WSP08527 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1J~:~:5 ., topography, the higher salt content of the soils in the area, and because there is less than 4,000 acres ofirrigable land available. The DWCD does believe that with the use of proper irrigation techniques, this land could be irrigated without compromising the intention of the salinity program. Even ifDWCD did not acquire the MVIC Class B shares, the most probably outcome would be that private irrigators would purchase the shares and apply the water to their lands within the MVIC service area. Comment 6- Under Interior's "Principles Governing Voluntary Water Transactions that Involve or Affect Facilities Owned or operated by the Department of the Interior", Trout Unlimited is an affected non-Federal party. Since TU does not substantially support this proposal, TO believes that the Bureau must consider either additional alternatives to the proposed action or mitigation to benefit the fishery. This would be consistent with the Principles that directs Interior to consider the "necessary measures that may be required to mitigate any adverse environmental effects that may arise as a result of the proposed transaction." Response 6-The Department of the Interior's Princioles Goveming Voluntary Water Transactions that Involve or Affect Facilities Owned or Ooerated bv the Deoartment of the Interior (1968) are intended to afford flexibility to State, Tribal, and local entities to arrive at mutually agreeable solutions to their water resource problems and demands. At the same time, the principles are intended to be clear as to the legal, contractual, and regulatory concerns that oar must consider in its evaluation of proposed transactions. Under these principles, Trout Unlimited believes that Reclamation must consider either additional alternatives to the proposed action or mitigation to benefit the fishery in order to be consistent with the Principle 7 which directs 001 to consider "necessary measures that may be required to mitigate any adverse environmental effects that may arise as a result of the proposed transaction". The criteria for compliance with Principle 7 requires that approval of the transaction be subject to ' NEP A requirements. There are basically two alternatives concerning the Carriage Contract-to execute the contract or select No Action. There can be various versions of each of these basic alternatives. The alternative description, including the discussion of the No Action alternative, has been expanded in the final EA. The Dolores Project has met its downstream fishery requirements; this will not be affected by the proposed earriage Contract and no mitigation is necessary. It is recognized in the final EA that additional water for the fishery pool would improve fishery conditions. 21