Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, i., '".., <br /> <br />OD1S20 <br /> <br />Public Scoping'Comments, Gunnison River Contract, cont. <br /> <br />,;;t~~f~~~;~~i <br /> <br />CREDA; p4, '1'2. When will you decide whether to combine the two biological opinions? When will <br />you decide the range of species to be covered in each biological opinion? If these decisions are in the <br />hands of the Fisb and Wildlife Service, wbat specific plans have they for resolving the biological <br />opinion portion of this process maze? <br /> <br />lb. CREDA; p4,'I'3. You then discuss two prior biological opinions on Dolores and Dallas Creek. How <br />will these biological opinions affect the array of alternatives and what provisions of them are relevant <br />specifically to the Aspinall Unit? What "other Reclamation facilities" tbat you refer to could possibly <br />be impacted? <br /> <br />6. CREDA; p4,'I'3. You then discuss two prior biological opinions on Dolores and Dallas Creek. How <br />will- these biological opinions affect the array of alternatives and wbat provisions of them are relevant <br />specifically to the Aspinall Unit? What "other Reclamation facilities" that you refer to could possibly <br />be impacted? <br /> <br />STUDY. CREDA; p4,'I'S. On page 13, you indicate that the effects of varied flow rates from Crystal <br />Dam have not been quantified. What studies have been identified as necessary to determine <br />the impacts of changing to varied flow rates from Crystal Dam on downstream resources? <br />What is the status of those studies? <br /> <br />13b. CREDA; p4,'I'6. To what extent do downstream water rights (page 14) conflict with this proposed <br />contracL? <br /> <br />3a. <br /> <br />CREDA; p4,'I'7. What is the basis for claim of 'assured" "dependable water supplies" (page 16 of <br />Public Information Packet) when you state that the volume of in-flow to the Monument has not changed <br />significantly (pages 13,14)? <br /> <br />. ~ :, <br />.~..;:, '.~: <br />,.. '::-"l <br />.:";:;"",,::.. <br /> <br />19b. CREDA; p4, '1'8. Isn't this proposal in direct conflict with future new trans-basin diversions or new <br />consumptive uses upstream (page 14)? How will these impacts be analyzed? <br /> <br />14c. CREDA; p4, '1'9. How will changes in flow regimen impact upstream and downstreap> sport fish <br />populations, spawning cycles, etc. (page IS)? <br /> <br />14c. CREDA; p4, '1'9. How will changes in flow regimen impact upstream and downstream sport fish <br />populations, spawning cycles, etc. (page IS)? <br /> <br />14c. CREDA; p4, '1'9. How will changes in flow regimen impact upstream and downstream sport fish <br />populations, spawning cycies, etc. (page IS)? <br /> <br />13b. CREDA; p5, '1'1. What will the impact of this proposal have on potential "calls" on the river (Aspinall <br />Unit storage) by downstream senior water rights bolders (page 5)? <br /> <br />la. CREDA; pS, '1'2. What hydrologic data and analysis supports the statement that the period since 1977 <br />"include a represenlative range of dry, normal and wet water years" (page 5 of Information Packet)? <br /> <br />13.. CREDA; pS.'I'2. What hydrologic data and analysis supports the statement that the period since 1977 <br />"include a representative range of dry, normal and wet water years' (page 5 of Information Packet)? <br /> <br />42 <br />