WSP12006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. The California Department of Water Resources com- ented on the Uraft that it went beyond the intent of Congress and that the emphasis of the Plan should be on increasing the water supply in the Colorado River Basin. It also said that study completion by 1977 would be hard to accomplish as many of the technical studies on such subjects as desalinization, geo- thermal resources and weather modification would not be completed by that time. The Arizona Water Commission also felt that the 1977 deadline was too limiting and that Congress had only intended for reconnaissance to be done by that time with the developin9 of a general plan to meet the future water needs of the West to follow. I' !I The consensus of the Advisory Committee was that the scope of the Plan did not need to be sig- nificantly altered. Members felt that state input to the Plan needed to be emphasized, with federal funding to the state increased to permit meaningful contribution by state personnel. However, Warren Fairchild, Assistant Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, emphasized that Westwide was to be more than a compilation of state water plans. that it had to be desi9ned to meet regional needs. The Committee said that the Bureau of Reclamation should identify those areas of water resource de- velopment and environmental protection which could be dealt with within the time period allotted to the Study as well as identify areas which would need further time for analysis. Committee members agreed that environmental planning should remain a part of the Study. However, there was disagreement over whether the Study should emphasize meeting water demands or seeking environmental quality. Several states commented on the Study draft that it was crucial to have input from the public through- out the Plan's progress and particularly in the selection of a recommended plan. Melcher believes that, regardless of any in- creased state role, conservationists and environ- mentalists should emphasize to both state and West- wide water planners that any study which gives short shrift to environmental quality is obsolete from the start and will be unacceptable. I' !' FOREST SERVICE THREATENS UNCOMPAHGRE "WILDERNESS" In an unprecedented action the U.S. Forest Ser- vice has proposed to declassify the entire Uncom- pahgre Primitive Area in southwestern Colorado. Announci ng pub 1 i c hea ri ngs on the proposal, Regi ona 1 Forester William J. Lucas said that the area bore such obvious signs of man's influence through mining and other activities that it no longer quali- fied for Wilderness designation. Conservation groups in Colorado oppose the Forest Service action and are seeking to delay the November hearings. While agreeing that some of the primitive area should be declassified, representa- tives of the Uncompahgre Wilderness Committee, the Rocky Mountain Chapter of the Sierra Club and the Colorado Open Space Council Wilderness Workshop say that the northern portion and a large contiguous area have true Wilderness character. They feel that to declassify the Uncompahgre before a complete study has been done of the adjacent territory might lead to irreparable damage being done to one of the largest and most beautiful potential Wilderness .3. . areas in the state. They are fearful that if official protection is not given to the area while Congressional review is pending, the same sort of destructive in- roads by man may be made which have destroyed the southern unit of the Uncompahgre despite its primitive area designation. Unless postponement of the hearings is granted, they will be held November 15, 9,00 a.m. at the Ramada Inn in Grand Junction, and November 17,9:00 a.m. at the Ouray County Courthouse. For information On transportation to the hearings, call Chuck Wanner at 758-5962. ROMCOE has joined other conservation groups in urging attendance at these hearings. "102" REVIEW PROCESS SNARLED IN RED TAPE For the past 9 months ROMCOE has been trying to set up an orderly, efficient process for the inde- pendent review of "102" statements. These are the statements required under Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act, describing the potential consequences of any proposed federal action having a major effect on the environment. ROMCOE has made this effort because it feels that NEPA can only be effective if there is meaningful citizen participation in the decision-making process. Therefore, in early 1971 ROMCOE wrote to the regional offices of 11 federal agencies, requestin9 that ROMCOE be put on the mailing list for automatic distribution of 102 statements on projects within this region. The majority of agencies responded favorably, although only a few of them are sending draft statements regularly. ROMCOE then forwards the statement to a member of our review group. These volunteers have a wide range of scientific and technical expertise. Many are connected with univer- sities throughout the region. Reviewer comments are returned to ROMCOE and sent to the appropriate agency. Several agencies responded that they would not put ROMCOE on their lists because it would be too expensive or because the law did not require that private organizations be consulted in the draft stages. Others replied that all 102 statements are available from the National Technical Infomlation Service (NTIS). The process of obtaining 102 statements from NTIS is long, complicated and expensive. NTIS publishes a semi-monthly bulletin listing current statements. ROMCOE checks the list and sends for applicable statements, at a cost of $3.00 per copy, $6.00 for larger statements. With office and mail delays on each end, it usually is more than a month after a draft 102 statement is filed that a copy arrives in the ROMCOE office. A recent order was returned from NTIS with the notation that the requested statements were out of stock, causing further delay. This lag may put unnecessary pressure on the re- viewer, who often has to fit field investigation of the proposed project into an already crowded pro- fessional schedule. There is only a 60-day period between publication of the draft and the final 102 statement and all agency and private comment must be in by the deadline. Despite the difficulties in- volved in the process, ROMCOE plans to continue to solicit and supply to the government informed citizen comment on 102 statements. In addition, ROMCOE will press for greater agency cooperation in providing the draft statements.