My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00769
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00769
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:27:42 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 9:56:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.766
Description
Gunnison River General Publications - Correspondence - Reports - Etc
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
3/1/1993
Author
Unknown
Title
Scoping Report for the Gunnison River Contract - Analysis Notebook - Section II - Comments by Item Codes
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />M1SQg <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />Gunnison River Contract $copip. - SORTED Comments <br /> <br />::~:f~~;t.%7'~ <br />'~:\/'~?: <br /> <br />6. 1. 34. Water for Monument and water for endangered fish need to be justified separately - <br />have different needs. However, try to use (same) water for both needs. <br /> <br />6. 2.2. 03. Look at opportunities for protection and improvement of ecosystem through more <br />natural condition of river: . <br />-trout -Monument <br />-endangered species -Gunnison Gorge <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />2.2. 25. <br />downstream" <br /> <br />Adequate peaks are also needed for overbank flooding for endangered fish <br />Also,. are there other ways to create overbank flooding7 <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />2.2. <br /> <br />28. <br /> <br />There is a moral issue in letting a species go extinct. <br /> <br />6. 3. 36. Experiment may produce no results for endangered fish; stretch of river is small <br />compared to whole system. Has anyone challenged? Who says its even necessary? <br /> <br />6. 3. 37. Temperature changes.. reservoir (water) too cold for endangered fish. What is <br />purpose of improving babitat in canyon when they can'tidon't live there anyway7 Definition of <br />habitat/goals needed. <br /> <br />6. 4. 21. Western Colorado Congress concerned that: I) the primary purpose of contract, to <br />protect resources of Monument, not be lost; and 2) endangered fisbes not be the deciding factor. <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />5. <br /> <br />.28. <br /> <br />Concerned tbat test flows were made before studies done. Sbould know effects first. <br /> <br />.:<.: :.~>,{::';~ <br />..<)<:.." <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />s. <br /> <br />32. <br /> <br />Location where you want high flow needs to be specifically defined. <br /> <br />6. ARAPAHOE; p6,'5. In defining goals to be met by water releases, BUREC should take into <br />consideration that the Monument is not a priority stream reach for any endangered fish species, as <br />identified in the Recovery Implementation Program. <br /> <br />6. CAMPBELL; pl,'4. In particular, U.S. Fisb and Wildlife Service must do a reconsultation on the <br />operation of the Aspinall Unit to determine if its operation should be changed to protect fish and <br />wildlife babitat within tbe Gunnison Gorge pursuant to tbe Endangered Species Act. <br /> <br />6. COLO_SPR; p3.#17. Witb specific reference to paragrapb 14, how can the agencies agree in <br />advance of any determination tbat the Endangered Species Act analysis will not impact the amounts to <br />be released under the Contract? <br /> <br />6. CREDA; p3, '4. On page 10 of the public information packet, you discuss the 5-year study of the <br />Aspinall Unit concerning endangered fish. You state tbat you will provide study flows during that 5- <br />year study but do not indicate whether such study flows are within or without the normal operation <br />pattern of the Aspinall Unit. What NEPA clearance do you intend to provide7 <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />CREDA; p3,'5. Reclamation does commit to NEPA compliance concerning any permanent changes in <br />operations to the Aspinall Unit resulting from tbe final biological opinion at tbe conclusion of tbe 5- <br />year study. However, you then talk about separate biological opinion for tbe contract without talking <br />about NEPA compliance. on that biological opinion. You also need to talk about combining the two <br />biological opinions and tbe need to consider otber species, especially tbe bald eagle. in any endangered <br /> <br />,.;.. <br /> <br />15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.