8089 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

determining both the quantity and quality of recreation at the reservoir, and in extreme cases low water can make some facilities such as boat ramps unusable. Trash problems and downstream safety hazards were mentioned as presently existing. Fencing the downstream edge of the diversion dam will reduce public exposure to a dangerous situation. The increased presence of people working in the area of the fish passageway may deter some people from using the land as a dump. Consultation and Coordination A full EIS was requested on the long-term water contract mentioned in the EA. One person cited skepticism about reports cited in the EA because they were government reports (government regulatory-generated science), and another cited skepticism because the reports were generated by PhD's. Another reviewer suggested that more coordination of analyses and data sharing is needed among agencies. One reviewer complained about the short amount of time available to review the draft EA and another about the lack of notification of people about the availability of the report. Another reviewer suggested that reports on the monitoring and progress of the project be made available to the public. Monitoring of the interim agreement will provide data on the need for and effects of a long-term water contract. A decision on whether an EIS will be needed will be made at that time, but it is recognized that this is a possibility. Concerning references cited, the best available information was utilized. All reports put out by the Recovery Implementation Program must be peer-reviewed by three professional scientists before they are published in final form. There are no peer-reviewed academic reports that contradict the information or conclusions referenced in the EA. Reclamation agrees that coordination with agencies and other organizations is becoming increasingly important. Operation meetings, held three times a year, have been a good start at this because all affected parties have input into operating plans. We expect this type of cooperation to continue to increase. The time allowed for review of the draft EA--over 30 days-- is standard and exceeds requirements. The draft EA was sent to over 300 parties who have expressed interest in the proposals and was further discussed at public meetings in Gunnison and Grand Junction. Public involvement activities on Gunnison River activities will continue and reports made on monitoring and progress on proposals in this EA and on other activities. All reports will be public information. 56