Laserfiche WebLink
<br />U. S. Forest Service (USFS) vegetation managem<;nt may affect flows in the North, South, and Central <br />Platte basins, Further study is required to determine these impacts and the USFS's responsibility to <br />address these impacts, In addition, in the review of existing USFS management plans and future <br />amendments to such plans, the U, S, Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) will establish a review <br />criterion that vegetation management shall not lead to new depletions or a reduction in runoff from <br />forest lands that adversely affect target flows or Program Projects for Threatened and Endangered <br />Species. Whatever the outcome of these studies arid reviews, the signatories will not be released from <br />any first increment obligations or commitments of! reducing shortages to the U.S, Fish and Wildlife <br />Service target flows by an average of 130,000 - 1$0,000 acre-feet per year, <br /> <br />All projects included in the Water Action Plan are voluntary and participation is incentive based. <br />Inclusion of these projects in the Program is subject to reaching an agreement between the involved <br />parties. <br /> <br />B, Additional Information Needs <br /> <br />The information presented for the projects included:in the Water Action Plan is at a reconnaissance <br />level of detail. Feasibility studies, final designs, and environmental permitting may be required <br />before specific projects can be implemented. There are several information needs that relate to most <br />or all ofthe alternatives identified in the Water Action Plan, In addition, there are some information <br />needs that are specific to each alternative, <br /> <br />The following additional feasibility studies and analyses are needed to address information <br />requirements that are common to most projects: <br /> <br />· A more in-depth analysis of project costs and yields. <br /> <br />· An assessment of the impact of project yields on other Water Action Plan components. <br /> <br />· An analysis of third party impacts focusing primarily on hydrologic, economic, and social <br />impacts. <br /> <br />· An analysis of local support or opposition for fhe project. <br /> <br />· A more detailed analysis of environmental effects including impacts on surface water, <br />groundwater, water quality, vegetation, wildlife, and on-site threatened and endangered <br />species, <br /> <br />· A more in-depth analysis of legal and instituti~nal requirements necessary to implement the <br />project. <br /> <br />Feasibility studies could also take the form of demonstration projects as discussed in Chapter 10 of <br />the Study, Three types of demonstration projects were suggested, which include small-scale projects <br />that are constructed to test both the feasibility of larger scale projects and the assumptions used in <br />their evaluation, projects that are not physically constructed, but provide further data through field <br />investigations and measurements, and projects that focus on refining assumptions and methodologies <br />used to analyze an alternative by developing more sophisticated analytic tools, <br /> <br />C:\Dmft Water Action Plan (May 30, 2000)\wllpCl l'ep;ln (Version 6 BND2)-.doc <br /> <br />4 <br />