Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OOH37 <br /> <br />., <br /> <br />Comment 33- The project would support crops subsidized by taxpayers; more people would <br />benefit from leaving the water in the river. <br />Response 33- The water is available because of both private and Federal efforts and funding <br />under the salinity control program and because of other factors. The subject water is non-project, <br />privately-owned water. The Carriage Contract would require DWCD to reimburse the Federal <br />Government for the uSe offacilities'at full construction cost. The people of Montezuma and <br />Dolores Counties would directly benefit from the Carriage Contract as well as surrounding <br />Counties and Indian Reservations. <br /> <br />Comment 34- I am outraged at the continued destruction of the environment and open space in <br />the west in favor of big business, cows, ranches, watering the desert, and self preservation of the <br />Bureau. The peak flows in the Dolores River that sometimes occurs is not wasted water, extra <br />spillage, or surplus. It is essential to replenish riverbanks and provide a few weeks of high water <br />flows for recreation on public land. <br />Response 34- The peak flows do provide benefits to the Dolores River itself and to recreational <br />rafting and is not considered wasted. However, Reclamation does not have authority to direct <br />MVIC how to use their water. <br /> <br />Comment 35- There is substantial demand for the water from farmers as seen by willingness to <br />pay; the only local issue the Federal Government hits at stake in this project is the use of its <br />facilities to transport the water. <br />Response 35- The EA recognizes that the Federal Action is the use of Dolores Project eanals to <br />carry the non-project water. <br /> <br />Comment 36- The relocation of the place of use of the water is supported by the vast majority of <br />OWeD's constituents and is important in retaining agricultural environment and open space and <br />it helps Colorado retain its entitlement to the Colorado River. <br />Response 36- Relocation of the subject water is consistent with the development of the <br />eolorado River Compact. <br /> <br />Comment 37- Studies have shown that we are creating increased dependencies on artificial <br />water sources; because of salinity and other factors, we actually decrease productivity over the <br />long term, even though it may appear we enhance productivity over the short term. <br />Response 37- The land in Montezuma Valley where the water was previously used has <br />successfully sustained irrigated agriculture for about 100 years. Studies conducted for the <br />Dolores Project concluded the soils in the area that will be irrigated under the proposed action are <br />substantially lower in salt content and very suitable for long term irrigated agriculture. <br /> <br />Comment 38- In order to make the proposal economically feasible, the proponents are seeking a <br />2 percent loan from the CWCB...the Dolores Project already has one of the lowest repayment <br />obligation percentages for irrigators among Bureau Projects....even with the high subsidy for <br />irrigation, the area is losing irrigated lands to development. Yet the EA does not analyze the <br />socio-econornic context of this transfer, the desirability of increasing acreage in high water <br />use/low value crops nor the likelihood that the project will actually provide more than transient <br /> <br />32 <br />