet (chord bears N 05°50'56" E 363.18 feet); 197.92 feet along an arc of a curve to the right whose radius is 630.00 feet (chord bears N 05°06'40" W 197.11 feet); N 03°53'20" E 576.86 feet; thence N 07°01'32" W 1,942.73 feet to the Westerly line of the Dedicated Open Space Easement of the Cozy Point Ridge Subdivision; thence N 20°21'49" W 3,989.84 feet along the Easterly line of said Open APPENDIX E APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 147 Space Easement to the point of beginning. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: THIS COMMITMENT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, IT IS NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLE INSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED INSURED IS NAMED THE COMPANY HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS AS DEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT HEREBY AGREES THAT THE COMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY IS NOT OBLIGATED TO ISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE. 148 SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Reservations and exceptions as contained in Patents issued by the United States of America and the State of Colorado. 8. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Quit Claim Deeds for Highway 82 Right of Way recorded September 8, 1938 in Book 157 at Page 538 and in Book 157 at Page 539. (ADDED) 9. One-Eighth oil royalty in a portion of subject property as reserved to Robert W. Sanders and Zella J. Sanders in Deed recorded April 15, 1949 in Book 166 at Page 576. 10. An undivided 1/2 of all minerals in a portion of the subject property reserved by Robert M. Burlingame in instrument recorded August 26, 1959 in Book 188 at Page 390. NOTE: By instrument recorded December 10, 1965 in Book 217 at Page 352, the said Robert M. Burlingame relinquished any right to enter upon the surface of the land which is subject of said mineral reservations. 11. Right of Way for gas pipeline and appurtenances granted to Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, Inc., by Deed recorded October 19, 1961 in Book 195 at Page 444. 12. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, Inc. Transmission Line Map as it affects subject property recorded April 23, 1962 in Plat Book 2 at Page 273. (ADDED) 13. Right of way for communication systems granted to the Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company by instrument recorded June 2, 1967 in Book 227 at Page 254. 14. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Easement Deed for Well and Pipeline recorded September 1, 1967 in Book 228 at Page 617. (ADDED) 15. Easement for an electric transmission or distribution line or system granted to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., as set forth in Right of Way Easement recorded February 25, 1972 in Book 261 at Page 595. 16. Easement for an underground electric line(s) granted to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., as set forth in Underground Right of Way and Easement recorded February 25, 1972 in Book 261 at Page 596. 17. Easement and right of way for an electric transmission or distribution line or system, as granted to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., in instrument recorded November 26, 1974 in Book 293 at Page 799. (ADDED) (Continued) APPENDIX E APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 149 SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS - (Continued) 18. Terms, conditions, restrictions, reservations, provisions and obligations as set forth in Right of Way Agreement recorded in Book 523 at Page 418. 19. Terms, conditions, restrictions, reservations, provisions and obligations as set forth in Resolution No. PZ-88-18 recorded in Book 568 at Page 139, and Resolution No. 88-81 recorded in Book 569 at Page 610. 20. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Special Warranty Deed to State Department of Highways recorded October 17, 1988 in Book 575 at Page 976.(ADDED) 21. Terms, conditions, restrictions, reservations, provisions and obligations as set forth in Book 577 at Page 768. 22. Terms, conditions, restrictions, reservations, provisions and obligations as set forth in License Agreement recorded in Book 592 at Page 21. 23. Terms, conditions, restrictions, reservations, provisions and obligations as set forth in Mutual Easement Agreement recorded in Book 602 at Page 78. 24. Terms, conditions, restrictions, reservations, provisions and obligations as set forth in Easement Agreement recorded in Book 602 at Page 82. 25. Terms, conditions, restrictions, reservations, provisions and obligations of Lease recorded October 02, 1990 in Book 631 at Page 003 and any amendments thereto, and Crop Lease by and between The Estate of Morgan M. Merrill and John Bullard, dated August 19, 1992. 26. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Agreement recorded January 21, 1992 in Book 667 at Page 289. 27. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Easement Agreement by and between The Estate of Morgan M. Merrill and Brush Creek Landowners Association, Inc., recorded September 29, 1992 in Book 689 at Page 972. 28. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forthin Occupancy Deed Restriction and Agreement for a Caretaker Dwelling Unit Approved Pursuant to Section 3-8.13 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code recorded September 29, 1992 in Book 689 at Page 995. 29. All matters as disclosed on survey of the subject property by Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc., Dated January 13, 1993 as Job No. 17171D and Open Space Parcel as shown on Plat recorded in Plat Book 22 at Page 26. Not excepted shall be the portion of the property designated on said survey as the "out parcel" as such property has vested in the purchaser by virtue of a conveyance to the Seller from the Elay Corporation. 30. All matters as set forth in Deed recorded January 21, 1993 in Book 701 at Page 263. 31. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Easement Agreement II recorded January 21, 1993 in Book 701 at Page 275. 32. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Equestrian Easement and Permit recorded January 21, 1993 in Book 701 at Page 300. 33. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Water Distribution System and Water Sharing Agreement recorded January 21, 1993 in Book 701 at Page 306. (Continued) 150 SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS - (Continued) 34. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Survey of subject property recorded December 9, 1994 in Plat Book 4 at 5.(ADDED) 35. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Lease Purchase Agreement recorded November 28, 1995 in Book 800 at Page 774. 36. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Indenture of Trust recorded November 28, 1995 in Book 800 at Page 822. 37. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Rule and Order, District Court, Pitkin County Colorado recorded August 5, 1998 as Reception No. 420255. 38. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Ordinance No. 98-08, Series of 1999 by the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado recorded June 24, 1999 as Reception No. 432560. 39. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado recorded August 13, 2002 as Reception No. 470914 as Resolution No. 123-2002. 40. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado recorded August 13, 2002 as Reception No. 470916 as Resolution No. 105-2002. 41. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded April 21, 2003 in Plat Book 65 at 25 as Reception No. 481689. 42. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Deed of Conservation Easement in Gross recorded June 30, 2003 as Reception No. 484726. 43. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Administrative Decision recorded April 16, 2008 as Reception No. 548395. 44. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Administrative Decision recorded April 30, 2008 as Reception No. 548703. 45. Easement and right of way for an electric transmission or distribution line or system, as granted to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., in instrument recorded November 21, 2008 as Reception No. 554486. 46. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Memorandum of Water Allotment Contract recorded November 24, 2008 as Reception No. 554504 and Order concerning the Inclusion of Lands recorded October 7, 2008 as Reception No. 553427. 47. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado recorded July 30, 2013 as Reception No. 601985 as Resolution No. 040-2013 and rerecorded to include Exhitbit B on March 3, 2016 as Reception No. 627491. 48. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of Pitkin County, Colorado recorded September 20, 2013 as Reception No. 603894 as Resolution No. PZ-10-2013. (Continued) APPENDIX E APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 151 SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS - (Continued) 49. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission of Pitkin County, Colorado recorded January 6, 2016 as Reception No. 626132 as Resolution No. PZ-6-2015. 152 ENDORSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR LENDERS POLICY FILE NO: PCT24782W2 BORROWER: TO BE DETERMINED The following endorsements will be issued in connection with the Policy to be issued hereunder as referenced above: Form: $ Form: $ Form: $ Form: $ Form: $ Upon compliance with the requirements set forth below, the following exceptions will be deleted from the final title policy. The fee for deleting exceptions 1 thru 3 is $50.00. The fee for deleting exception 4 is $10.00 for Residential Property and $25.00 for Commercial Property. Exception Number 5 will be deleted upon recordation of the documents called for on the Requirement Page. Exception Number 6 will be amended to read: Taxes for the current year not yet due or payable, upon evidence satisfactory that the Taxes for prior years have been paid in full. NOTE: A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's and materialmens liens, executed by the borrower and any additional parties deemed necessary by the Company. The company hereby reserves the right to make additional requirements as may be deemed necessary in the event additional facts regarding development, construction or other building or work are disclosed to the company that may fall within any lien period as defined in the Statues of the State of Colorado, and may result in additional premiums and/or fees for such coverage and any additional requirements deemed necessary by the Company. The Company hereby reserves the right to deny any of the above coverage's at its sole discretion. APPENDIX E APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 153 ENDORSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR OWNERS POLICY ATTACHED TO AND BECOMING A PART OF CASE NO: PCT24782W2 SELLER: CITY OF ASPEN PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY BUYER: TO BE DETERMINED The following endorsements will be issued in connection with the Policy to be issued hereunder as referenced above: ENDORSEMENTS: For a fee of: $ For a fee of: $ For a fee of: $ For a fee of: $ For a fee of: $ Upon compliance with the requirements set forth below, the following exceptions will be deleted from the final policy. The fee for deleting exceptions 1 thru 3 is $50.00 A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against any defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters known by Seller and Buyer. The Company hereby reserves the right to make additional requirements as may be deemed necessary in the event information regarding defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or the like are discovered. The fee for deleting exception 4 is $10.00 for Residential Property and $25.00 for Commercial Property. Exception Number 5 is automatically deleted upon recordation of the documents called for on the requirement page of this commitment. Exception Number 6 will be amended to read: Taxes for the current year not yet due or payable, upon evidence satisfactory that the Taxes for the prior year(s) have been paid. NOTE: A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's and materialmens liens, executed by the seller and any additional parties deemed necessary by the Company. The company hereby reserves the right to make additional requirements as may be deemed necessary in the event additional facts regarding development, construction or other building or work are disclosed to the company that may fall within any lien period as defined in the Statues of the State of Colorado, and may result in additional premiums and/or fees for such coverage. NOTE: A current survey, certified by a Registered Colorado Land Surveyor must be delivered to, approved and retained by the Company for Deletion of Printed Exception No. 3. (NOT REQUIRED FOR CONDOMINIUM OR TOWNHOME UNITS) 154 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURES The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2 NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominium or townhouse unit) (i) of that title entity's general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Owner's policy when issued. Please contact the Company for further information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners or loan closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage". Pursuant to Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11-122) (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing District; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent; (c) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate or other appropriate research will be ordered from the County Treasurer/Assessor by the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by this Commitment. Pursuant to House Bill 01-1088 (CRS 10-11-123) If Schedule B of your commitment for an Owner's Title Policy reflects an exception for mineral interests or leases, pursuant to CRS 10-11-123 (HB 01-1088), this is to advise: (a) There is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals or geothermal energy in the property and (b) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owners' permission. NOTE: The policy(s) of insurance may contain a clause permitting arbitration of claims at the request of either the Insured or the Company. Upon request, the Company will provide a copy of this clause and the accompanying arbitration rules prior to the closing of the transaction. NOTICE REGARDING CONSTRUCTION FINANCING: If it is not disclosed to the company that the loan to be insured hereunder is in fact a construction loan, any coverage given under the final policy regarding mechanic or materialmen's liens shall be deemed void and of no effect. APPENDIX E APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 155 Pitkin County Title, Inc. Privacy Policy We collect nonpublic information about you from the following sources: • Information we receive from you, such as your name, address, telephone number, or social security number; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliates, or others. We receive this information from your lender, attorney, real estate broker, etc.; and Information from public records We do not disclose any nonpublic personal information about our customers or former customers to anyone, except as permitted by law. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information to provide the products or services requested by you or your lender. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that company with appropriate federal and state regulations. 156 Notice of Privacy Policy of Westcor Land Title Insurance Company Westcor Land Title Insurance Company ("WLTIC") values its customers and is committed to protecting the privacy of personal information. In keeping with that philosophy, we have developed a Privacy Policy, set out below, that will ensure the continued protection of your nonpublic personal information and inform you about the measures WLTIC takes to safeguard that information. Who is Covered We provide our Privacy Policy to each customer when they purchase an WLTIC title insurance policy. Generally, this means that the Privacy Policy is provided to the customer at the closing of the real estate transaction. Information Collected In the normal course of business and to provide the necessary services to our customers, we may obtain nonpublic personal information directly from the customer, from customer-related transactions, or from third parties such as our title insurance agents, lenders, appraisers, surveyors or other similar entities. Access to Information Access to all nonpublic personal information is limited to those employees who have a need to know in order to perform their jobs. These employees include, but are not limited to, those in departments such as legal, underwriting, claims administration and accounting. Information Sharing Generally, WLTIC does not share nonpublic personal information that it collects with anyone other than its policy issuing agents as needed to complete the real estate settlement services and issue its title insurance policy as requested by the consumer. WLTIC may share nonpublic personal information as permitted by law with entities with whom WLTIC has a joint marketing agreement. Entities with whom WLTIC has a joint marketing agreement have agreed to protect the privacy of our customer's nonpublic personal information by utilizing similar precautions and security measures as WLTIC uses to protect this information and to use the information for lawful purposes. WLTIC, however, may share information as required by law in response to a subpoena, to a government regulatory agency or to prevent fraud. Information Security WLTIC, at all times, strives to maintain the confidentiality and integrity of the personal information in its possession and has instituted measures to guard against its unauthorized access. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards in compliance with federal standards to protect that information. The WLTIC Privacy Policy can also be found on WLTIC's website at www.wltic.com. APPENDIX E APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 157 158 PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS, THIRD FLOOR ASPEN, CO 81611 970-925-1766/970-925-6527 FAX TOLL FREE 877-217-3158 WIRING INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL TRANSACTIONS REGARDING THE CLOSING OF THIS FILE ARE AS FOLLOWS: ALPINE BANK-ASPEN 600 E. HOPKINS AVE. ASPEN, CO. 81611 ABA ROUTING NO. 102103407 FOR CREDIT TO: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., ESCROW ACCOUNT ACCOUNT NO. 2021 012 333 REFERENCE:PCT24782W2/TO BE DETERMINED APPENDIX E 159 2014 July 22nd City Council Site Visit and Review October 8th Rock Bottom Ranch Review of Farm 9th Brush Creek Metro District November Brush Creek HOA December 11th Roaring Fork Horse Council ________________________________________ 2015 January 6th AVLT 8th Pitkin Open Space and Trails Board 8th Meeting with Aces 15th Meeting with Aces 15th City Open Space & Trails Board 22nd Joint Meeting of Pitkin and Aspen Open Space & Trails Boards February 2nd Tony Vaguer 13th Pitkin County Community Development 17th Building Assessment at Cozy Point with Capital Asset 17th City Council Work Session Yearly State of Parks and Open Space 18th Capital Asset Building Walk Through to Summarize Conditions 19th Food Security Group 24th Molly Haberman “Agriburbia” 26th Tom Moore March 6th Community Development & Capital Asset 9th Edward Sanditen (Water) April 2nd Aspen Historical Society 3th Steve Childs 14th Aces 14th Roaring Fork Horse Council 20th Town of Snowmass Village 30th Woody Creek Caucus May 5th Gwen Garcelon, Roaring Fork Food Council July 13th Town of Snowmass Village August 7th Joel Salatin 25th CRMPI (Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture Institute September 17th Gary Gardner 18th Eliot Coleman APPENDIX F Stakeholders Meeting Log 160 October 9th Western Ecological Resources 20th Sustainable Settings November 27th Aspen Tree ________________________________________ 2016 January 21st OS&T Board Meeting RFVHC Aspen Tree 27th CPR Planning Wester Ecological Resources Fox, Tuttle, Hernandez February 12th Anne Cure, Cure Farms April 12th RFVHC May 6th AVLT June 13th Friends of Cozy Point 16th Pattie and Rob Covington July 13th Archery Community Representatives 28th Eden Vardy – Aspen TREE August 25th OS&T Board Meeting Draft 1 Update September 15th Joint Open Space Board Meeting Plan Reveal Beginning of Public Comment 22nd Draft Plan Feedback Meeting with Cozy Point Ranch LLC October 13th Community Open House @ Cozy Point Ranch 20th Community Open House @ Red Brick Community Center 28th RFVHC Equestrian Center Site Visits Rumble Ridge White’s Ranch Carbondale Polo Facility Lauren Sherry’s Barn November 18th RFVHC Equestrian Center Site Visits Part 2 Iron Rose Ranch Carbondale Polo Facility Strange Ranch 21st RFVHC Walk Through at CPR 22nd Farm Management Experts Natural Resource Conservation Services, Soil Specialists Dereck Wyle Colorado State University Extensions Visit from Small APPENDIX F 161 Cozy Point Ranch Management Plan Do you currently use/visit Cozy Point Ranch? If so, what elements of the ranch do you use/enjoy? __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ What do you see as opportunities for improvement at Cozy Point Ranch? __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ What would your vision be for this open space property? __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Other Comment, Suggestions, Concerns: __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Please Return to: Questions? City of Aspen Parks & Open Space Department We’re open to any suggestions and we’d be 585 Cemetery Lane happy to answer any questions on this planning process. Aspen, CO 81611 Parks Dept. 970-920-5120 Or drop off at City Hall front office Parks Mailbox. Scanned or digital comments may be submitted to: austin.weiss@cityofaspen.com APPENDIX G Public Comment Analysis 162 Analysis Methods & Discussion The Cozy Point Ranch Management Plan strives to align the ranch vision with the community's sentiments and values and their hopes and ideas for its future. In order to achieve this there were two phases of input. Phase one, stakeholder input, was implemented to collect and organize public sentiments into categories. These categories were then used in the management plan to help structure and guide visioning and actions. All comments were distilled down using two of comment thoughts into one representative word or phrase, and created a word cloud using those representative words or phrases. Comments with lengthy explanations were shortened using more succinct language. For instance, if a writer describes the what he or she learned from experiencing Aspen T.R.E.E.’s programs and then brought those techniques to their own yards, the sentences are represented with “agricultural education”. The sentiments about the Cozy Point property. The second method transcribed and categorized comments into eight general categories derived from the common phrases found in method one, research performed by professional. This method the public comments to help identify where people place value on the property. Of the three data collection types, the questionnaire and online comments produced the most diverse comments, meaning those who wrote to these forums described Cozy Point and its potential more in depth, as opposed to writing about one questionnaire and the online comments had an average of 3 values per comment. The emails and online letters expressed on average 2 values. Method one revealed a relatively well-distributed emphasis on open space, community, agriculture, and equestrian values, with mentions of history. Method 2 further broke these categories down to activities are the most important need/use for the Cozy Point Ranch property. Education and youth experiences/activities play a key role in the community values. Many people expressed a love for the natural and rural character of the space. This resources, and ranching history and heritage. From the collected information, key principles to guide the property developed: sustainability, community health, education, historical and natural components of the site to concentrate on, such as equestrian operations and natural resources. Public input from Phase Two collected information about public sentiments, concerns, and desires was then reapplied to the management plan in order to produce a comprehensive and well- rounded plan for Cozy Point Ranch. The second phase further emphasized the themes, principles, and key components generated from Phase One. The Cozy Point Ranch Management Plan aims to represent every theme, value, concern and Decisions for prioritizing actions were based on a combination of public input, the City's goals, and professional research. All public comments can be found in a separate document titled, "Cozy Point Ranch Public Comment,” provided by the City of Aspen Parks Department. APPENDIX G APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 163 164 NATURAL RESOURCES SUSTAINABILITY EQUESTRIAN ACTIVITIES AGRICULTURE PRESERVATION COMMUNITY ACCESS EDUCATION HEALTH SAFETY APPENDIX G APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 165 Sustainable Agriculture Sustainable agriculture comments were measured by mentions of food security and local food production ranging from community gardens, the Aspen T.R.E.E. agricultural learning center, to large scale innovative production. Desires for increased pasture health, and weed- and herbicide-free haying operations were also considered a component of sustainable agriculture. Education Educational values ranged from passive experience in nature to programs such as Aspen T.R.E.E and Camp Cozy Point. Stories described life lessons gained from the agricultural processes included horse care, growing food, animal husbandry. Much of this was expressed in terms of childhood learning, however some adults appreciated the experiences gained from a historical perspective. Natural Resources & Wildlife Care for wildlife and habitat were mentioned often, including concerns about riparian areas, elk and deer migration corridors, and the quality of agricultural fields and water. Ranch Heritage and History This category general marked a value in the valley's agrarian heritage. This includes ranching, agriculture, and equestrian history. Mentions of the "Old Aspen" and maintaining its "rural character" were also considered a hat tip towards historical preservation. Equestrian Mentions of equestrian values were generally framed in a desire to maintain and improve the existing facilities in efforts such as improved safety, drainage, fencing and other upgrades, as well as mentions of equestrian trails, cross country jumps, and other equestrian-centered recreation. Accolades and primary care for the Cozy Point Ranch LLC were also counted in this category. Community Access This category marked the desire to connect the Cozy Point property with adjacent properties, and the potential to improve internal infrastructure. This included the need for better signage and designated parking, as well as multi-modal trails and other forms of passive use associated with public land. Other connections included experience and advancements for community health. The mention of safe use across all components of the site was included. Open Space Activities Includes activities that most associate with open space recreation, for example, hiking, biking, and wildlife viewing. Other open space values include preserving land for the future. Model Landscape There is a strong desire to maintain a landscape that exemplifies the high quality values of sustainability, environmental protection, and historical preservation synonymous with Aspen. The visual presence and cultural significance of its location as the "Gateway" to Aspen and it's past make a model landscape most valued by the community. PUBLIC COMMENT THEMES 166 PUBLIC COMMENT ANALYSIS Comment Type Total Equestrian Sustainable Agriculture Education Open Space Activities General Community Access Natural Resources Model Sustainable Landscape Ranch Heritage & History Letters/Emails 109 67 60 63 20 55 27 14 24 Questionnaires 71 20 67 31 18 35 19 10 14 Online Comments 40 25 28 15 11 5 11 7 7 Totals 220 112 155 109 49 95 57 31 45 Petition Signatures/Letters 178 178 0 150 178 178 0 0 0 *Hiking, Biking, Archery, etc. **Connectivity, access, gathering space ***Gateway, Agriculture and Equine Cooperation, etc. LAND USE FAVORABILITY Individual Comments 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Equestrian Sustainable Agriculture Education Open Space Activities General Community Access Natural Resources Model Sustainable Landscape Ranch Heritage & History LAND USE FAVORABILITY BY CATEGORIES Letters/Emails Questionnaires Online Comments Totals APPENDIX G 167 APPENDIX H Strategic Plan City of Aspen Parks Department 5-Dec-16 * ** ***The City of Aspen Open Space and Trails and potential non-profit lessees do not operate for a profit, however economically sound decisions must be made to meet budget needs. Private for-profit business will need to operate towards sustained profit. Derived from public comment sentiments and the City of Aspen Open Space and Trails priorities. See CPR Sustainability Objectives Table Archery Community Health Site Management Components General Site Natural Resource Agricultural Equestrian Social Ecology Community Connection Sustainability Pillars** Economy*** Cozy Point Ranch Strategic Plans Purpose of Document Serve Envision Guide Vision Statement Preserving our valley’s ranching heritage and fostering the environmental and community health through innovative, sustainable management approaches that provide locally-grown food, enhance equestrian and agricultural operations, and connects the community with the land Preservation Sustainability Education Safety Guiding Principles* 168 APPENDIX H Action Items Short (1-5 years) Mid (5-10 years) Long (10 - 20 years) Coexistence of Components City of Aspen Open Space & Trails organization & support Appoint ranch manager (year one) Re-assess management plan effectiveness Identify lessees (year one)Explore sustainability certifications Collectively organize land use areas (Riparian, dry-land habitat, agricultural land, equestrian land) Design and implement collective sustainability and efficiency measures Design Stewards' Code-of- Conduct Measure baseline of sustainability indicators Infrastructures & Resource Efficiency Upgrade Facilities & Structures Improve drainage on roads and parking lots (includes re- paving office parking lot, re- grading service roads & horse paddocks) Design/construct renewable energy initiatives (photovoltaic, anaerobic digester) Construct staff housing Continue to implement energy efficiency upgrades to existing buildings Wise Waste Management Research efficient composting system Implement composting improvements Improve recycling systems Redesign waste management system (replacing leach field w/ other technology such as anaerobic digestion)General Site Integrate Operations for Sustainable Use Implement new waste management system Cozy Point Ranch Action Plans Goals Strategies Site & Plan Evaluation Re-measure and evaluate sustainability indicators for effectiveness Re-measure and evaluate sustainability indicators for effectiveness Research more and improve staff housing (for all ranch hands) APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 169 Renovate third pan-abode Functioning Ecosystems Preserve sensitive wildlife habitat Assess unattended fields for renovation Identify and restore CDOT impacted land Restore & Enhance Riparian Habitat Select and implement Brush Creek restoration level (Including riparean buffer areas) Select and implement Cougar Creek restoration level (Including riparean buffer areas) Restore dry-land habitat In need Continue weed management Action Items Short (1-5 years) Mid (5-10 years) Long (10 - 20 years) Model Landscape For Food Production & Ecosystem Health Restore and maintain existing fields as needed Expand to AspenMass Implement best hay production practices (nutrient cycles, land use diversity) Expand food production Fix fencing in fields where needed Explore food production in unattended fields AgriculturalGoals Strategies Site & Plan Evaluation Agricultural Land Use Optimize Integrate efficient compost system (see general site actions)Update unattended fields for production (see natural resource actions)Natural ResourcesDesignate Wildlife Habitat & Riparian Areas Dry-lands Wildlife Habitat Restoration Preserved Agricultural Heritage Assess unattended fields for renovation (see natural resource actions) Continue to renovate red barn Restore Historical Buildings & landscapes 170 APPENDIX H Redesign waste management system (see general site actions) Extend water use to the north of Juniper Hill Road Expand to northern unattended fields Continue irrigation infrastructure improvements Collaboration with ditch owners for Improved management Connect & Educate Community Around Agriculture Improvements to Education Facilities Optimize Brush Creek access points Research more staff housing (see general site actions) Construct staff housing (see general site actions) Research education opportunities expansion Connect Community Improve visual presence (see community connection actions. i.e. signs, outreach, etc.) Community garden feasibility study Improve User Safety Improve separate dedicated operational access Formalize visitor entrance (see community connection actions)AgriculturalExpand Capacity Expand to AspenMass Agriculture Water Use Efficiency Expand on sustainability practices Implement sustainable practices (driven by co- designed sustainability measures in general site actions) Continue weed managementAgriculturalCollectively organize land use areas (see general site actions)Implement new waste management system Maintain Ecosystem Health (Land quality, waste, etc.) APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 171 Repair indoor arena (dust control and ventilation) Horse shelter repair Implement sustainable land use practices (driven by co produced sustainability goals in General Site Actions. i.e. composting, rotational grazing, bio-filtration etc.) Integrate efficient compost system (see general site actions) Restore existing pastures as needed Sustainable hay production (see ag. actions) Upgrade facilities for resource efficiency (see general actions) Enhanced Public Access to Equestrian Facilities Improve public trailer parking (Including north field lot. See community connection actions.) Revisit Brush Creek Road crossing Safe crossings of Juniper Hill Rd (see community connection actions) Increase Sustainable Practices improve Public Equestrian AccessEquestrian Action Items Short (1-5 years) Mid (5-10 years) Long (10 - 20 years) Sustainable Equestrian Facility Fencing repair/replace (including bison fencing) Create horse servicing stall Implement paddock redesigns New pole barn for efficient hay storage Eliminate leach fields from paddocks (see waste management in general site actions) Replace grain storage unit Repair large barn (including ventilation, insulation, etc.) Goals Strategies Site & Plan Evaluation Update Equestrian Infrastructure & Safety Redesign paddocks (improved drainage, soil quality, quarantine area and ease of access) 172 APPENDIX H Explore Opportunities For Additional Recreational Uses Plan and construct trails in north end of property Signage (guide, inform, direct) Formalize north property parking Formalize Juniper Hill Road entrance Restrict Ranch Office Road access Improve public trailer parking Design site to ease user conflicts (includes paddock area redesign, dedicated operational entrances, trails, etc.) Increase ranger presence Informational signs (see above "signage" action)Community ConnectionCreate Better Public Access With Signage, Bus Access, & Parking Design/construct soft surface trail from bus stop at Juniper Hill Road Reduce User Conflicts Education & Design Equestrian loop trail design/construction Create cross-country jumping course Action Items Short (1-5 years) Mid (5-10 years) Long (10 - 20 years) Enhanced Archery Range Facilities Parking lot and footpath improvements Formalize target paths Shade structures and picnic tables Re-arrange targets Youth-friendly improvements to targets Explore Opportunities for Events Feasibility study for events Safe Community Accessibility & Recreational Activity Expand Equestrian Recreation Opportunities Site & Plan Evaluation Archery RangeUpgrade Facilities & Introduce Comfort Station Goals Strategies APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 173 Safe Connections to Adjacent Properties Safe Juniper Hill Road crossings Research multi-use trail alignment Construct multi-use trails Revisit Brush Creek Road crossing Connect People to History & Environment Historical Ranching Education Uphold rural character Identify historical education opportunities Improve educational infrastructures Environmental Education Provide environmental education Improve educational infrastructures Improve Safe Access 174 REFERENCES & RESOURCES 1. "Aspen Sustainability Report: environment, economic, social". City of Aspen. 2016 2. Aspen Tree; Together Regenerating The Environment Through Education. Aspen T.R.E.E.. http://aspen-tree.org/. Accessed 01 Septmeber 2016 3. Aspen Valley Land Trust. AVLT. 2014 Http:// avlt.org. Accessed 01 September 2016 4. “Best Management Practices.” Equine Conservation Resource, Inc. NP., 2015. Web. 18 Aug. 2016. 5. Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture Institute. Central Rocky mountain Permaculture Institute. http://crmpi.org/. Accessed 01 September 2016 6. Coleman, Eliot. “The New Organic Grower: A Master’s Manual of Tools and Techniques for the Home and Market Gardener”. Chelsea Green Publishing Company. VT. 1995 7. Cozy Point Ranch. Cozy Point Ranch, LLC. http://cozypointranch.com/. Access 01 September 2016. 8. Davison, Paul H. “Archery and Bowhunter Range Guidelines”. National Field Archery Association. Yankton, SD 9. Dumanski, Julian. "Criteria and Indicators for Land Quality and Sustainable Land Management". ITC Journal. 1997 10. Dumanski, Pierce. "Land Quality Indicators (LAI): Monitoring and Evaluation". Land Use, Land Cover, and Soil Science. Vol. 2. 2006 11. Dumanski, Terry, Byerlee, Pieri. "Performance Indicators for Sustainable Agriculture". The World Bank Rural Development Sector. Washington D.C. 1998 12. "Sustainability and the U.S. EPA". The National Academies Press. Washington D.C. 2011 13. “Energy Audit for the Cozy Point Ranch”. 14. Equine. Penn State Extensions. extensions.psu.edu/animals/equine. Accessed Jan 05, 2017 15. Fabian Wheeler, Eileen. "Horse Stable and Riding Arena Design" 1st edition. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. IW. 2006 16. Garcelon, Gwen. “A Food Hub Study For The Greater Roaring Fork Valley (Aspen to Parachute)”. Roaring Fork Food Alliance. Carbondale, CO. June 2015 17. “Glassier Open Space Management Plan”. Pitkin County Open Space and Trails. Aspen, CO. January 2015 18. “Historic Structure Assessment and Preservation Plan”. Slaterpaull Architects & JVA, Inc. October 2014. 19. Hodgson, Kimberley. “Planning For Food Access and Community-Based Food Systems: A National Scan and Evaluation of Local Comprehensive and Sustainability Plans.” American Planning Association. November 2012. 20. “Jessica Catto Dialogue: Joel Salatin”. Aspen Center for Environmental Studies. Youtube video. Aspen, CO. Aug 13, 2015 <https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=hIdsDg0GDq0> 21. “Northern Colorado Regional Food System Assessment”. Larimer County Plant to Plate. January 2011. 22. “O.S.T Presentation: Supporting Local Agriculture”. Pitkin County Open Space and Trails. Nov 2011 23. Pansing, Cynthia, John Fisk, Michelle Muldoon, Arlin Wasserman, Stacia Kiraly & Tavia Benjamin. “North American Food Sector, Part One: Program Scan and APPENDIX COZY POINT RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN 175 Literature Review.” Wallace Center at Winrock International. Arlington, VA. 2013. 24. Roaring Fork. Food Alliance. NP., 2014. http://www.roaringforkfood.org/. Accessed 18 Aug. 2016. 25. “Roaring Fork Gorge Management Plan”. Pitkin County Open Space and Trails and City of Aspen Open Space and Trails. Aspen, CO. December 2013 26. Rock Bottom Ranch Sustainable Agriculture. Aspen Center for Environmental Studies. 2012. https://www. aspennature.org/restore/sustainable- agriculture. Accessed 07 September 2016 27. Shanks, Lisa Woo, Martha Neuman, Alistair Bleifuss. “Horse Keeping: A Guide to Land Management for Clean Water”. Council of Bay Area Resource Conservation Districts in partnership with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Bay Area, CA. 2001 28. Shere, Amanda R. "Reducing The Environmental Impact Of Horse Keeping". California Polytechnic State University. Santa Barbara, CA 2012. 29. “Sky Mountain Park Management Plan”. Pitkin County Open Space and Trails and City of Aspen Open Space and Trails. Aspen, CO. May 2012. 30. "The City of Aspen Solar Feasibility Study". Core, Sunsense, City of Aspen. Aspen, CO. 2016 31. "What is Sustainable Agriculture". Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE). Unknown date. 32. "West of Maroon Creek Plan". Pitkin County. Aspen, CO. 2013 REFERENCES & RESOURCES