Laserfiche WebLink
<br />'. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />Cultural Resources <br /> <br />The FRIFES summarized results of general (Class n and detailed (Class llI) cultural resource <br />surveys conducted for the Unit (Collins et aI., 1981). One prehistoric and six historic sites <br />were identified within 50 feet of canals and laterals on the east side of the valley, but are not <br />considered to be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Sites. It <br />concludes three sites on the register at that time "would not be affected by development of <br />any of the candidate plans" (Reclamation, 1984). The South and East Canals are considered <br />eligible for the register. Work on laterals of these systems will require further coordination <br />with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to completely record and evaluate the <br />sites and determine effects and measures to avoid or mitigate impacts as appropriate. <br /> <br />Additional Class ill surveys have been completed on lands distu1bed by the winter water <br />program (Alpine Archaeological Consultants, .1990-1993). A final report is being prepared <br />for review by the SHPO. Recommendations of these reports should be followed as proposals <br />for work on specific laterals are being evaluated. If proposals would disturb unsurveyed <br />areas, additional Class ill surveys would be required as designs are completed. Sites listed <br />or eligible for listing on the National Register would be protected, and construction activities <br />near recorded sites will be monitored. <br /> <br />Indian Trost Assets <br /> <br />The 1984 FRlFES did not address the project's impacts on assets of Indians held in trost by <br />the U.S. Reclamation is not aware of any such assets in the affected area. Because lining <br />would affect project facilities and lands already disturbed and committed to project uses, <br />impacts are not expected. Consultation will be initiated with potentially affected tribes when <br />specific proposals are being evaluated. <br /> <br />Summary of Impacts <br /> <br />Most impacts of the East Side Laterals Project would be similar to impacts discussed in the <br />FRIFES for the 1984 Plan (Alternative A-2). Impacts from lining of the canals would <br />continue to be deferred. <br /> <br />1. Reducing seepage from laterals by either lining them or placing them in pipe should <br />prevent about 63,880 tons of salts from entering the Colorado River system. If no action is <br />taken, no significant reductions in salinity from the Lower Gunnison Basin Unit would be <br />realized, and regional benefits of improved water quality would not occur. <br /> <br />2. Piping laterals and small canal segments would cause minor changes in land use. In <br />many cases, burying the facilities would restore use of overlying lands to landowners--as <br />long as their use would not interfere with operation and maintenance of the pipelines. <br />Realignment of some laterals could require acquisition of up to 500 acres of rights-of-way. <br /> <br />26 <br />