WSP03675 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

<<::l" O"J ct) N C o PLANNING STUDIES Advance planning studies were initiated in 1980. These initial studies revealed that the best damsite would be Conner Dam on the Gila River. However, significant environmental concerns prompted the Bureau to consider other alternatives. As Reclamation studies advanced, new alternatives were developed. They included: - A Small Mainstream Diversion Structure - An Offstream Reservoir - A Large Pipeline (for direct pumping from the river) - Floodplain Storage Basins - A Ground Water Management System with Artificial Recharge Basins and a Wellfield for Recovery It is from this set, with the inclusion of Conner Dam, that the alternatives selected for the EIS were developed. Reclamation studies have now reached the stage of planning where cost estimates are being prepared for the alternatives; water quality, wildlife habitat, vegetation, and aquatic studies are all underway; and recreation studies are being conducted. In November 1984, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) notified Reclamation that the spikedace and loach minnow were being considered for proposal as threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, and that portions of the study area are in an area proposed for "critical habitat for the two fish." In June 1985 both fish species were proposed for listing as threatened with critical habitat. The Supplemental Appropriation Act for 1985, signed in August 1985, contained an amendment (authored by New Mexico Senator Jeff Bingaman) specifying Reclamation's schedule for the study's decision-making process. The Conference Committee Report calls for selection of the proposed action by August 15, 1985, with the draft EIS to be released in September 1986, and the final EIS available by September 1987. The actions by the FWS prompted Reclamation to delay selection of the proposed action so that analyses can be conducted on alternatives specifically addressing the proposed fish listing. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES The following alternatives are proposed to be included in the EIS. Please review them and tell us if you think they are reasonable and let us know, during the public meetings or on the enclosed response form, if you think there are other reasonable alternatives that should be included in the EIS. No Federal Action (Acquisition of Water Rights for Municipal and Domestic Needs) With this alternative, the New Mexico feature of the Central Arizona Project and related water exchange would not be implemented. Given this situation, 3