My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00916
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00916
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:28:28 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:02:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.115.J
Description
Florida Project
State
CO
Basin
San Juan/Dolores
Water Division
7
Date
1/1/1951
Author
USDOI-BOR
Title
Florida Project Colorado - A Supplement to the Colorado River Storage Project Report
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.
/
34
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 />-----.---,---:;--..-c---,----;;:-,;::-;-;.-~_;:_:-~- -..-.="'".-..',_,_.:;:-;::----:-;-- <br /> <br />FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE REPORT <br /> <br />42. Summary of wildlife values.- Preproject and postproject values are <br />summarized in Table 4: <br /> <br />TABLE 4 <br /> <br />Summary of Annual Wildlife Values <br /> <br /> Preproject Postproject Net Gain or Loss <br />Big game $ 300 $ -$ 300 <br />Upland game 2,900 4,100 1,200 <br />Fur animals 1,000 1,100 100 <br />Waterfowl <br />Total $4,200 $5,200 $1,000 <br /> <br />Means of Mitigating Losses and Deriving Maximum Benefits <br /> <br />43. Available data indicate that measures designed for improvement of <br />aquatic habitat would not be consistent with the primary purpose of the <br />project if an allocation of water were required. <br /> <br />44. The ten-year water study made by the sponsor indicates that there <br />would not have been enough water to meet the irrigation requirements of <br />the Florida Project during four of the ten years. Florida Mesa has had <br />irrigated farming for many years and water rights are well established, <br />although many landowners have not received their full allocation when <br />needed. In addition to water shortages and complete appropriation of the <br />available water, little consideration has been given to fish and wildlife <br />in Colorado statutes pertaining to water use. Therefore, neither a more <br />favorable operation of the reservoir in the interests of the fishery nor <br />an increase in the proposed minimum release from the reservoir seems to <br />be feasible. <br /> <br />45. Stream improvement and fish screens possibly could alleviate some of <br />the adverse conditions that would exist with the Florida Project in opera- <br />tion, therefore making possible an enhancement of fishery values to accrue <br />to the proposed project. <br /> <br />46. Rotary screens constructed in the Florida Canal and the Florida <br />Farmers Ditch near the headgates lootluld prevent losses of trout in these <br />diversions. The screens should be provided with a by-pass to carry the <br />fish back to the river. Based upon further investigations, any other <br />diversion resulting in significant losses to the fishery should also be <br /> <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.