WSP03260 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

00 o .... o ---") Cl For Alternatives Ml, M3, and M4, Reclamation would exercise greater flexibility in the issuance of rights-of-use permits that provide easier access through ungated fence openings. For concrete lining alternatives (Cl and C2) Reclamation would require a much stricter fencing policy that would require gated openings to provide a reasonable measure of safety. Safe tv Features As discussed previously, safety features for all alternatives, including the No-Action Alternative, would include fencing, and, in the case of concrete-lining, deer escape structures. Concrete- lined segments in Cl and C2 would also be constructed with ridges in the canal and include escape ladders, and would require a much stricter fencing policy of requiring gated openings. Fish and wildlife Measures Fish and wildlife measures are included in the Unit (Reclamation, 1986 and 1990; Fish and wildlife Service, 1984). Other than additional deer escapes required under the concrete lining alternatives, there would be no changes in fish and wildlife plans. These plans center on an ongoing program of replacing habitat losses due to seepage reductions by acquiring and developing lands along the Colorado River as the reductions occur. Approximately 1,200 acres have been acquired to date and are being developed as the Horsethief Canyon State Wildlife Area. Summarv Comparison of Alternatives Land ACQuisition The acreage needed to widen the canal corridor in the alternatives involving membrane lining has been significantly reduced for both fee land and temporary ROW from standard Reclamation practice and from the acreage identified in the draft EA prior to consideration of the public comments. Modified Alternatives Ml and M3 require the highest amount of acquired land to provide for the increased width of the membrane- lined canal and a north O&M road. After considering concerns of adjacent landowners, these land acquisition needs have been reduced through shifting the design centerline of the canal 10 feet to the south in Alternatives MI and M3. Table 1 shows the maximum amount of fee land or reserved ROW to be 10.3 acres for Reach lA, 20.5 acres for Reach lB, and 84 acres for Reach 2. Alternative M4 avoids the purchase of fee land by shifting the canal to the maximum extent possible, which is generally 20 feet. Concrete lining in Alternatives Cl and C2 involves a 10-foot shift in the canal centerline similar to that of Modified Alternative MI. Finally, the proposal to membrane line segments of Reach lA under 19