My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Specific Comments on Platte River Draft EIS
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1001-2000
>
Specific Comments on Platte River Draft EIS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:38:44 PM
Creation date
6/16/2009 1:14:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8461.100
Description
Adaptive Management Workgroup
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
9/17/2004
Author
CWCB
Title
Specific Comments on Platte River Draft EIS
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Board Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
7 <br />Table 4-34 Shows predicted changes in width o <br />whether this is within the margin of error of the <br />such as depth, velocity, grain size, vegetation d, <br />extremely limited and are presented as represen <br />60 years at about 10 percent. We question <br />del given the variability in the input parameters <br />nics and width measurements (which are <br />several miles but are actually points). <br />P. 4-76 The DEIS provides no quantitative data c rrelating river stage and groundwater depths in <br />wet meadows. In addition, no quantitative data or trends in ground water depths or wet meadow <br />hydrology is provided. Only opinions are offered and should be removed from the DEIS. <br />P. 4-80 This table needs to be revised to include <br />Power District and Central Nebraska Public Pov <br />that a majority of the Central Platte River is cun <br />protection of the species <br />ids under ownership and lease of Nebraska Public <br />and Irrigation District. It is astonishing to note <br />ly under management for the conservation and <br />P. 4-88 The DEIS should cite the studies <br />sand moisture content and invertebrate density. <br />P. 4-88-89 The DEIS does not analyze the conflic ing flow management objectives established by <br />the Services flow recommendations. Establishing tern and plover nesting in April- June and at the <br />same time establishing flow goals for whooping c anes and pulse and peak flows which would result <br />in the potential take of terns and plovers needs to e analyzed, discussed and resolved. <br />P. 4-91 In the previous discussion nest inundation <br />DEIS cites Ducey (1982) as reporting that higher r <br />sandbar longer and reduced the elevated area. Th <br />quoted as stating that the sand bar had been cut by <br />not consistent with the opinions and predictions of <br />cited without any nest elevation data. Here the <br />er flows in spring made a Lower Platte River <br />, referring to another riverine location, Ducey is <br />e river. It appears that Ducey's observations are <br />the Sed Veg model. <br />P. 4-91 Please remove the speculation regarding <br />defined, and the conjecture that flood flow quite <br />P. 4-91 Please provide the data that substantiates <br />erosion. <br />P. 4-101 This section on sediment transport highli <br />of SedVeg. First early in the DEIS, it is stated tha <br />should be evaluated; here it is used to estimate ton <br />that maximum sediment is transported at high flov <br />moved per unit time and how flow frequency effec <br />moves into a rate per day assessment, but then say <br />The section then concludes with the admission tha <br />the level of impairment of sediment transport in th <br />development; in other sections, the DEIS suggests <br />P. 4-101 The DEIS cites fish kills with no data of <br />speculation that: "undoubtedly some were due to i <br />P 4-98 The statements regarding critical spawning <br />table elevations of sand bars, which is not <br />elv created new habitat. <br />opinion that hydrocycling exacerbates channel <br />hts many inconsistencies in the DEIS and the use <br />SedVeg cannot be quantitative but that trends <br />of sediment transported. Second, while stating <br />s, there is no documentation of how much is <br />s the total sediment movement. Third the section <br />it may not be representative of a typical day. <br />the lack of data does not allow a determination of <br />Lower Platte River as it relates to water <br />hat habitats may need to be mitigated. <br />hen, how many, and over what area. Its <br />-vating temperature" is inappropriate. <br />itions for the Pallid Sturgeon are speculative. <br />Flood Protection • Water Project Planning d Finance • Stream and Lake Proteckion <br />Water Supply Protection Conservation P1amling
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.