Laserfiche WebLink
' Table ES-2 <br /> List of ALP Project Alternatives <br /> Number Title <br /> I 1 Administration Proposal <br /> 2 Administration Proposal with Recreation Element Added <br /> I 3 Administration Proposal with San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program <br /> (SJRBRIP)Element Added <br /> 1 <br /> I 4 Administration Proposal with SJRBRIP and Recreation Element Added <br /> 5 Animas-La Plata Reconciliation Plan , I <br /> 6 Animas River Citizen's Coalition Conceptual Alternative <br /> 7 1996 Final Supplement to the Final Environmental Statement Recommended Action <br /> 8 Administration Proposal with an Alternative Water Supply for Non-Colorado Ute Indian <br /> Entities <br /> 9 Citizens'Progressive Alliance Alternative <br /> 10 No Action Alternative <br /> 1 I Non-structural components include acquiring existing water sources. As part of this analysis,this FSEIS <br /> inventories the available land and associated water rights in the McElmo Creek and Mancos,La Plata, <br /> Animas,Florida,and Pine River Basin drainages in the vicinity of the two Colorado Ute Tribal <br /> reservations. Land values,seniority of water rights,parcel sizes,and other factors were evaluated to <br /> I develop a reasonable picture of the potential acquisition of land and direct flow water rights. Working <br /> with the basic assumptions that water and land would be purchased from willing sellers,and that project <br /> modifications and reoperation would be able to receive the approval of all participating parties to <br /> proceed,representative areas were identified in order to develop an analysis of the range of likely non- <br /> structural component options that might be implemented by one or more of the water users in the future. <br /> Finally, as part of the non-structural analysis,the potential for securing water supplies from existing <br /> ',! Reclamation-owned storage facilities in the region was evaluated. <br /> The 10 alternatives,and their structural and non-structural components, were then evaluated to determine <br /> . ` the relative practicality of each alternative in terms of: <br /> ' • Potential environmental impacts <br /> • Meeting the ALP Project purpose and need <br /> • Technical and economic factors <br /> Considering all three sets of these factors(i.e., environmental,purpose and need,and technical and <br /> economic merits)for each of the 10 alternatives,Alternatives 4 and 6(modified to provide for water to <br /> non-Colorado Ute Tribal entities)were identified as warranting refinement. Each alternative had unique <br /> strengths in various areas,and together they represented significantly different approaches to meeting the <br /> purpose and need of the project. Alternative 4 is principally a structural alternative and Alternative 6 is <br /> I principally a non-structural alternative. Alternatives 4 and 6 were both determined to have merit. As <br /> such,Alternatives 4 and 6 were then refined to more closely meet project requirements, and the structural <br /> and non-structural components of both refined alternatives were then evaluated. The environmental <br /> impacts and proposed mitigation for Refined Alternatives 4 and 6 are discussed in this FSEIS. A more <br /> detailed discussion of the alternatives evaluation process is contained in Sections 2.3,2.4, and 2.5 of the <br /> FSEIS. A further discussion of the evaluation of impacts from Refined Alternatives 4 and 6 is included <br /> in Chapter 3, and in Section 5.2 of this FSEIS. <br /> 1 ES-6 <br />