HomeMy WebLinkAboutPrairie Dogs at Valmont City ParkAttachment for 5.
City of Boulder Parks and Recreation
~ Parks Planning and Construction Division
MEMORANDUM
To: Members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
From: Chris Dropinski, Director of Parks and Recreation
Ken Ramsey, Superintendent of Parks Planning and Construction
Kate Bemhardt, Associate Parks Planner
Date: August 31, 2000
Subject: Prairie Dogs at Valmont City Park
PURPOSE:
In the June Pazks and RecreaAOn Advisory Boazd Study Session, the Boazd agreed with the
contmued relocahon of praine dogs requued to proceed with the Wonderland Creek and
Valmont City Pazk Phase 1 construction. The Boazd requested that praine dogs hvmg outside of
these construcuon zones remam on site unt~l the Boazd had an opportumty to discuss the
possibility of retaznmg these prazne dogs wrtlun the developed pazk The purpose of this
memorandum is to provide the board with mformauon wtuch may assist m tlus discussion.
~ BACKGROUND:
The following background documents aze mcluded:
• Memorandum to City Council dated January 18, 2000 proposmg an ordmance and
measures to protect and manage prazne dogs.
Draft Interdepartmental Pohcy for Praine Dog Management and Relocaaon on
City-Owned Lands
Map (dated November 1999) showmg locauon of exisang prune dog commumaes
wittun crty hmits
Memorandum to City Council dated June 28, 2000 Update about praine dogs witlun
Valmont City Pazk and Wonderland Creek Channel pro~ect azeas (map of locauon of
praine dogs at Valmont City Pazk)
Below is a summary of the esumated acres of prazne dog habitat and number of praine dogs on
public and private property wittun the city and county of Boulder.
• C~ty of Boulder Area I, II, III : 15 praine dog commumhes on pubhc and pnvate property
with an est~mate (November, 1999) of 1560 or more prazne dogs. Ttus estimate has not
been updated.
• City of Boulder Open Space 1,200 acres of praine dog habitat occupied by pra~ne dogs.
No specific ammal count is avazlable.
• Boulder County Open Space 9,600 acres of designated prauie dog habitat. 890 acres are
,~-, currently mhabited by prazne dogs. Based on GIS survey of the praine dog commuruhes,
i.~.
an average of 15 praine dog holes per acre, and an average of 5 to 6 animals per hole, ,,.,,,
there is an eshmated 65,000 to 85,000 praine dogs on Boulder Counry Pazk and Open w
Space property
Witlun the city hmits, an addihonal prazne dog community has been observed neaz
Pleasant View Soccer Fields
Boulde~ County pnvate property Staff did not locate mformation about the number of
pra~ne dog commumues on private property m Boulder County
The Ci[y of Boulder Mountain Parks and Open Space programs have set aside over 5000 acres of
public land as Prazne Dog Habitat and aze committed to the long-term management of these
azeas as funchomng grassland ecosystems These azeas contazn praine dogs or aze available for
relocaung prazne dogs from other development pro~ects
Staff consulted the followmg people to obtam mformation for ttus discussion about praine dogs.
• Ecological consultants: Wanen Keammerer, Dav~d Buckner, Ron Beane
City of Boulder Staff Ann Wichmann, Mountazn Pazks Manager, Bryan Pntchett, Open
Space Natural Resources Manager, Bev Johnson, Plamm~g and Open Space Planner
US Department of Fish and Wildhfe• Dave Seary
Boulder County Pazks and RecreaUOn Wildhfe Speciahst Rich Koopmann
• Boulder County Health Department Environmental Health Speciahst Gaby Hoefler
• Boulder County Commissioner and Director of Boulder County Open Space: Ron Stewart
• Footlulls Pazk Distnct Recreahon Manager• Cazolyn Keith
The mformation below provides a very general background about the sub~ect of praine dogs and
the possibihty of creaung a prazne dog preserve wrttun an urban pazk. Ttus mformation ~s not
mtended to represent a comprehensrve techmcal study.
PRAIRIE DOGS:
1. How many acres of property is required to support a prairie dog community?
Chppinger (1989) eshmated a nummum habitat azea s~ze per family umt is .61 acres. Another
es[imate is 50 burrows per hectare (2.47 acres). One source suggests that a family unrt would
contain 1 male, 1 to 4 females, and pups A cotene is a close kmt family complex or an
extended fanuly unrt, funct~omng somewhat hke a commune withm a communiry Hoglan, The
Black Tailed Praine Doe, suggests that the number of azumals m a cotene can range between 5
and 10 up to as many as 26. He suggests that a smgle cotene requues slightly less than I/: to 1
hectaze A praine dog communiry should contam multrple cotenes to support healthy breeding
habits.
~*-
2. What might we anticipate in terms of an e~cpanding prairie dog community?
Female prairie dogs usually don'[ breed unhl their second yeaz, and l~ve 3 to 5 years. A htter can
contam 4 to 5 and up to 7 pups. It is esUmated that a female might produce 3 to 20 young m a
hfetime. Mortality esumates for adults is about 40% For the young, it may be higher '"~"`"
~ 3. What might we anticipate in terms of predator control of a small fenced prairie dog
4. If the prairie dogs were limited to a specifc area by fencing, how might the food supply
be managed?
It would be very impor[ant to site a fenced praine dog commumty on properry which contams
excellent grazing oppoRunities However, the pratne dogs would definrtely over graze an
enclosed area without consistent tkunrung of rhe populauon. If the grazmg azea is over grazed,
unpalatable plants would thnve, wluch would hkely mclude noxious weeds such as bmdweed,
knapweed, and tlustle. Praine dogs do seem to graze on some of the noac~ous weeds. If the grass
species wittun the fenced azea aze grazed to exunction, it would be difficult if not imposs~ble, to
revegetate th~s area of ground unless the prazne dogs could be removed long enough to allow for
the establ~shment of a new grass stand.
community ?
Natural predators such as fox, coyote, and badger will probably not attempt to hunt prazne dogs
who are protected by a fence. Air bome predators such as hawks aze less hkely to select prazne
dogs from a fenced commumry wrthm a developed urban pazk sethng. It is anticipated that there
would be little control of ttus fenced praine dog commumry through predators.
5. How might we handle thinning the prairie dog population and at what cost?
If there aze few predators providmg a natural control of [he praine dog popula[ion w~[tun ttus
fenced area, the populatron will grow rapidly The City would need to provide ongomg
~ management of the populahon, removmg or relocahng ammals on a yeazly basis as reqtured. The
amount of addihonal prauie dogs that would need to be relocated each yeaz depends on the size
of the commuruty and the bu-th success rate. It is generally thought to be best to remove entire
cotenes and to relocate them as a group. Another opaon for populauon control is bemg explored
by Colorado State Umversity students who aze studymg contracepuve options for prairie dog
population control.
The cost of relocatmg approximately 230 plus dogs from the Valmont City Pazk si[e (1999-2000)
was $2Q900 plus $12,000 for pra~rte dog fencmg to protect a neighbor from the relocated
commumty. An addit~onal $11,000 was expended m July to contazn the prune dogs outside of
Phase I and Wonderland Channel construction azea. Other agencies have spent up to $150 per
prazne dog for relocation. The cost of movmg the praine dogs is mcreasmg because sites
avazlable for relocat~on do not have existrng burrows. The cost per anunal relocahon is
sigmficantly tugher if the movmg agency must trench new burrows and provide livmg boxes
withm the new burrows to assist with the transihon to a new si[e.
At this point m time, there is only one pernutted prazne dog relocatmg firm m the Boulder area,
Wild Places Inc As demand for relocat~on services mcreases relative to development, ttus firm
has been mcreasmgly difficult to cantract for work and has not been able to meet deadlines.
In order to meet the needs for relocatmg praine dogs, Boulder County recenfly kured three full
ume employees to work e~ght months of the yeaz on prazne dog relocauon or removal efforts.
^ The county moved 300 prazne dogs last yeaz and ant~cipate movmg 300 prairie dogs this year to
~
keep the prazne dogs wiflun designated hab~tat.
~
~
5. What kind of fence would you need to keep the prairie dogs in place?
It was suggested that an 8 foot chazn hnk fence with 4 feet buned m the ground and 4 feet above
ground would keep a prazrie dog populat~on m place. The fence above ground should be covered
wrth a fabnc wtuch would not allow the prazne dogs to see beyond the fence Silt fencmg, hay
bales, and other fencmg tectuuques have proven to be only margmally effective.
6. How would fencing a community prairie dogs affect their social structure?
There aze a number of soc~al concerns to consider if an isolated and small fenced praine dog
commumty is created. There would need to be a number of cotenes m ttus fenced preserve or
mtense inbreedmg will occur. Young males normally migrate out, or get kicked out, of [heir
cotene when the~r mothers aze ready to breed agam These males nugrate to find d~fferent
colomes for breedmg, which is an mbuilt system to prevent mbreedmg. In a fenced situaUOn, the
removal of prazne dogs would ideally address relocadng extra males and/or removmg an ent~re
coterie In some social situaUOns, a female might need to migrate from the cotene.
If the praine dogs expenence a sense of overcrowdmg wrthm the fenced preserve, they will start
to kill each other
7. Can plague carrying fleas transmit the plague to adults, children, domestic dogs in close
vicinity to a prairie dog preserve?
The plague luts almost every prune dog commumry at some pomt m t~me The plague is camed ,.~,,,
by fleas, which are in tum camed on sqmsels, cats, dogs, rabbits, fox, coyote, praine dogs, and
other animals. Praine dogs are unable to withstand the plague and die. The fleas will not remam
on a dead animal, and will seek a new host. F1eas can ~ump appro~mately 1 to 2 feet. The plague
could be transmitted from the prairie dog commumry to domestic dogs or humans who might
come mto contact with the praine dogs witkun the urban pazk sethng.
The plague can be treated for humans, however if the plague is mismterpreted as the flu and the
person dces not seek med~cal treatment, rt can enter the blood and be fatal. Tlus is fazrly rare.
If the plague occurs m the fenced prurie dog commumty withm the park, the dead animals would
need to be treated and removed, and the s~te prepazed for a new colony. Public park use would
need to be managed to allow for this act~vity.
The US Department of Fish and Wildhfe is studymg the effectiveness of a cherrucal dust called
Delta Dust to reduce the number of fleas wittun a praine dog commumry
8. Can you create a prairie dog ecosystem within this fenced preserve?
A funcnomng praine dog ecosystem requires at least 100 acres to support the full and adequate
range of plants, msects, birds, and animals assceiated with ttus ecosystem. Prune dogs maintain
a dynanuc commumty by expandmg and/or movmg their populations as needed for food, safety,
and habrtat.
~
A small fenced prazne dog commumty witlun the pazk w~ll funchon more Llce a zoo, offenng an
~ educat~onal opportumty. As such, it will requue the mtensive mazntenance of a zoo, absent the
natural features wluch support the v~tahty of a funct~omng pra~ne dog ecosystem. Of the wildlife
consultants questioned, all agreed that it is preferable to preserve or create prazne dog
commuruues m lazge open azeas, such as the City or County Open Space properties, designated
specifically for habitat protecdon. All agreed that creatmg this limited and artificial environment,
located witlvn close proximity to areas des~gned for mtensive use by people, mcludmg cYuldren
and domestic pets, is not desuable from a standpomt of supportmg a healthy pra~ne dog
commumry and grassland landscape, although they felt that the praine dogs would survive m flus
situation ~f managed cazefully
9. Do other municipalities have a similar situation and how do they handle it?
One Colorado agency has a 10 to 15 acre prazne dog colony withm a lazge urban park. Due to
kvgh mamtenance requirements and mazgmal funcuon of fencmg opt~ons, they have removed all
fences ongmally mstalled to contazn the praine dogs The praine dog azea is surrounded by
concrete s~dewalks. The praine dogs do migrate into the park causing d~srupt~on for recreauonal
activities and direct damage to the turf and to the imgation system electnc wiring. Prurie dogs
that rmgrate outside of the colony into the developed pazk need to be managed. When the plague
entered ttus prune dog commumty, staff and the public dealt with associated issues mcludmg:
domeshc dogs entenng the prazne dog commumty and removmg dead praine dogs, hawks
droppmg dead praine dogs onto ad~acent turf azeas, and clean-up of the dead azumals.
^ VALMONT CITY PARK DEVELOPMENT / OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
~,r,,, The current approved Valmont City Pazk Concept Plan and Site Review Plans were created with
the understandmg that the existmg prazne dog commumty would be relocated to surtable pazk or
open space natural grassland si[es. If a prazne dog preserve is a desired activity or use for a
porhon of Valmont City Pazk, the concept plan and possibly the Site Rev~ew plans would need to
be revised, mcludmg full publ~c and crty agency reviews. Addiuonally, a wildlife management
plan, associated staff, relocahon sites, and budget would need to be identified for the long term
management of tkus wildlife preserve.
The mformaaon obtamed by staff leads us to conclude that the development of an urban prune
dog habIIat on the Valmont City Pazk s~te would not result in a healthy, humane habitat for
prazne dogs.
1. Does the Board agree that a better solution is to act~vely pursue the relocation of praine
dogs to the City of Boulder Open Space designated prazne dog habitat so that the praine
dogs can enjoy a more viable ecosystem and a more viable social structure~
At[achments.
A. City Council Memorandum, January , 2000
B Draft Interdepartmental Pohcy
C. Praine Dog Inventory Map
D. City Council Memorandum, June, 2000
~-
r~..
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF BOULDER
CTTY COUNCII. AGENDA TTEM
~
~
MEETING DATE: January 18, 2000
(Agenda Item Preparation Date: January 5, 2000)
AGE.~iDA TTTLE:
Consideration of items relating to Praine Dogs.
a. Emergency adopnon of Ordinance No. 7019 amending Seciion 6-1-9, "Poisoning
Animals Prohibited," B RC. 1981, concerning prairie dogs.
b Considerauon of a Resolurion Concerning the Protection and Management of
Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs
REQUESTING DEP.~iRTMENT:
Planning Department
Peter Pollock, Planning Director
Bev Johnson, Environmental Planner
FISCAL Il~ACT:
The proposed ordinance may increase department costs related to prairie dog relocauon,
development of biological inventories, and habitat protecrion.
PURPOSE:
Addiuonal background matenal on tlvs item can be found in the November 16, December 7,
1999, and January 4, 2000 first and second reading packets. The emergency ordinance in
Attachment A reflects the amendmenu that Council made to the ordinance at the second reading
on 7anuary 4, 2000 This rtem aiso includes a proposed resolution (Attachment B) for Council
adopuon concernutg the protection and managemem of black-tailed prairie dogs
BACKGROUND:
The proposed resolution m Attachment B reflects the policies and goals of the City concerning the
management and protection of prairie dogs. The resolution expresses the intent of the City to
protect and enhance prairie dog habitat on City-owned lands. It also reinforces the prairie dog
~^
i..
protection ordinances Council is adopting by ensuring that the City vmll work with private and
public landowners within Boulder to accommodate relocation needs as they arise The adoption """~
of both the emergency ordinance and the resolution will provide strong insurance that prairie dogs °`
wili not be exterminated witlvn Bouider or on City-owned properties This resolution will be
followed by an Interdepartmental Policy adopted by the city manager which outlines protocol and
methods for prairie dog management and relocation on City-owned lands Tlus policy wili be
forwarded to Council for commeirt prior to adoption by the city manager.
PUBLIC COMN7ENT Ai~iD PROCESS:
This item is being heard at this public meeting, advertised in the Darly Camera
STAFF RECOIVIlVIENDATION:
Staff recommends that Council adoQt both Emergency Ordinance No. 7019 amending Sechon
6-1-9, B RC 1981, concerning prairie dogs and poisoning animals and the resoluuon conceming
the protectzon and management of black-tailed prairie dogs
Approved By
~,,
Ronatd A Secrist
Ciry Manager
ATTACHNIENTS
Attachment A. Proposed Ordinance amending Section 6-1-9, "Poisoning
Animals Prohibited," B RC 1981
Attachment B Resolution Concerning the Protection and Management of
Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs.
Attachment C Memo from the City Attomey's Office regarding
externunation of prairie dogs.
ATTACHMENT A
ORDINANCE NO 7019
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6-1-9, B RC 1981,
CONCERNING PRAIItIE DOGS AND POISONING Ai~1Il~fALS •"'*
~ BE TT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCII. OF Tf~ CITY OF BOULDER,
COLORADO'
Section 1 Section 6-1-9, B R.C 1981, is amended to read
6-1-9 Poisoning, Trapping, or Killing Certain Animals Prohibited.
(a) No person shall poison or distribute poison in any manner with the intent to poison any
animal.
(1) It is a specific defense to a charge ofviolating this subsecuon that the person
intended to poison house mice (mus musculus), deer mice (peromyscus
maniculatus), or Norway rats (rattus norvegicus), ~- --a~-'° -``-_ .~..._ ,.,,_...,,_,.
', by the use of a poisonous substance which was either
approved for such use by the United 5tates Emiironmental Protection Agency or
~ee~was applied by a certified operator regulazly engaged m the
business of fiamigarion or pest externunation and was so licensed by the State of
Colorado pursuant to Section 35-10-114, C R S
(2) It is a specific defense to a chazge of violating this subsection that the person
intended to poison black-tailed prairie dogs (cynomys ludovicianus) after giving
the city managez fifteen months advance notice of intent to do so, engaging in
~ good faith consultation with the manager concerning alternatives, making a good
faith effort to relocate the anunals, and by the use of a poisonous substance wluch
was either approved for such use by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency or was applied by a certified operator regularly engaged m the business of
fumigation or pest extermination and was so licensed by the State of Colorado
• pursuant to Section 35-10-114, C R S
(3) It is a specific defense to a charge of violating this subsecUon that the person who
poisoned the anunal owned or was responsible for a dam, or acted at the direction
of such a persoq and that removal of the animal was necessaty to protect the dam
and to comply with the Dam Safety Manual published in January 1988, by the
Colorado State En,gineer's Office, or any successor editioq and the poison was
applied by a certified operator regulazly engaged m the busmess of fumigation or
pest externunarion and was so licensed by the State of Colorado pursuant to
Section 35-10-114, C R S
(b) No person shall use, set, place, maintain, or tend any leg-hold trap The aty manager shall
conSscate any leg-hold trap found m violation of this subsection and dispose of it as the
manager deems appropnate
(c) No person shall use, set, place, mamtain, or tend any mechazucal trap which is designed or
~ used to capture or kill any animal and does not require the presence of a human operator
....
to so capture or kill. It is a specific defense to a charge of violating this subsection that ,,,,,,
the person had the express permission of the owner of the land on which the trap was set. ~
This subsection does not apply to public officials in the exercise of their duties.
(d) No person shall knowingly Idll any black-tailed praine dog (cynomys ludovicianus).1
(i) It is a specific defense to a chazge ofviolating this subsection that the person killed
the animal by poison only after giving the city manager fifteen months advance
notice of mtent to do so, engaging in good faith consultation with the manager
concerning altematives, and makuig a good faith effort to relocate the animal
(2) It is a specific defense to a charge of violahng this subsection that the pezson who
killed the animal owned or was responsible for a dam, or acted at the d'uection of
such a persoq and that removal of the animal was necessary to protect the dam
and to comply with the Dam Safety Manual published in January 1983, by the
Colorado State Engineer's Off ce, or any successor edition
Section 2 This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and weifaze of
the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern
Section 3 The council deems it appropnate that tlus ordinance be pubGshed by title only
and orders that copies of ttus ordinance be made ava~lable m the o~ce of the city clerk for public
inspection and acquisition.
Section 4 The city council finds that an emergency e~rists due to the threat to black-tailed
prairie dogs pending enactment of this ordinance, and accordingly orders that this ordinance be
effective immediately upon final passage
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY
TTTLE ONLY this 16th day ofNovember, 1999
Mayor
Attest
City Clerk on behalf of the
Duector ofFinance and Record
~.,
READ ON SECOND REr1DING, AME~IDED, AND ORDERED PLBLISHED BY
TITLE ONLY this 4th day of January, 2000
~
Mayor
Attest.
Ciry Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
~
~
READ ON THIItD READING, PASSED, ADOPTED AS AN EMERGENCY .a..
MEASURE BY A TWO-THIRDS VOTE OF COUNCII. MEMBERS PTLESENT, AND ~3
ORDERED PUBLISHED BY 11TZE ONLY this day of
Mayor
Attest
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director ofFinance and Record
~
~^*~
~ RESOLUTION NO
A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE PROTECTION AND NfANAGEMENT
OF BLACK-TAILED PRAIItIE DOGS
WI~REAS, the City of Boulder, Colorado, recognizes that the black-tailed prairie dog
(Cynomys ludavrcirnrus) is a vital and important species to the grasslands of the Boulder Va(ley;
and
WI~REAS, the City ofBoulder values prairie dogs as a vital element in grassland
ecosystems, and
Wf~REAS, black-tailed prairie dog popularions aze declining throughout their range due
to the rapid loss of grassland habitat and are, therefore, a species of local concern, and
WE~REAS, the City of Boulder is committed to the protecuon of praine dogs and theu
habitat witlun the Boulder Valley; and
VVf~REAS, the City's goal is to effechvely eliminate any need for poisoning or
extermination of prairie dogs on private and public lands in Boulder and on City-owned lands in
~ the Boulder Valley; and
Wf~REAS, the City ofBoulder, through its Open Space and Mountain Parks programs
has set aside over 5000 acres of public land as Praine Dog Habitat Conservation Areas and is
committed to the long-tecm management of these azeas as functioning ~assland ecosystems.
NOW, TI~REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT TF~ CITY COUNCII. OF TF~ CTTY
OFBOULDER,COLORADO,THAT
1 The City Counc~l directs the Crty Manager to estabGsh policies that will emphasize
praine dog habitat protection as a priority on all public and pnvate lands, unless the presence of
prairie dogs is in conflict with the e;dsting or planned use ofthe site, or the public health and
safety on or near the site is injeoQardy due to the presence of prairie dogs.
2 The City Council directs the City Manager that when the protection of prairie dog
habitat is in conflict with the intended use of the site, relocation will be the method for removing
the prairie dogs from the site
3 T'he City Council directs the City Manager to estabGsh policies such that the City
of Boulder will accommodate all praine dog relocarion needs of pnvate and public landowners in
the city Further, that City acceptance of relocated prairie dogs is based upon the condition that
the landowner of the properry where prairie dogs aze to be removed will take the respons~bility
~
tr..
for all costs of relocation and receiving site prepazation. Open Space properties will be the ~
primary source of receiving sites for relocated prairie dogs, akhough other City-owned lands may
receive prairie dogs if appropriate sites aze available. ~~ ~~
4 The City Council directs the City Manager and the Open Space Department to
take the lead in Snding and preparing receiving sites on Open Space properties The City
Manager and the Open Space Department aze fiuther directed to work to insure that appropriate
ecologica! conditions aze presesrt for successful relocation. When, however, events occur wheze
relocation is required and appropriate ecological conditions aze not present on Open Space
property, the Department will take reasonable extra measures to accommodate relocation needs,
recognizing the relocation e$'ort may be less successfiil than under more optimal conditions
INTRODUCED, READ, PASSED AL~1D ADOPTED tlvs 18th day of January, 2000
William R Toor, Mayor
Attest
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
~
~
ATTACHMENT B
~ City of Bouider Policy for Prairie Dog Management
and Relocation
Dra, ft of July 11, 2000
Background
The Boulder City Council adopted a resolution on January 18, 2000 expressing the City's
commitment to the protection of the black-tailed prairie dog and its habitat throughout the
Boulder Valley The City will protect prairie dogs and their habitat in the Boulder Valley on all
city-owned land to the maximum extent possible. Protection of prairie dog habitat on all
City-owned land will be required unless the presence of prairie dogs is in direct conflict with the
earisting or planned use of the site or the public heakh and safety on or neaz the site is in jeopardy
due to the presence of prairie dogs The City will only use relocation as a means of prairie dog
removal from City-owned property unless there is an imminent threat to public heakh and safety
caused by praine dog burrowing in and around a dam The City a(so will work rvith other
agencies to protect and manage prairie dogs on state, county or federal lands within Boulder
Tlus policy provides specific direction in implementing the Council prairie dog protection
resolution on all city-owned lands Prairie dog colonies aze located on properties owned and
managed by several City departmenu including Pazks and Recreanoq Open Space, and Public
~ Works. This document serves as an umbrella policy for all City departments
The Open Space and Mountaui Pazks programs have set aside over 5000 acres of public land as
Prairie Dog Habitat Conservation Areas and are committed to the long-term management of these
areas as functioning grassland ecosystems. The Open Space Board of Trustees has adopted a
'Black-tailed Prairie Dog Habitat Conservation Plan" and a"City of Boulder Open Space Prauze
Dog Relocarion Policy" The policies outlined in these documents give specific guidance for
Open Space praine dog management and prairie dog relocation on Open Space properties Other
departments may adopt management policies wtuch provide more specific management
requirements on individua( City properties which they manage
This policy is issued by the City Manager The City Manager shall give final approval on all prairie
dog relocauon plans after the appropriate permits have been obtained from the Colorado pivision
of Wildlife. Prairie dog management dec~sions shall be based on emerging legal, ecologicat, and
polirical issues at the state and federal levels, including lisnng decisions under the federal
Endangered Species Act All departmental decisions on prairie dogs shall be consistent with
applicable management plans, and all such plans shall be consistent with this prairie dog policy
/"'~
~
Policies .,.{
The City Council resolution provides the &amework for the City's policy reguding the protection
and management of prairie dogs. Statements from this resolurion are outlined below in italics.
s Commitment to Habitat Protection
Resolution: The Crry recogn:zes that the b1aclFta:led prcune dog (Cynomys
ludovtcrarrus) is a vrtal and :mponant specres to the grasslmrds of the Boulder Ya11ey and
values prairie dogs as a vrtal element in grassland ecosystems; the Gty u commrtted to
the proteciron of pra:ne dogs axd therr hab:tat wrth:n the Boulder Yalley;
Resolulion: The Gry wrll emphanze prmne dog habifat protecfron as a pnonty on all
public and pmate la~rdg unless the presence of prarne dogs rs in conflict wlth the
exrshng or plmveed use of the stte; or the public health and safety on or near the .s~te ~s rn
~eopardy due to the presence of prmne dogs.
Policy City departments wi11 seek to accommodate prairie dogs 6y 5rst evaluating all
possible options for managing prairie dog populations and their associated habitat
on the site where they occur Long-term management plans for protected prairie
dog colonies on city properties will be developed by the deparhnent managing the
site.
Relocation will only be considered if: 1) protection of the habuat on the
site is infeasible due to unmanageable conflicts with the exisnng or planned
land use or will cause significant adverse economic impact to the city, 2)
the prairie dogs are currently damagmg existing &cilities on the site and
on-site management has been demonstrated to be anworkable, or 3) there
is a substantiated or imminent threat to public health and safety resulting
&om the presence of prairie dogs
If public health and safety is a concern, the City Manager shall make a
decision on whether to relocate the prairie dogs after consultation with a
public health agency and an expert in prairie dog ecology and management.
s Prohibition on Extermination
Resoludon: The Gty s goal rs to effectively ekmrrrate pouon:ng or extermrnatson of
praine dogs on pnvcrte and public lands m Boulder and on City-owned I~ds in the
Boulder Yalley; therefore, when the pratecnon of prarne dog hab:fat:s tn confltct wrth
the intended use of the srte, relocahon wrll be the method for removmg the pratne dogs
fiom the site.
~
Policy Protection of existmg prairie dog hab~tat will be the first pnority If habitat „~
protection is deemed u~feasible by the Ciry Manager, the prairie dogs may be
relocated following the standazds and best management practices for relocation
~ outlined below Killing prairie dogs will only be pernritted where necessary for
dam safety pursuant to the Boulder Revised Code, only when there is an
immediate threat to public health and safety, and upon the specific authorization of
the City Manager
s Accommodation of Prairie Dogs on City Lands
Resolutton: The Gty w:ll accommodate all prarne dog relocanon needs of pnvate and
pubkc landawners rn the City of Boulder. Open Space propernes w:ll be the pnmary
source of recerving sztes for relocated prcnne dogs, although other City-awned Icmds mcry
rece:ve prmne dogs if appropnate sites are avculable
Resolutron: The Gty, through its Open Space and Maunta:n Parks programs has set
curde over 5000 acres of public land crs Prcnrre Dog Habrtat Conservatron Areas mrd rs
committed to the long-term mcmagement of these areas as functromng grassland
ecosystems.
Policy~ City departrnents shall first consider properues under their own management for
relocation. If appropnate sites are not available, prairie dogs will be relocated to
Open Space properties. For urter-departmental relocation, reciprocal agreements
between departments may be azranged
~ The Open Space Boazd of Trustees has adopted the'Biack-tailed Prazne
Dog Management Plan" which gives spec~fic guidance for Open Space
prairie dog management and prairie dog relocauon on to Open Space
properties. Habitat Conservation Areas for long-term praine dog
protecuon aze identified in the plan These azeas will be the pnmary
location for receiving praine dogs from other sites withm the city
s Responsibilities for Relocation Casts
Resolutron: The Open Space Department wrll take the lead rn frnc~ng and prepanng
rece:vcng srtes on Open Space properhes.
Resolunon: Further, that City acceptance of relocated prarrre dogs rs based upon the
conditron that the landowner of the property where praine dogs are to be removed w:ll
take the responsrb:kty for all costs of relocahon and recervmg srte preparatron.
Policy Open Space staffwill determine the specific location and methods of site
prepazation for receiving prairie dogs from other sites All costs associated with
relocation aze the responsibility of the sending department or landowner Costs
include, but are not limited to, labor and expenses for trapping and transport of
prairie dogs as well as labor for receiving site prepazation
~
~
s Standards for Relocation ,,~,
Resoluhon: The Ciiy Manager and the Open Space Depcatment are funher direcfed to
work to insure thcrt appropnate ecologrcal condihons cae present for successjul
relocatron When, however, events occur where relocahon rs requrred mrd appropnate
ecologrcal corrdrnons are not present on Open Space properiy, the Depardnerrt wtll take
rearonable exira measures to accommodate relocation needs, recogmzmg the relocation
effort may be less successful tium urrder more opnmal conditrons.
All relocation efforts shall be cazried out in collaboration with the Colorado
Division of Wildlife (CDOI~. All relocators shall be permitted by the state and
are required to adhere strictly to state pernut requ'uements as specified in the
CDOW Administrative Directive W-17 on the Capture and Relocation of Praine
Dogs (March 9, 2000) (see Attachment A) Policies and guidelines of the Open
Space Department will be followed if prairie dogs aze relocated to Open Space
lands. Specific standards for relocarion shall be determined by both the receiving
stte landowner and the relocation contractor, should a conuactor be employed
For relocation to Open Space properties, all conditions outlined in the City of
Boulder Open Space Praine Dog Relocauon Policy shall apply
Emphasis shall be placed on relocating praine dogs between June 1 and October
15 and when favorable weather and ecological condirions aze present. Prazrie dogs ""~.
may be relocated between October 15 and March 1 only when weather and
ecological conditions are favorable to insure survivabiliry Prairie dogs shall not be
relocated from City properties between March 1 and June 1 unless there is an
imminent threat to pubGc health or safety as determined by the city manager or a
delay in relocarion will cause significant adverse economic impact to the Ciry No
trapping or releasing should occur during inclement weather
4. Receiving sites should be previously occupied prairie dogs towns whenever
possible If pre-existing burrows aze not avazlable, the department recervuig the
prairie dogs will take e~ma measures to accommodate relocation needs
Department staffwill detemvne the method and timing ofrelocation and site
preparation under extraordinary condirions.
Praine dogs should generally not be relocated mto areas affected by the plague for
approximately rivo years after the plague event. If praine dogs must be relocated
to an infected azea in a shorter timeframe, precautions will be taken to T++;n;m;~e
impacts of the plague infestarion
6 After uutial trapping efforts, the relocator shall continue to uap remaining praine
dogs on the site undl the day construction begins
7 The relocator shall bacld'ill and plug all machve burrows witlun the consuuction ~
zone to keep any remaining dogs out of the area. Consider the use of temparary
barriers to keep remaining prairie dogs out of the construction zone.
~ S. A relocation expert should be on-site during initial earth-moving activities if there
is any possibility that any prairie dogs aze still on the site. All efforts shall be made
to capture any remaining prairie dogs during the initial grading activities.
Best Management Practices for Activities in Prairie Dog Habitat
A The following best management practices apply to city activities that aze short-term in
durarion and do not require permanent habitat destrucrion
Avoid all construction activiries in prairie dog towns from ivtarch 1 to June 1
unless
a. the nature of the work would cause minimal disturbance to the prairie dogs
or their habitat,
b the prairie dog habitat is in conflict anth the mtended use of the site and
required relocation efforts have been completed,
c the construction activity during this period is critical for the immediate
public health, safety, and welfare; and
d. the nming of the construction acUvity has been approved by the City
Manager
~ 2. Consult with a plant ecologist and wildlife biologst prior to beginning the pro~ect
and for post-project reclamanon
Flag all burrow holes and the approximate extent of the burrowing system
Concentrate activity azound the penphery of prairie dog towns to the extent
possible
Mazntain the suuctural integrity of burrow entrances near the construction activity
by placing drainage pipe inside the burrow hole and extending it several feet above
ground to prevent the burrow &om caving in &om heavy equipment moving in the
azea.
Earth-moving equipment should progress through the azea at as slow a rate as
possible to avoid direct injury or mortality However, the project shouid be
completed as quickly as possible
6 Overall disturbance to the area where prairie dogs aze located shall be m;n;m;~ed.
Stage vehicles and constsuchon equipment as far away as possible from the prairie
dog town.
~ B The following best management pradices apply to activines in praine dog habitat after
m..-
considerab(e ~ffort has been made to relocate all the prairie dogs vet a few ~rairie does
remain on the site. '°'
Consult with a qualified wildlife biologist or relocation specialist pdor to beginning
the construction activities.
2 Contiinie to trap prairie dogs remaining on the site unUl the day of the
construction.
3 A relocation specialist shall be present on the site to capture any remaining prairie
dogs during the initial grading activities -
4 Bacl~'ill and plug all inactive burrows within the construction zone to keep any
remaining dogs out of the azea.
Authority
This policy is issued by me under my authoriry as the City Manager, and is binding on all
departments and city employees
Date
Ronald A Secrist
City Manager
~.
~
:NT C
~
~..
tnnaw
a.al
1 WinCnB9rorGRIB
1 `MncnasNrGrc~a
3 Winmes[erGrc~e
~ Sp ne Ra
5 93N St
4, Poan PNwyB Footlnib PMVy
Pna~ Pkwy 8 CMaraao ~be
9 foot~i~sPkwy&vaimont
~ q aaotM1tlb PMry B SSIn S[
10 Munitlp9PRpoR
.~`~ 11 Faothilis P1iy 8 PrmaM1w fia
~~„~
R VaImOnlqNPefk
10 Neoenor d FaoNnls PNVy
An~ III Anmi~tl
A 8owaerRe=arvo~r
IS 9oulaerR~auvoir
o.~...em
PmalaA~wmmo0an
wHa~.
Pmeb
PmMa/CW~wN5essminqa
SemiFuttlwuexc Swica Co
Pueiwstai•n~qm.ay
Pu01MIStettNiqlmey
hbNUSfnf~ Xigtmay
hClx/Eity TnnapMe4on
PflOIICI~ItyifMSpGICIIOfI
Pupllu5bte Hghnp
Pu01KlGfYP~dRx
Pnve~Wan ~bN- W w R.ynmaa C
Pu01iNCRyMf PerNs
wen~e~iumm..
Mm~.«.~.o~, prairie Oog Colonies in
<°o,°° Area I, 11, 8 111 Annexed
sa o0 10 Preme Oag Cdonies
]a-as
~
o ~ ~ BaulderCrtyhmts
a
ci~ I ~ Pl1bIIC ~3[%I$
50•TS
50-t00
50-~5
,s_,oo
~,~ a
sa-:s ~ ~
B06Z50
sa-ioo .r.~.~ra.wwrr. 0'~'S 0 025 Nl~s
~~•
~
I „>.,~,,,o,,,,.«.,
,
ATTACHMENT D
TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
~ FROM: Ran Secrist, City Manager
Chris Dropinski, Director of Parks and Recreation
Ned Williams, Acting CaDirector of Public Works
Kate Bemhardt, Associate Parks Planner
Annie Yoble, Interim Greenways Coordinator
DATE: June 28, 2000
SUBJECT: Information Item: Prairie Dags / Valmont City Park and Wonderland
Creek Project
BACKGROUND:
In 1995 the citizens approved a tax increase for Parks and Recreation projects, wluch included a
proposal to purchase property for a large city park to provide space for development of uitensive
use recreational faciliries In 1996 the Valmont City Pazk site was selected because
a) the site provided adequate acreage, including redevelopment of e~sting city uses on the
adjacent City Yazds site
b) the site was eas~ly accessble by major arterial roads, bus routes, and existing and future
alternative-mode trail systems
c) the site was well distanced from residential uses to avoid creating dist~ubance to
nei3hbors by the proposed active pazk uses
d) the site was predominantly suaounded by light industrial uses
~ e) a good portion of the site was currentiy occupied by industnat uses wluch could be
readily removed for the development of park and recreation facilities
~ the site offered suitable topography for intensive recreation development as well as
beautiful unique natural features such as hillstdes and ditch riparian comdors
The Ciry started purchasing property for the Va(mont Ciry Park in early 1997 and completed site
purchases in spring of 1999, at a cost of aQproximately $14,000,000 The Valmont City Pazk
concept plan was approved m spring of 1998 following a public process and 13 public meetinss
In 1997, an esUmated total of Z50 prazrie dogs lived on the site (Exlubit A) Over the period of two
years, as the industrial uses were removed and the properry was revegetated, the praine dog
popularions expanded, occupying lazger azeas of the new parksite (E~ibit B) In anticipation of
the Wonderiand Creek pro~ect and the uutia! phase of park construcUon, staff hired Wild Places
Inc to relocate all of the praine dogs from the parksite. Wild Places Inc is considered to be one of
the more experienced and successfui prairie dog relocation companies in the azea and is highiy
recommended by staff at the Colorado State Droision of WIldlife Wild Places Inc started
relocation efforts in October of 1999 and moved approximately 270 prairie dogs to 20 acres in an
existing park property west of Kelso Road, generally south and west of Boulder Reservoir At this
~
~..
time tlvs location ~s near capacity for prairie dogs. Given the birth rate in the prairie dog colomes
and migration of praine dogs from the colonies south of Pearl Pazkway, there is an estimated Z00
to 250 prairie dogs currently remaining on the parksite, located primarily in the Goose Creek ^+~
Channei and City Yards azeas east of Goose Creek. Recendy, councii approved a Resolurion -
Re2azding Protection and Mana¢ement ofBlack-Tailed Prairie Dogs which confumed the
following goal " The City Council directs the City Manager to esrablish policies that will
emphasize prairie dog habitat protection as a priority on all public and private lands, unless the
presence of prairie dogs is in conflict with the existing or planned use of the site, or the public
heaith and safety on or near the site is in jeopazdy due to the presence of prairie dogs." The
resolution also identified 5,000 acres of Open Space and Mountain Pazk properties for pcaine dog
relocations These properues aze committed to long-term management as functioning grassland
ecosystems. In the future, the prairie dogs from the Vaimont site will be relocated to these
propercies as per the Interdepartmental Policy for Praine Dog Management and Relocarion on
City-owned Lands
Construction began m late May on the Public Works Wonderland Creek project, which is located
m Valmont City Pazk. The majority of the praine dogs have been removed from the site of the
Wonderland Creek project. Wild Places Inc is relocating the remaiivng prairie dogs (estimated 15
to 20 dogs), and is working closely with the contractor
The Pazks and Recreat~on Advisory Board met on June 10, 2000 u~ a stu~y session to review the
Valmont City Pazk concept plan. The Boazd suppoRed the continuauon of reIocating dogs withm
the construction area for the Wonderland Creek Channel and the initial phases of pazk
development (Extubit C)
The Board requested that the relocanon of prazne dogs beyond these azeas within the Valmont
City Pazksite be considered at a future Board meenng Costs, feasibility, and practicality of
retauung prairie dogs on the site aze bemg explored.
In order to consider preservation of prauie dogs witlun ttus proposed active use city pazk srte, the
Valmont City Pazk Approved Concept Plan would need to be revised, along with necessary public
hearings Issues that need to be addressed mclude
a) whether locarion and space requirements for a healthy pran-ie dog community within an
active-use pazk is possible
b) how the issue of a continually expanding prairie dog population in the park could be
handled
c) costs and schedule for staff and consultants to redesign the concept plan, inciuding a
public review process
d) deletion of a proposed park facility or use azea to accommodate the praine dog colomes
e) whether public safety can be guaranteed, for active use areas adjacent to the proposed
praine dogs colony (plague), specifically areas with anticipated use by children and dogs
~ pracucality and effectiveness of yeazly control e$'orts and costs to keep the prairie dogs
&om migraung into public turf and use azeas such as ballfields, picnic facilities, open play
~
azeas, or onto pubGc streets
g) Need for on-going professional services to relocate those dogs that do migrate into the
~ developed portions of the pazk.
NEXT STEPS:
1 Staff is proceeding with the Wonderland Creek project and Valmont City Pazk Phase 1
design development and construction. Wonderland Creek construction will continue into
the fall and winter Valmont City Park construction is anticipated to begin in the fall and
proceedinto spcu~g of2001
2 A meeting will be scheduled wrth the Pazks and Recreation Advisory Board to discuss the
concept plan and praine dogs
CC: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
ATTACHNIENTS:
Attachment A Locat~on of praine dogs at Valmont City Pazksite 1997
Attachment B Location of prairie dogs at Valmont City Pazksite 1999
Attachment C Location of Wonderland Creek Channel (Public Works) and Valmont City
Pazk (Pazks and Recreation) initial phase consuuction azeas
~
r+~~
ti..,
C/TY OF BOULDER, COLORADO
VALMONT CIT `~ PARK
' Attachment A
~~
FUTURE PARK SITE
' / /~== I' ~ ~~_ ' II
~ ~~~ ' I y,,~.~ ~C`~'•-.,~ / ~ n_; ~~I 1`~
~ V i ._.~`~~'.~,~ ~~.~ i ~ ~
, '
1 ~' ~~ I i =-~~•c'% I1~~ ~ _
1' ~ ~~+7D'~'L7'~ ~ ~ ~~ L.,~~_ , i ~ ~
~ ~~I ,-SE~ \1J~ ~ ,Y'/ ~' y / i ~
r I _~.,,Ja, ~ -~~^
I ~~~3_r.'-~~`~ ~~ \I~ ~~'~_`.t:s~ ~-~ ~ i:S
j~~\~~~~~ > -,<~:~<;` r\I ' ~ ~~-~~ -~ "~ ~,~i
~,`f~>-~<;. . ~ 'r;,~~ ~ r
J I ~~i:C~i~k; ~~~ = ~ II ~II ' ~~ / ~ ~'~%~ \^
/~J,yJ~' { „ I ~ '~ ~~ J~^ ` ~~~ ~./~ ,~.!~r ~ ~~ ~
1 . r~ Il J ~I By~~~t ~Y~ ~~~I~ ~ /1~i %l!i'~ . ~
~ ~a ~ _ (~~ ,~ ,,;' ~ ~
,
.{ n~~ $li ~y ~ ~ ~1.._/ a ~~ / % ~•~~v I ~ 1
~
% r
yI ~\ ~~ rsm),~{dl ` . :/.',' ~'}(
,~~~ - ~. ~,,.~
`ef ~_` ~Srl _ 1 " ;•,,~ ii i% ' ,~ *f ~ ~ 1 ~
° 'Aim~i '-'-aa- __'___'_' " •,
~ ~" ~ , ~j ~,/ ~ r ~; r ~ i~ ' I I
~ ~ ' ~~y G j~i~% j% ,F ~ i
~ j ~ ~ ,~ ~~'~~ r ~'l~/!~ /. ii :~ i, Y -ra ~ ~~
I ~I /~ ~ 8- ~~~j~~,/~~:~ ~~..:i~,~ ~ ' /,i/ ,~~ ~ /
~~~% /,~~2~i~~ : ,,~" ; ~, i ~
~ - iiY %~'%~'%~' ~' i' %Y ' ,~ ~G ~ I ,
~ ~ i i,~~ !C`- :~/,~" ~~~ "~~`"'~ ~ '
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~= ,~~ % ~`,, ~.;s~ / _ ~
~ / ; . ~<<~ :~G
i .~~ ~ _ ~ =- - ,
~~L J1 ~~ I ~ I I _ `•,f,~,Y ~'•Sii~2
~i 'qdq~ ty~<
~ `~- ~~ j ; EX1S7iLIG G:7T <}~ ~ ~
~
' ' ~ ~ ` \ `~`` ~
~' ~,~~-~ , ~ - ~ ~ ~r~- ~- = ~~ ~~`~ °~'' ; .
I~~ ~ ! _. '~ur~rE~~nc< r~c~:rr ~
I '
\ I ~ ~~ ~`~~~ ~ % ~
.~ ~ :- ~ / i
/~
~~~ _-~~~ ,~ / / ~~r ; i
r\ Gt. ~~.. ~.O~SO ~ /
r ~• ~A1QlE P06 co~.ot~t~s
~~l ~ ~tt~cEtZ t 9'3"7
LOCATION 11~AP
N
~ w ~ L ~ _ ~
I S ~wa u wr
~
c~7 r vr C3VVLLCt4, c.v~vrs.qc~v
VA L MONT CI T Y PARK
' ^ Attachment B
FUTUftE PARK SITE
~ , ~ , iy~--=~ ; I ~~ _
~ ~~ ~~ ~~`GC.i'r,~, \ /
~ r ~~ ~'~~~ .,~~,y,, a ~ i i -' ~ '
~ _ _ ~,
y ~ !' ~ ` ,c ..~ , r '~~ ~=. ~I
i~~="-r'^v-' ''-\ / ,
"~ ~ , , ~ `
i' ~~'~iy'~I @I,1~1 ;' / y^~.~/'- i ~ o
-„~~ ~° `-~_-~ ~-y L i ~ \
( ~~'~~~~;~-,~ _ r ~ ~~ : ~~- ~,,'d I „ ~~ ,:~
I ~ ,~. , ,. .
~•~ ~ < , -,
• ~ j ~~ v 4-` '~~ ,c. > /~ <;;;, <, _ ' , „ ~1- ~ „ '% / ~
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~_ ~ ~ (- ~ ~~ ~~. ~~ ~
' i I ~ _'`~ ~-: r~'_ _ = a „ ae~~`` -, / .
/ I i I ~ ~`y, - ~ a .! ~
a i 'T~-, '`I--e r, ~ ~ ~'i ''/' ~ •, ~~
~ ~ .~ `~,.. i~i ..~ ,.i~p./r l'.~ ~; ~ ' i
~, ~ ii l' ~I ~Ja~~ ~^ o~ ~ ~%ij ~ ~
~ ~~ e~i ~ / ~ °' ~ ~ ~ ~/ I
`, •~ 1 ~ ~~ ~II ~ - ~ Y % % ~ ~~;'% ~~ ~ .i 31
~~ '~~ ~~I~aa~~ „ i /~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I I 1,
~ "'__"""'' , , ~_
~ ~ , I ~ / i. i~~i~ . ,Y , y , ~ ~ , ~ i
~ / 1 ~ i i C~ i~% ~~~/ ~ fi ~ ~~ ~ i
~y i ~ ~' j yyy /•, i y, •, 'i
~~ ~ w i/%! i~.G;%l: / ,~ % / ~, 'yy rC ~ ~~~
~ ' ' ' ~%',~!%~%GG ! %:~~ /~ i ~, ~
I ~I ~ ! I e j~~,C ~ . ,~. ~ G , ~~ \
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~;- %'r~~~% ...~;_~ g ~' r
'J ~ i~ I~= ~ ~ ~"/~' tc:~ I/ !'
~~~ / ~ ` _<t.b'' ~
~ ~ ~t ~ ,
I ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ _ .`% ~ :: `a4~~ ,
I ~ ~ t t I I~ = - - ` ~ M1F•~t.<< , / i
~f<}~
~ ! -~ exu~ae r ~ ~ <~' ~
i ~ ~1 •~, ~ ~~ I ~ ~_- ,rI I = „' `c' ~ ~ :
~I ^~ \ I a p~. % i I ~ ' .
~ I ~= J1MNTcNANG: FACI.:TY ~~
( ~ rJ'" / =
~~. ~ ~ ~~~~ i % 1~,~ I
~Ci~--~~ ~_. ~ ~ - ~
^ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~
;
~ ' 1 GE1vE.S2A1.- LocAT~~
`t ~. ~¢,e.l gt E`Do6 Go t.c~1 cS
- ,5~r~r~erz t999
LOCATION I~IAP
v
~.~+ w~= _ _ . ~
I_ - -
~r ' ~
S ~~~
. ~
C/TY OF BOULDER, COL014AD0
VALMONT C/T Y PARK
~~ Attachment C
J;
ti
~
~~~j ~lt1Ll~i on7T c, tT'S PAtz'~c '~H DS~ t
"t!".~i AND woNt~.rt.~No c~~~c c,~e,Nni6~
Co is ~T' F~CC'tcN A~R.Fs~
LOCATION MAP
~ N
W~E - _ ,~
i '
~ S W11O13L1M ...
~ •
FUTURE PARK SITE
t-~~ ,.J~.~
c~~"~..
~ ~ ~~
~L `~ I e ~ c: v
1
b~
~ 2~Fj rt1~
~
~.
NRBC Remodel
Summary of Concerns with Pool Plans
1. Inadequate Lap Lanes: The reducdon in lap lines from the current 6 to the planned
5 will have severely detrimental impacu on Boulder's swimming community,
including all of the following:
~
~
~„."
~._.
a Decimation of Youth Swim Programs: Youth swun progams, such as the
Boulder Poseidons and other lap or compedtive pmgrams for children, were once
a major part of recreation center programs. However, these programs have been
cut back over the years, at least at the Ciry recreation centers, due to a lack of
available lane space. For example, Poseidons now holds many of its workouts at
Angel Pines, which it leases from the City. However, the Angei Pines pool is
likely to be closed within the next couple of years, leaving Boulder's best youth
swnnmers without a piace to swim. Given that the current lane space is already
inadequate to meet the needs of youth swimming, a reduction in lanes makes no
sense at all.
b. No Room for High Sc6ool Swimming: Boulder and Fairview High Schools both
have outstanding swim programs, but aze in constant danger of losing their
facilities. Fairview currendy trains at South and East Boulder Recreation Centers,
but the planned reduction in total city lane space will make it more difficult for
the City to conanue to accommodate them. Boulder High swimmers currendy
train at CU, but CU claims to need the space; if they ask Boulder High to leave,
the school may be forced to drop iu swim program unless the City can increase
its lane space to accommodate them.
a Loss of Masters Revenue and Increased Traffic: The Masters Swim pmgram is
by far the lazgest group of users of City swun faciliues. By a conservative
estimate, the group brings the recreations centers $100,000 annually in
admissions fees and memberships. NBRC ~s the nearest recreation center for
approximately one-third of the Masters swimmers. But under the lane reducrion
plan, Master swim workouts could no longer be held at NBRC This will cause
some combinaaon of two undesuable consequences:
(1) North-area Masters swunmers who opt to conhnue v~nth the City will be
forced to drive long distances for all workouu, exacerbating Boulder's traffic
problems.
(2) Many of the North-area swimmers are likely to leave the City program for
competing Masters programs at CU, Rallysport, or the YMCA, thereby
reducing the huge revenue stream that Masters brings to the Ciry. (Note: a
couple dozen Masters swimmers have already left the City program in the past
couple of years due to reductions in workout times and lack of available child
caze during Masters swirn hours )
2. Overabundant Leisure Pool Space: Leisure pools aze cleazly attractive to children,
as wimessed by the populanty of the slide pool at EBRC when school is not in
session. However, the North area already has a leisure pool open to the public: the
pool at Mapleton Hospital. This pool gets heavy use for children's swim lessons, but _,,,
httle use by adults (aside from those in rehabilitadon). Thus, the North-area is m less
need of leisure pool space than other areas of town, yet the remodel plans give it the
largest leisure pool space of any recrearion center. The experiences at EBRC and
Mapleton show that this space will be lazgely unused except on weekends and during
times when children are on holiday from school. But it is hugely expensive to
mamtain because of the high water temperature and the excess leisure space is
commg at the expense of the more-needed lap lane space.
3. Heaith Hazard Due to Leisure Pool and Inadequate Ventilation: Based largely on
health problems that cecurred at Mapleton pool and in Westrninister, it has now been
scientifically established that wann water pools, including leisure pools and hot tubs,
are breeding grounds for bacteria that can be hazardous to the health of pool
employees and patrons. This problem is exacerbated by anything that creates a fine
spray, such as the planned slide for NBRC. The only known way to alleviate the
problem is by bringu~g in fresh, outside air at all times. The current ventilation plans
for NBRC do not do this, and because of the lazge leisure pool, NBRC will be
particularly prone to this health hazard. By not addressing the hazard, the City is not
only putring its citizens and workers at risk, but exposing itself to expensive legal
achon when (note the emphasis on when, not ifj people get sick.
Simple Solutions
The above problems can be addressed by reconfiguring the planned pool space and -.
ventiladon as follows.
• Reduce the leisure pool size while increasing the lap pool to EIGHT lanes. With
eight lanes, the lap pool can accommodate 6lanes of a swim pmgram (such as
youth swimmmg, high school swimming, or Masters) while still leaving 21anes
for the general public. If a ramp is included, it should be an "L" shape to avoid
interference with the lanes. All slides should be in the leisure pool, with the
leisure pool being lazge enough for all leisure activides. The hot tub should be
away from the pool azea to decrease azr quality problems.
• Use heat-exchange technology to ensure that outside air cuculates at all times,
and mcrease the door and window space so these can be opened during wazm
weather. Perhaps a berm sunilar to the CU pool, which keeps in the wazmth and
keeps out the wind, might be an option for NBRC.
With creative thinl~-g about the avazlable space on the west side of the facility, these
changes ought to be doable with linle or no additional cost for construction, plus reduced
cost for maintenance (due to lower temperature of lap pool) and eliminadng the potenhal
high costs of a health hazard.
Without these changes, the remodel of the pool facilities at NBRC wili prove to be
an expensive and irreversible mistake for the City.
~.~