My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00972
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP00972
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:28:39 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:04:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.10.C.4
Description
UCRBRIP Flooded Bottom Lands
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
12/1/1995
Author
UCRBRIP
Title
Levee Removal Strategic Plan - Final Draft
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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 />~OV-1J-95 WED 09: 15 <br /> <br />WAPA ::1m RONHENT AFF A: RS <br /> <br />FAX NO. 303275 \ 727 <br /> <br />P. 02/02 <br /> <br />below Doso/Gray a signifiollllt difference. <br /> <br />Thc last sentence in the Green River pilllgruph on page 6 needs to be corrected. <br /> <br />The refercllce l() "Block 2 and 3" in the second sentence, second Green River paragraph, is <br />confus:ing. Should this be Block 1 & 2, B!ld should it refer to pagc~ B and 97 <br /> <br />The Colorado River paragraph at the bottom of page 6 should indiel1tc 11 geographic range (n:ach <br />of river) being considered. Will the Gunnison River be con~idered at some point in the future? <br />An explanation for the appare01lack or =phasis on me ColoradO River vs the Green River (2 & <br />2 sites vs 10 & 10 ~ites) would answer the reader's question before it is asked. <br /> <br />TABLE 1, pase 7, is not clear regarding the designation of low nonnative density, "up~treall1" <br />and "downstream." Is this lownoo.native density up and down from a specific site or up and <br />down from thc Dcso/Gn>.y division? Also, a footnote to ellplain the prtl~~nce of "N/A"s would <br />help ciarify this table. I llS>Ullle t.~ey mean there are no occurrences of a specific .ite type with <br />the desired up/down(?) nO!lll8.Uve uen~ity in that block ofsiles. <br /> <br />Under Evaluation and Refinement on page 11, will evaluation be based only on comparison <br />between paired sites or ",;11 baseline condition dn.ta be collected to cvaluatc individual sites over <br />time. Does this need to be outlined in the strategy? <br /> <br />The last two senlellces under Nnnnative Species on page 12, need to be corrected. <br /> <br />Table 2., page 13 and 14. seining is a viable, accepted sampling method for YOY natives, is there <br />a reason seining will nOl be used? Also, a foot note on page 14 to explain Why N/A is <br />appropriate f('r Channel Catfish under "While Connectea" would clarify the table for thc reader. <br /> <br />Does the Products and Time fr=e pnge (15) need to cOll5idcr NEP A compliance in the ~.rnc line <br />since levee removal will utilize CAP funds? <br /> <br />T TCllize I may have missed the marl:: in some areas of the docwnent, but I did find it confusing <br />and undellf in placcs and where this is headed, clarity will serve us well. Please consider my <br />comments and incorporate those that ",ill add to the quality of chis document. Call me at (303) <br />275-1725 jfyou have questions. <br /> <br />GLB <br /> <br />.; <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.