Laserfiche WebLink
<br />! ... <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />Comments on the 1984 Plan and the current proposal raised socio-economic concerns for the <br />habitat replacement program. The FR/FES for the 1984 Plan notes the Board for the <br />UVWUA, representing about 2,500 water users in the valley, opposed the habitat <br />replacement program. They objected to Federal acquisition of agricultural lands to replace <br />habitat losses, primarily because it would threaten the rural lifestyle and would remove <br />private land from local property tax rolls. Acquisition of 2,500 acres along the river <br />corridor would include about 250 acres of irrigated cropland. Some of this land might be <br />used to grow crops to provide food and cover for wildlife, but use for livestock production <br />would not continue. Property taxes to the county would be replaced by "Payments in Lieu of <br />Taxes" made for all Federal lands within the county. <br /> <br />For the reformulated habitat replacement program, both support and objection has been <br />expressed. Water users are still concerned about thc;l displacement of livestock use along the <br />corridor in the spring. Because replacement areas would be acquired from willing sellers, <br />such displacement might occur without the program. Another concern was for conflicts <br />caused by increases in wildlife use of adjacent cropped areas. This concern would be <br />addressed once specific areas are proposed for acquisition, with development plans <br />coordinated with adjacent landowners. <br /> <br />Table 6 shows how pipe installation and habitat replacement cost estimates vary between the <br />systems. All estimates use 1994 price levels, and do not represent a ceiling. There are <br />concerns that risk of cost increases is high, especially for the habitat replacement program. <br />Such risk could hinder the ability of proposed projects to compete with other proposals in the <br />Colorado River basin for limited funds. Reclamation is concerned that increasing demands <br />and values for river corridor lands would limit our ability to fmd willing sellers and meet <br />replacement commitments at a reasonable cost. Despite high habitat replacement <br />requirements for South system laterals (11. 8 percent), it still is the most cost effective system <br />to treat. <br /> <br /> Total Cost Pipe Habitat Replacement <br />Lateral Effectiveness Installation Replacement Area O&M <br />System (annual $) (capital $) (capital $) (annual $) <br />South (A) $64/ton $13,998,000 $1,873,000 $47,000 <br />Loutzenhizer (D) $67/ton $6,777,000 $351,000 $9,000 <br />Selig (E) $71/ton $11,318,000 $1,548,000 $39,000 <br />East (G) $78/ton $14,096,000 $854,000 $21,000 <br />Gamet (II) $76/ton $2,051,000 $20,000 $1,000 <br />TOTAL $70/ton $48,240,000 $4,646,000 $117,000 <br /> <br />Table 6 - Cost Estimates per Lateral System <br /> <br />24 <br />