Laserfiche WebLink
Plan decisions were prepared in compliance with NEPA. The Agencies describe their <br />preferred alternative and the environmental consequences of all the options. Much of this <br />material is contained in the Environmental Impact Statement that accompanies the Draft <br />Plan Revision. In the Draft Plan, Alternative A is the no action alternative, meaning the <br />old Plans will be kept in place. Alternate "B" is the preferred alternative, or the SJPLC's <br />proposal alternative. Alternate "C" has a stronger focus on environmental conservation. <br />Alternative D is more focused on commodity production. <br />The Draft Plan Revision, which has numerous appendices, is available on disc and in <br />hard copy. <br />Janice Sheftel, Attorney with the Southwestern Water Conservation District <br />(SWCD), said the SWCD had asked for a 60 -day extension to the original comment <br />period, which ended March 11, but the Agencies granted only a 30 -day extension. She <br />asked whether there might be a further extension to the comment period. <br />Mark responded that the SWCD should send another letter to the SJPLC, but it was <br />unlikely the comment period would be extended. To do so would put the Agencies into <br />another Fiscal Year. Right now, the SJPLC staff is hoping to have the final Plan finished <br />by August 2009, but an extension of the comment period could mean not having the Final <br />Plan in place by the end of September 2009, which is the end of the Fiscal Year. <br />In answer to a question, Thurman said comments to the Draft Plan are reviewed locally. <br />Initially they are reviewed by a content- analysis team in Sacramento, Calif., which <br />gathers and organizes the comments to reduce redundancies, and then sends the package <br />on to the SJPLC. The local planning team then responds to the comments and/or makes <br />changes to the Draft Plan documents. <br />RIVER PROTECTION WORKGROUP <br />The Water Roundtable discussed the River Protection Workgroup (RPW), which was <br />created in 2006 to look at broader ways to protect the values of area rivers, starting with <br />Hermosa Creek and moving eastward to the Animas, Piedra, Pine, and San Juan Rivers, <br />and Vallecito Creek, all waterways with segments listed as Suitable for Wild and Scenic <br />River ( "WSR ") designation in the Draft Plan Revision. <br />Steve Fearn, representing San Juan County, said the workgroup includes representatives <br />of SWCD, San Juan Citizens Alliance, The Nature Conservancy, the Wilderness Support <br />Center, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Colorado Division of Water Resources, <br />Southern Ute Indian Tribe, and offices of Sen. Ken Salazar, Sen. Wayne Allard and Rep. <br />John Salazar. Steve said the RPW is designed to provide a public process to look at <br />important issues for these streams, including their values worth protecting and different <br />tools for providing that protection. WSR status is one such tool, but many others are <br />available. <br />3 <br />