Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~JUL-ll~S7 13.32 FROM.M.B.S.S. <br /> <br />ID,-S70 247 8827 <br /> <br />PAGE 1 5/2~ <br /> <br />I'- <br />~ <br />N <br /> <br />c <br /> <br />The project will still result in substantial and unnecessary environmental <br />impacts. <br /> <br />. The new proposal continues to include a large and unnecessary dam and reservoir that would <br />drown Colorado's Bodo Wildlife area - wintering habitat for the state's second largest elk <br />herd. <br /> <br />. It will continue to consume huge amotmtS of federally generated electrical power to pump <br />water over 500 feet up the side of a mountain. <br /> <br />. It ",ill divert and deplete one of the West;s last free-flowing rivers and impact a gold medal <br />trout fishery in the AmIIlas. It will also interrupt flows in the portion of the Animas that is <br />used as an Olympic white water naining site. <br /> <br />. Alternatives exist that would deliver water to the tribes at less cost and with less <br />envirorunental impactS. <br /> <br />Implementation of the new proposal will likely req uire that several existing <br />laws and agreements be subjected to fundamental and, in some instances, <br />very harmful changes. The changes include the following: <br /> <br />. The new proposal would require revisions to the 1986 Ute Settlement Agreement to reflect <br />changes in water allocations among the parties. <br /> <br />· The 1988 Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights Settlement Act would subsequently have to be <br />amended to secur~ Congressional affirmation of a revised settlement agreement and new <br />requirements stemming from changes in the agreement. <br /> <br />. The Water Supply Act of 1958 would have to be amended to modify or waive current <br />requirements that the beneficiaries ofM&I water repay all construction costs with interest <br />and all operation and maintenance costs. <br /> <br />. The new proposal has implications regarding allocation of water project hydropower <br />revenues among the Upper Colorado River Basin states, water allocations between Colorado <br />and New Mexico and the need to deauthorize all of the remaining features of the original <br />ALP, all or which may require amendments to the Colorado River Storage Project Act of <br />1956. <br /> <br />The new proposal is a Trojan Horse for the possible development of a much <br />larger project that is similar to the original ALP. <br /> <br />· The size or proposed reservoir for the new project (260,000 acre feet) is 92% of the size of <br />the original ALP reservoir, which was designed to provide sUbstantia! quantities of irrigation <br />"''llter. <br /> <br />2 <br />