|
<br />of the recreatlon features of the reservoir may be modified in accord_
<br />ance with the alternatives provided in P.L. 89-72; and
<br />
<br />claims
<br />
<br />f.
<br />d",
<br />
<br />1I0ld and save
<br />to construction
<br />
<br />ch,
<br />and
<br />
<br />United States free from water
<br />operation of the project.
<br />
<br />rights
<br />
<br />an average of 50,000 man_days of fishlng with a benefit of $75,000
<br />annually. It was also stated that waterfowl USe of the area presently
<br />is limited to the spring migration period but a reservoir with a per-
<br />manent pool would attract an average of one million days of waterfowl
<br />use annually. ltwas estimated that there would be 3,000 man-days of
<br />waterfowl hunting with a benefit of$13,SOO annually. In addition, the
<br />reservoir would support wildlife_oriented recreation of S,OOO visitor_
<br />days annually, yielding a benefit ofS2,SOO. Itw'as added that adop_
<br />tion of a zoning plan would insure adequate areas for fhhing, hunting,
<br />and other wildlife uSeS.
<br />
<br />38. COCRlJ!NATION WITH LOCAL n,'TERES'!'S.- Upon COJ:lpletion of pre-
<br />liminary studies of the Fountain Reservoir Project, the Albuquerquo
<br />District Engineer and members of his staff met with State officials
<br />in Denver and with city and county officials and other interested
<br />parties in Pueblo on May 23, 1969. The meeting' were arranged to
<br />obtain the views of local interests regarding the potential plan,
<br />explain the requirements of local cooperation, and to obtain an expres-
<br />sion of willingness on their part to cooperate in the project in the
<br />event of its authorization. Subsequent to the conference, letters of
<br />intent indicating the willingness of local interests and the State of
<br />Colorado to cooperate in the construction of the project were roceived
<br />from the Governor of the State of Colorado, the Colorado Division of
<br />Game, Fish and Parks, the PueblO County Board of County Commissioners,
<br />the Pueblo Regional Planning Commission, and the PueblO City Council.
<br />Copies of the letters are included in Attachment VI.
<br />
<br />b. Bu~au of Outdoor Reoreation.- Coordination of report
<br />studies with respect to recreational potential of various reservoir
<br />projects considered in the basic report was discussed on several oc-
<br />casions with staff members of the Mid-Continent Region of the Bureau
<br />of Outdoor Recreation who furnished preliminary evaluations of outdoor
<br />recreation needs. Pertinent data on the proposed Fountain Reservoir
<br />Project were furnished to the Regional Director with a request for
<br />assistance in evaluation of potential recreation benefits; however,
<br />he expressed regret that his office lacked the resources to effectively
<br />review and report on the proposal at this time, A copy of his letter
<br />is included in Attachment VI.
<br />
<br />39. COORDINATION WIrH OTHER AGENCIES. _ During the preparat ion of
<br />this supplemental report, close coordination of studies relating to the
<br />Fountain Creek water resources problems and needs, and SOlutions thereto,
<br />was maintained with the regional and local offices of interested Federal
<br />agencies and various departments of the State of C010rade, and the
<br />State of Kansas. The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, the Bureau
<br />of Outdoor Recreation, and the Colorado Department of Natural Resources
<br />were consulted in the formulation and evaluation of the potential Foun-
<br />tainReservoirProjeet. Partidpationby the individual agencles
<br />involved in the project planning is briefly discussed in the following
<br />subparagraphz,
<br />a, Pisfi'anii WitdU/,. Service. SUNlau of SpOl't Piehel'iee and
<br />wiWiZife.~ Prior to completion of the draft of report. design details
<br />of the proposed reservoir project were coordinated with the Regional
<br />Director of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Region 2,
<br />Albuquerque, N. Mex" and the Field Supervisor, Division of River Basin
<br />Studies, Denver, Colo. In connection with the studies and by authority
<br />of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 State 401, as amended;
<br />16 U.S,C. 661 ot seq ) a letter report on the proposed project was
<br />prepared by the Regional Director and coordinated with the Colorado
<br />Division of Game, Fish and Parks. A copy of the report is included in
<br />Attachment VI. In summary, the report states that the Fountain Reser-
<br />voir would have an insignificant effect on the existing poor fish habi-
<br />tat of Fountain Creek. However, since the reservoir slte is in a
<br />favorable location to serve colorado'S fast-growing population centers
<br />of Denver, COlorado Springs, and Pueblo, a permanent pool of 20,000
<br />acre-feet Pl'ovi<.ling good habitat forwann-wlItcrfish..."uld su!'pur t
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />40, Immediately upon completion of detailed project studies of the
<br />Fountain Reserveir Project and preparation of draft of report thereon,
<br />a public meeting waS held by the Albuquerque Olstrict Engineer at
<br />Pueblo on March 2, 1970, to present the results of the supple~ental
<br />studies to State and local offidals and other interested parties. The
<br />meeting was well_attended by about 150 people. Pertinent features of
<br />the proposed reservoir project were presented in detail and the require-
<br />mentsofloealinterests_wereexplained,afterwhichattendeeswere
<br />invited to cOme forward and express their opinions as to the desira-
<br />bility of the project and their views toward local participation. The
<br />project was enthusiastically received by the ~&jority of speakers, and
<br />previous statements made by responsible local sponsors regarding their
<br />willingn~~~ to provide the required cooperation were confirmed. The
<br />General Manager of the Seutheastern Colorado Water Conservancy Oistrict
<br />called attention to their interest in the effect of the project on
<br />administration of the watcrz of the Fryingpan_Arkansas Preject, and
<br />pointed out the critical nature of availability of water for the
<br />permanent recreation pool. He added that if the economic feasibility
<br />of the project is predicated on the recreation pool and related bene_
<br />fits, then it would be necessary for the State of Colorado to provide
<br />proof as to the continued availability of water for this purpose. Some
<br />of the residents who live on farms located in the reservoir site ex-
<br />pressed fear that their lands would be subject to condemnation by the
<br />Federal Gevernment with accompanying loss of their water rights for
<br />irrigation purposes.
<br />
<br />'"
<br />
<br />17
<br />
|