WSP08527

• File Number: 8210.382
• Description: Colorado River Basin Organizations-Entities - Delores Water Conservation District
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 5/1/2001
• Author: BOR
• Title: Final Environmental Assessment - Delores Project Carriage Contract
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

00l(?tt

..

during the review period. Following the review period, additional comments were received. In
general, the majority of the comments opposed execution of the Carriage Contract because it was
perceived as either taking water away from the Dolores River fishery and recreation resource or
because it was perceived as foreclosing options of adding water to the Dolores River. Effects of
the Carriage Contract on salinity and on the purposes of past salinity control programs were also
cited. Supporters of the Carriage eontract cited the benefits of strengthening the agricultural
economy, maintenance of open space, and prevention of the conversion of agricultural water to
urban uses.

The Fish and Wildlife Service was the only Federal agency to comment. They suggested
measures to protect sagebrush habitat and wetlands. The Service also requested that Reclamation
prepare a separate Biological Assessment under the Endangered Species Act to address impacts
on endangered fish and other species. The Ute Mountain Ute Indian Tribe commented that they
supported the proposal as a way to assist members of the community to increase the productivity
of the region. The Jicarilla Apache Nation asked for clarification to determine if the earriage
Contract would affect the ability to meet San Juan River flow recommendations for endangered
fish and indirectly interfere with Indian water rights in that river. The Pueblo of Zuni expressed
concern for any Ancestral Puebloan and Pre-Puebloan archeological sites, trails, shrines and
other historic properties which might be affected. The Hopi Tribe requested that they be a
consulting party due to cultural affiliation to the prehistoric cultural groups in southwestern
Colorado, including the Basketmaker and Pueblo groups. The Colorado State Historic
Preservation Officer was consulted with to develop provisions to protect cultural resources.

Comments received were categorized into general groups as presented below. Reclamation's
responses to the comments are included. Where appropriate, changes have also been made in the
final EA to respond to comments. '

NEPA Compliance and Alternatives

Comment 1- An EIS should be prepared. The application of salvage water to bring new lands
, into production may result in significant environmental impacts. Some of reasons include to
analyze salinity impacts which are significant and the outstanding need to find additional water
for fisheries. Cannot consider a FONSI if you do not detennine whether or not salinity increases
are significant.
Response I~Based on the final EA and comments received on the draft EA, Reclamation has
detennined that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is warranted on this Carriage
Contract and no further NEP A is necessary. Based on comments received, Reclamation has
provided more analysis on salinity impacts in the text of the fmal EA (See also Responses 7 -16).
Salt loading to river systems is expected to be very low.

The fishery pool requirements for the Dolores Project have previously been completed and will
not be affected by this Carriage eontract project. Reclamation has set aside funds to assist in
enlarging or enhancing the fishery pool in cooperation with cost sharing partners (see Response
Nos. 25-28 for more information on additional water for fisheries).

19