watervulnerability

Geographic Areas
W
N
0 5 10 20 Miles
S
Exposure
Ranking
E
Value Risk Ranking
(weighted Ave)
19 | ASSESSING THE VULNERABILITY OF WATERSHEDS TO CLIMATE CHANGE
Vulnerability
Ranking* Adjusted Vulnerability Ranking**
Uncompahgre 6 1 7/12=0.58 3
Grand Mesa 5 2 7/12=0.58 4
San Juans 4 6 10/12=0.83 6
West Elk 3 3 6/12=0.50 2
Upper Taylor 2 5 7/12=0.58 5
Cochetopa 1 4 5/12=0.41 1
* Exposure Ranking + Value Risk Ranking)/12
** Upper Taylor adjusted > Grand Mesa and Uncompahgre (area in high risk)
Grand Mesa adjusted > Uncompahgre (higher concentration of values)
Table 7. Vulnerability ratings from the GMUG NFs. Exposure was ranked for the six landscape units (a composite of
HUC-6 watersheds) on the Forest (1 is the lowest), based on biggest change in annual average maximum temperature,
annual average minimum temperature, and percent change in annual aridity index. Value Risk Ranking is the highest risk
to values based on weighted average of acres × count of high rankings for each subwatershed.
Watershed Ranking
Water Uses
Legend
Water Diversions
A - Active structure with contemporary diversion records
C - Conditional structure
U - Active structures but diversion records are not maintained
Water Uses Ranking
High
Moderate
Low
Watersheds Level 6
Administrative Forest
Figure 19. Climate change vulnerability rating for the water uses resource value, White River NF. Red shading depicts
subwatersheds with the highest vulnerability. Points of diversion for water uses are shown as black dots.