Laserfiche WebLink
<br />002192 <br /> <br />Taxpayers for the Animas River <br /> <br />Comment period should be increased; An EIS should be prepared; Dam relc:ases must be coordinated with <br />eodangered species protection: Dolores Project was poorly designed and built; more wllter released downstream <br />should not be charged to the OM&R costs charged to the District: A mo=crumisrn should be found to allow <br />downstream release of water; proposed water for release is inadequlIte for recreational and habitat purposes; <br />operation of McPh~ Dam should be done in conjunction with examination of re-operation of aU dams in the Upper <br />Colorado River. <br /> <br />Trout Unlimited <br /> <br />Water should be managed as a pool rather than 8 flow; 36.500 acre-feet is the minimum pool; fish and wildlife pool <br />should Dot be charged during spi)js: fishel)' releases cannot..be subject to any requirement for power generation. <br /> <br />u.s. Fish and Wildlife Sen"ice <br /> <br />Considers 36,500 acre-feet the minimum pool, Potential impacts _to aquatic resources, especially native fishes, should <br />be addressed; Operation of dam to avoid escapement of non-native fishes should be addressed; Supports change of <br />water year to April! to March 30; Fish and wildlife pool should be credited with 36,500 after spills; Spill <br />management should dosely mi.-Die Il natural hyorogrnpn. <br /> <br />U.S. Forest Sen'ice <br /> <br />Supports the cb!mge to mRnRgee pool: 36.500 Rcre-feet is minirnll:T: pool: Re:.:ommend~l comicierntion of additiOnRl <br />water beyond 36.500 acre-fee:: \VlIter y~r should he chllng~: Recom:n~nds spill marutgement to mimic narural <br />hydrograpb; Supports CDOW's recorr.rnenoation regaromg. powerpian: optmltior.: Stm::tural habitat improvement may <br />be beneficial, but is not e suostinlte for acauiring additional wHt~r; A quaii[y fishery is imponant to USFS recreationai <br />activities and facilities: .A.n alternative that supports Il heaitny aquatic e::o~ystem wouid also benefit other reSOUf"ces. <br /> <br />A public meeting was cOnCucted a: A.nasazi Heritage Center ot: ~ovembe:- 16, !99::. Tnere were 24 attendees at that <br />meeting. The Scoping Document and [his draft EA were sent to the distribution ust shov,n at the end of this cOapter. <br /> <br />B. COORDINATIO;\ \\'ITH OTHER AGE:'\CIES <br /> <br />Reclamation is toe lead agency for prepanmon or this E..!... Other key federal. state. [ribai Rnc locai <br />agencies were consulteG. Tne;-- provided resource expertise. technical assistance, and ongoing review Rno input to the <br />environmental analysis during preparation of the EA. Tnt!se agencies included: <br /> <br />Federal Agencies <br /> <br />Department of Agricultun: <br />Forest Service. Durango, Colorado; Dolores, Colorado <br />Department of the Interior <br />Bureau of Land Management. Durango, ColorRdo; Montrose, Colorado <br />Fish and Wildiife Service. Gnma Junction. Colorado <br /> <br />State Agencies <br /> <br />Coiora-do State Gover."'_'1len: <br /> <br />DiviSJO!; of \,'Rte:- F~e$ou;ce~,. Durance. Coioraco <br /> <br />Division 0; Wildlife. J)lIran~o. Coiorado: Dolores. Colorado: :=ort Collins. CoioraciC' <br />