Cooperative design of a water quality monitoring system for the Big Thompson River Watershed, Colorado

1999 Fall.Includes bibliographic references (pages 78-80).Water from the Big Thompson River and the Colorado-Big Thompson Project (a trans-mountain diversion of Colorado River water to the Big Thompson River) is a valuable resource to the North Front Range region of Colorado. The water is utilized for many purposes (e.g. municipal, irrigation, industrial, recreation, and ecosystem health). Over half a million people depend on the Big Thompson system for drinking water. In recent years a slow decline in water quality has been observed at some locations, particularly in reservoirs lower in the watershed. This trend, coupled with increased pressure to provide accurate data about water quality, has lead a group of stakeholders in the Big Thompson Watershed to seek a better way in which to monitor and manage their water, through cooperation. Stakeholders within the Big Thompson Watershed, who make up a group called the Big Thompson Watershed Forum (BTWF), formed a partnership with Colorado State University to design a water quality monitoring network. The design process was broken down into five steps: objectives, variables, monitoring locations, sampling frequency, and cost analysis. Each step was completed in a cooperative manner, through a series of meetings with BTWF members. The meetings provided an opportunity for members of the BTWF to shape the monitoring system based upon concerns and priorities specific to the watershed. The resulting water quality network is governed by five objectives. The objectives address regulatory requirements within the watershed, eutrophication of reservoirs, and the estimation of loads, spatial trends, and temporal trends. A variable list of 38 water quality parameters was defined as the minimum group of variables that meet the informational goals laid out in the objectives. The list included 12 inorganic variables, nine metals, five organic parameters, seven microbiological variables, and five field parameters. Monitoring locations were defined based on the objective list, already existing monitoring sites, and watershed hydrology (e.g. mixing distance, confluence locations, diversions). Thirty-nine monitoring locations were chosen; 29 moving water sites and 10 reservoir sites. Each site was given a priority rating of high or low. The group of 31 high priority sites is the smallest network that satisfies the needs of all BTWF participants. The seven low priority monitoring locations will be sampled if financially feasible. Sampling frequency was determined on a seasonal basis. Three seasons were determined based on annual flow and water temperature cycles. It was originally hoped that historical data could be used to estimate background variability, allowing the sample size required for a specified level of accuracy in mean and trend detection to be determined. Only 11, of the 38 variables on the variable list, had historical data available, and only three, of the 11, had enough data to accurately estimate background variability. Sampling frequencies for variables with inadequate historical data were based a maximum frequency set for each season. During seasons one and two, no variable is to be sampled at a frequency higher than twice a month except for biological parameters. The maximum frequency during season three is monthly. The cost estimate step was utilized as a feasibility check on the monitoring program. The aim for the cooperative monitoring program was more thorough information for the same or less cost. If the monitoring program cost exceeded the sum of all current monitoring budgets, adjustments were made in variables, monitoring sites, and sampling frequency. The final cost estimate was $405,259.00 per year, roughly the same as the$401,500.00 currently spent. In order for an undertaking such as this design and monitoring program to succeed, all participants must be willing to compromise and devote large amounts of time in order to allow for a truly cooperative effort. Those individuals most active in the design process typically represented local entities. The resulting monitoring network therefore gave higher priority to local water quality concerns, highlighting the differences between local informational needs and those defined by state and federal governments. The monitoring system currently includes a set of objectives, variable list, monitoring network, and sample frequency. They have been developed, discussed, and agreed upon by all BTWF participants. The completion of the monitoring network indicates that the BTWF is on its way towards the final goal of a long-term monitoring program operated by, and benefiting all agencies involved

Local Policy Scan on Climate Change Adaptation

The Climate Change Adaptation Policy Scan provides a snapshot of the current state of community-level activities in the United States and Canada for addressing climate change impacts on public health. The report was developed using a combination of literature review, expert interviews, and case studies to identify best practices, common challenges, and keys to success. This report is intended to be useful to public health officials and community organizations; city and county public agencies, especially those involved in city planning and sustainability; and scholars in these fields. The information provided for the emerging area of climate adaptation policy development is organized into four areas. The first two topic areas, Climate Change and Public Health and Strategies for Responding to Climate Change, summarize the information gathered from literature, expert interviews, and case studies. The third area, Background Research, details the three data sources used to develop the report, and the fourth area, Research Method, describes the data collection process

Planning and Urban Ecology: A New Elective in City and Regional Planning

Since recently joining the CRP department, Adrienne Greve has been using her background in the sciences to strengthen the relationship between the fields of planning and urban ecology with a particular emphasis on water systems. In this article, together with seniors Corbin Johnson and Kevin Waldron, she writes about her new elective and an important class project, which is monitoring the impacts of the new campus housing on the campus creek system

Local Climate Action Planning

The topic of conversation is Local Climate Action Planning, a book co-authored by Michael Boswell, Adrienne Greve, and Tammy Seale, published in 2011 by Island Press. The three authors are joined in conversation by Elizabeth Lowham of Political Science.https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/convocpauth/1003/thumbnail.jp

An Assessement of the Link between Greenhouse Gass Emissions Inventories and Climate Action Plans

In this article, we review local climate action plans and their associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventories from 30 U.S cities in order to assess the degree to which climate action plans are informed by such inventories and to identify choices and assumptions the inventories require that may influence climate action plan policies and proposed actions. We hope this will help planners preparing climate action plans make informed, clear, and defensible choices, as well as optimize policy development and implementation in their communities. In addition, we hope that this research will contribute to refining future GHG emissions inventory protocols and climate action planning methods

Transportation policy for campus climate action planning: Process and policy implications

This article discusses the innovative methods used to complete the transportation components of Cal Poly’s Climate Action Plan (CAP). The campus\u27s CAP was completed by a BSCRP studio during the fall and winter quarters (2015-2016AY) in collaboration with Facilities Planning and Capital Projects. Professors William Riggs and Adrienne Greve (instructors for the studio along with Chris Clark) developed the methods discussed here, and C. Kai Lord-Farmer was the graduate assistant who assisted in completing the technical analysis

Assessing Interdisciplinary Learning Styles

The interdependent world we live in is increasingly reflected in the interdisciplinary nature of our professions. As professors, we are frequently required to teach students from various disciplines in our courses and to engage in interdisciplinary research and teaching efforts. This is perhaps even more the case when teaching at a polytechnic university. While it is indisputable that such endeavors enrich our understanding of complex issues and benefit the learning experience of students and faculty alike, they also bring with them new challenges that need to be met. One such challenge is the diversity of learning styles that students bring to the classroom. Many of us are well aware of the vast literature on students’ learning styles (e.g. Myers, 1962; Schroder et. al., 1967; Paivio, 1971; Kolb, 1976; Messick, 1976; Dunn & Dunn, 1978; Keefe, 1979; Riding & Sadler-Smith, 1992; Larsen, 1992; Jonassen & Grabowski, 1993; Biggs, 1993; Vermunt, 1996). Far less research has been done on the distribution of learning styles across the disciplines and how they affect the learning behavior of students in different majors and their response to various teaching and assessment strategies. In order to derive the maximum benefit from interdisciplinary teaching, it is essential that we understand such differences. In a collaborative project that involves scholars from five different disciplines, we are asking the following research questions: 1) How are learning styles distributed across different majors? 2) Is there a tendency for students to self-select into different majors based on their learning styles, or are certain learning styles influenced by departmental and cultural pressures? 3) How do students in different majors perform in different learning environments? 4) Is there a correlation between students’ learning styles and how they respond to various assessment techniques? At the conference, we present preliminary findings from the survey that offers insight into the research questions listed above. In order to answer these questions, we will conduct a survey that measures learning styles and various aspects of learning and assessment both across learning styles and across disciplines. The survey will be administered to majors from architecture, engineering, political science, the social sciences, and urban planning. In order to fully answer our questions, we plan to conduct a four-year panel study that will allow us to observe students in a diversity of majors throughout their career at Cal Poly

Cal Poly Climate Action Plan

The Cal Poly Climate Action Plan (PolyCAP) is designed to achieve the California State University (CSU) Chancellor’s mandate to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2040 (CSU, 2014). California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) Facility Management and Development (FM&D) and the City and Regional Planning (CRP) Senior Community Planning Laboratory developed the PolyCAP during the Fall 2015 and Winter 2016 quarters, with editing and refinement in subsequent quarters. The goal of the PolyCAP is to reduce Cal Poly’s GHG emissions and to adapt the Campus to a changing climate. The PolyCAP aims to exceed the CSU mandate and achieve Net Zero GHG emissions by 2050, in accordance with Cal Poly’s signing of the Second Nature Climate Commitment. Cal Poly is updating its Master Plan to 2035, examining University academics, buildings, housing, transportation, agriculture, and more. The PolyCAP is intended to aid the Draft Master Plan Update to achieve its goal to be responsive to climate change. Many strategies of the PolyCAP can also be implemented as mitigation measures in the Draft Master Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR)

Rio de Janeiro: Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas

Energy conservation and climate change impacts are priority issues for planning in the US and are becoming so around the world. Adrienne Greve writes about her experience as an invited speaker in the first international conference of the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil which discussed the planning and housing needs of the low income populations

Mainstreaming Climate Adaptation Planning

Mainstreaming Climate Adaptation Plannin