Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-- <br /> <br />r-Hl..':IC. O.l ~ <br /> <br /> <br />I~~-t'~~-~~?;~ ~~V'!: ~~l <br />'n~~~~ ~i:~ ,;,= E-~~ a....l. <br /> <br />(corrected copy 2-16-04) <br /> <br />FFH 1 'j 2004 <br /> <br />Natural Energy Resources Company <br />P. 010 Bolt 567, Prdmer Lake, Colorado 80133 <br />('19) 481-2003 FAX (719) 481~34.52 <br /> <br />t~plprado Wa1er Cone.eNatfon 8o?n~ <br /> <br />Februlry 13.2004 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The Honorable Raady ThurstOD, President <br />and City COUldl Members <br />Clcy or Pueblo <br />1 City Hall Place <br />Pueblo, Colorado 81003 <br /> <br />Subjeet~ Wlter DeeJaJoa Crouroad <br /> <br />Dear President Thurston aDd Council Me01ben: <br /> <br />Pueblo and Colorado Springs are at a critical water decision crossroad. JfPueblo agrees with the proposed <br />Southern Delivery System, it will adversely 1mpact its future - as wen as Colorado Springs and the State of <br />Colorado. <br /> <br />The enclosed George Sibley commentary is an excellent account of Colorado's general water policy confusion:'. <br />conflicts, and wasted efforts. The current controversy over Colorado Sprin,brs' proposed Southern Delivery System <br />is symptomatic of Colorado's underlying water polioy crisis. <br /> <br />The enclosed Jetter to President Bush and Interior SecretaJ)' Gale Norton briefly outlines the multiple advantages of <br />Colorado's superior Gunnison/Union Park Pumped-Storage solution for local, state, and regional drought and <br />growth needs. UnfortUnately, Union Park was not considered by Colorado Springs -- apparently because of an <br />institutional billS against cooperative multi-basin storage projects.. This improper exclusion vioJates the National <br />Bnvironmental Policy Act. NEPA requires environmental and economic com.parisons of all re~onable 8}ternatives~ <br /> <br />EPA vetoed Denverts Two Forks Dam proposal, after a ten-year, $50 Inillion effort, because Ii~superior alternatives <br />(i~e~ Union Park), were improperly screened from the environmental studies". CoJorado Springs is headed for a <br />sinlilar fate with its inefficient:, SPS proposal that unnecessarily depletes the overly depleted Arkansas River.. <br /> <br />Exorbitant water rights and misguided development proposals that excessively de...water over-appropriated rivers <br />are still subject to NEPA-EPA oversight review~ To protect its future and avoid additional Two Forks and <br />Homestake II type mistakes, the City of Pueblo should insist on a preliminary scoping evaluation of the Union Patl.:. <br />oversight. Any Southern Delivery System Agreements with Colorado Springs should be dererred until all impacted <br />stakeholders have a chance to compare SDS with Union Park.. <br /> <br />r would be honored to provide a briefing for Pueblo's City Council on the overlooked advantages of Union Park. <br /> <br /> <br />JZ:- /b;;JL <br /> <br />Davei Miller President <br /> <br />Enclosures: George Sibley artiole dated 2-05-04 & letter to President Bush & Secretary Norton dated 2-02...04. <br /> <br />- <br />