Laserfiche WebLink
<br />d, The water rights are owned by the individual landowners. <br /> <br />2_ Compliance With Federal Regulations, <br /> <br />a. The Bureau of Reclamation declined to participate since the project <br />was not cost effective under their criteria. The question has been <br />raised as how it can therefore, be cost effective for NRCS? <br /> <br />b. They state that use of NRCS funds for improving MML is not <br />appropriate for the following reasons: (1) the purpose of the program <br />is to improve on-farm management, not for benefit of downstream <br />users, (2) OMID is not a landowner, and is therefore, not eligible. <br /> <br />3, Ownership of Laterals. The claim has been made that Mutual Mesa ditch <br />is not part of the Orchard Mesa system. A request has been made to <br />prove ownership of the right-of-way and ownership of the ditches. <br /> <br />4, Habitat Improvement. Various claims have been made that water cannot be <br />diverted for the purpose of wetlands and OMID cannot use its land for <br />growing hay for habitat. <br /> <br />5. One of the primary concerns of those opposed to the project appears to be <br />the fact that the Construction Fund loan will be repaid by revenues of the <br />entire District rather than the property owners under the Mutual Mesa <br />Lateral (MML) only. They contend that property owners on other laterals <br />have negotiated directly with the NRCS and/or paid for the costs of this <br />type of project themselves, <br /> <br />Information which addresses these items is provided at appropriate places in the <br />report. <br /> <br />1-4 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />