Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OO?SH <br />CESPK-CO,R <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Public Notice Number 200375243 <br /> <br />Imp;]"!s to Wildliff' <br /> <br />This office has determined that the proposed project may affect the Federally endangered Colorado <br />pikeminnow and razorback sucker, based on water depletions trom the San Juan River drainage. This <br />office is currently consulting with the US Fish and Wildlife Service according to Section 7 of the <br />Endangered Species Act. The District Engineer has made this detennination based on infonnation <br />provided by the applicant and on the Corps' preliminary investigation. <br /> <br />Additionally, adverse impacts may potentially occur to the state sensitive roundtaJI chub, and <br />flannel mouth sucker. In order to minimize potential impacts to these native fishes, the project will be <br />coordinated with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and the New Mexico Fish and Game Department to <br />establish a monitoring and f10w release plan that meet the requirement of the Compact and seasonal f10w <br />requirements for these fishes, <br /> <br />Df'plf'tions <br /> <br />Average annual calculated depletions associated with the proposed reservoir are 1,602 AF, These <br />depletions consist of evaporative losses from the surtace of the reservoir and additional depletions due to <br />irrigation of land within the La Plata basin, <br /> <br />Altf'm:ltivps <br /> <br />The applicant investigated several alternatives to the proposed reservoir. These alternatives include: <br /> <br />1. Rf'rl ME''';] \V:lTrl Rp,prvoir Fnl~rEf'mp.nt: A feasibility study for the enlargement of Red Mesa <br />Ward Reservoir from 1,172 AF to 4,070 Afhas been completed, This study detennined that <br />enlargement of Red Mesa Ward Reservoir is not practicable because the reservoir is <br />approximately 21 miles from the state line, resulting in significant water loss through the channel <br />and less water delivered to satisfy the Compact. In addition, inf10ws to the reservoir are <br />inadequate to routinely fill and would be less than Long Hollow Reservoir, making it more <br />difficult to meet the targeted flows at the state line, <br /> <br />2. Pipeline: A pipeline also was investigated from the Hesperus Gauge to the State Line Gauge. <br />This alternative is not practicable due to cost. The estimated cost for material, construction, and <br />right-of,way acquisition is approximately $25 million to $30 million, compared to $12 to $15 <br />million for Long Hollow Reser,oir. <br /> <br />3. No Artion: No action could result in legal action between the States of New Mexico and <br />Colorado, A lawsuit would be costly for both states. This alternative would not satisfy the 1922 <br />La Plata Compact. <br /> <br />4. Solriiers Dr;l\v Rpsen!t')irs 1 ::Inn ?: These reservoirs have conditional water rights and are decreed. <br />for a combined 1,000 AF of storage, yielding much less water than Long Hollow. Also, the <br />reservoir outlets are approximately 28 miles from the state line and would discharge to the dry <br />reach of the La Plata River. This alternative would provide minimal advantage over the natural <br />delivery of the La Plata water. <br /> <br />PropOSf'rI Mitirntion <br /> <br />Impacts to waters of the U.S. will require mitigation, The applicant has proposed the following <br />conceptual mitigation options: <br />