Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, , <br /> <br />~-' <br /> <br />aOl0g~ <br /> <br />. ' <br /> <br />Page <br /> <br />Paragraph <br /> <br />Comments <br /> <br />I. Sununary <br /> <br />b <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />c <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />d <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />h <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />k <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />II. Chapter 2 <br />II-I 1 <br />II-I 4 <br />II-3 1 <br />II-3 2 <br />II-3 3 <br />II-4 2 <br />III. Chapter 3 <br />III-12 Table III-6 <br />III-13 Table III-7 <br />III-14 3 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />CLOSED BASIN <br /> <br />Draft Supplement to Final <br /> <br />Environmental Statement - Feb. II, 1982 <br /> <br />Shouldn't the water rights acquired at Russell Lakes be <br />included in the total amount of water for mitigation? <br /> <br />How can you state there will be no additional environmental <br />impact in stages 3, 4, and 5 if the number of wells planned <br />for these areas change? What if they double in number? <br /> <br />We will stock fish in the channel and will need the 10 <br />fishing access points. <br /> <br />We will manage the Russell Lakes WMA. <br /> <br />See conunent for e-5 above. <br /> <br />Mention the loss of 1050 fisherman days at the Blanca WMA. <br /> <br />Why spend the money to bury lateral pipelines if surge <br />tanks and stand pipes are constructed in the corridor? <br /> <br />Is the change in opinions due to a change in administration? <br /> <br />Change to Russell Lakes WMA, <br /> <br />See c-6 above. <br /> <br />Surge tanks and pipe stands will have an effect on the <br />esthetics of the area, <br /> <br />See d-2 above. <br /> <br />The water required (5300 AF) to improve 4374 acres at <br />Alamosa NWR disagrees with the 4500 AF in Table 111-7. <br /> <br />Is this table necessary? If so, the title shoLil.d indicate the <br />table - shows only partial mitigation, <br /> <br />See comment e-5. <br />