8089

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 8089
• Author: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
• Title: Final Environmental Assessment Gunnison River Activities, Passageway Around the Redlands Diversion Dam and Interim Agreement to Provide Water for Endangered Fish.
• USFW Year: 1995.
• USFW - Doc Type: Grand Junction, Colorado.
• Copyright Material: NO

evaluated; and until they are evaluated, the EA is incomplete. Another individual suggested that
the passageway, since it is experimental and will need to be modified, be constructed from wood
to save considerable expense. Additional information was requested on how the structure relates
to the city of Grand Junction's pumping station.
Some of these ideas--such as jetties or other bank work to deepen critically shallow reaches in
the lower Gunnison River or power purchases to essentially conserve water--have merit. (Power
purchases mean that Redlands Diversion Dam would reduce their hydropower diversions and
would be repaid for lost revenues). During the period of the interim water agreement and in the
first years of the passageway operation, the effects on the endangered fish and on water uses will
be monitored. More detailed flow recommendations will be made and ideas such as power
purchases (see later discussion on Interim Water Supply Agreement) will become important ideas
to consider in meeting the recommendations for a long-term water contract.
Concerning the idea to use wooden construction, approximately 23 percent of the contract costs
will involve earthwork and dewatering which would have to be duplicated if the structure were
initially built with wood and then concrete. Another 26 percent of the contract costs are
comprised of piping, valves, and metalwork where practical wood alternatives do not exist. This
leaves approximately Sl percent of the costs in concrete structures and aluminum baffles. Only
41 percent of these costs or 21 percent of the total construction costs are for materials. Thus
choosing a different construction material such as wood does not mean significant savings could
occur. In addition, there are groundwater and lateral earth pressure considerations that make
wood construction difficult and costly and wooden structures have higher maintenance costs.
If a wooden structure were built and then later replaced by a concrete one, the total construction
costs would be very high due to duplication of effort. In summary, Reclamation believes that
the passageway will succeed, and there would be much greater risk of losing investment dollars
by initially using wood than concrete.
Additional information has been added to the section of the report on Fish Passageway Design
to better explain the relation with the city's facilities.
Land Status (Rights-of-Way)
One comment stressed that there are two related projects--one the fish passageway itself and the
other is the resolution of authorization for the portion (west side) of the Redlands Diversion Dam
and facilities that occur on BLM land. A possible land exchange was cited as being very related
to safety and recreation issues.
Chapter 2 of the draft EA mentioned that "The proposed passageway will be constructed on land
owned by the Redlands Water and Power Company. Property interests (such as an easement or
exchange) will be acquired by the United States. " The passageway is now planned to be built
on a perpetual easement acquired from Redlands. It is possible, and desirable, that in the future
the BLM land on the west side of the river will be exchanged for land on the east side; however,
the fish passageway is not dependent on this exchange. The exchange is not related to the
46