Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00288"5' <br /> <br />contract has decreased recently, although slightly more than a three year's <br />supply remains under contract. <br /> <br />WATER <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />REMOVE SECOND AND THIRD PARAGRAPHS UNDER SECTION TITLED "Current Use and <br />Management" (FEIS PAGE 111-92 AND 111-93) AND REPLACE WITH THE FOLLOWING: <br /> <br />The maximum 50 year average annual water yield increase is estimated at 60,067 <br />acre feet over current levels. It would result from commercial and <br />non-commercial vegetation treatment. The estimate of area available for <br />vegetation treatment was based upon the following assumptions: <br /> <br />- For this analysis, only commercial clearcutting or created openings in <br />spruce-fir and lodgepole were modeled for water yield purposes. <br /> <br />- Shelterwood and selection harvest methods were considered, to have minimal to <br />no impact on water yield. The shelterwood harvest for this planning cycle <br />are generally initial entries. <br /> <br />1 - The model was limited from selecting clearcutting treatment methods in the <br />~ <br />Ponderosa Pine type due to regeneration problems. <br /> <br />vy- Aspen harvest water yield increases decline rapidly (Hibbert 1979) and were <br />not modeled. <br /> <br />,I <br />, - In the analysis, the potential for increasing water yield from spruce-fir and <br />lodgepole pine types was limited, due to EPA concerns over sediment increase <br />from non-point sources and cost, of non-commercial methods of vegetation <br />treatment. <br /> <br />REMOVE SECTION TITLED "Demand Trends" (FEIS PAGE 111-911) AND REPLACE WITH THE <br />FOLLOWIIIG: <br /> <br />" Demand Trends - This demand analysis involved the production of water from <br />\ National Forest lands for downstream users. There was no distinction between <br />users which were adjacent to the Forest and those which were out of state. <br />Water production was measured in acre-feet. <br /> <br />The Water Resources Planning Act of 1965 directed the U.S. Water Resources <br />Council to maintain a continuing study of the Nation's water and related land <br />resources and to prepare periodic assessment to determine the adequacy of these <br />resources to meet present and future water requirements. This analysis used <br />the Second National Assessment, related specifically to the Upper Colorado <br />Region, in determining the future demand estimates for water in the Forest's <br />planning area. <br /> <br />.~ <br />.\1 <br />'>" <br />0' <br /> <br />The following discussion is excerpted from the report titled "The Nation's <br />Water Resources 1975 - 2000"; Volume 4: Upper Colorado Region; Second National <br />Water Assessment by the U.S. Water Resources Council. Page 14 of the report <br />states: "Total consumption will increase 32 percent in the next 25 years. Two <br />important water uses in the Upper Colorado Region that deplete streamflow are <br />exports and evaporation from reservoirs." <br /> <br />18 <br /> <br />"'Tl\.th .lJ) Sb,^^,.<2- <br />C'if) Q.v)Crl.I.J:>~ <br />crvc (jJc~'~\p- C -17 <br />