Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />or no change, That means that environmental constituents will <br />not like the results, But is there any reference at all to "The <br />NEPAprocess will be initiated to determine the environmental <br />impact of no change in the operating criteria."? Phase II and <br />III are expected to be good enough for environmental <br />constituents, but if much change is indicated, it's not good <br />enough for the power interests--let's go to NEPA, <br /> <br />Fortunately page seven shows just where the Bureau of Reclamation <br />is coming from: If the Department"of Interior elects little or <br />no change, the basin states will likely concur. In your stated <br />assumption that the basin state representatives represent all <br />valid interests "including recreation and environment," then, <br />theoretically you have covered your legal mandate, But the <br />underlying assumption of comprehensive representation is <br />blatantly false. As I said walking away from our (Western River <br />Guides Association) meeting with Cliff Barrett last fall, "The <br />process is unacceptable because we don't have representation at <br />the bargaining table." Without beqqinq the question, just ask <br />any state governor specifically what interests are represented by <br />his basin state representative and the representative question <br />will be answered. Who are you trying to fool? Is it any <br />surprise that we are forced to seek a hearing before other <br />channels than administrative? <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />4?~~ <br /> <br />Rob Elliott <br /> <br />cc: Jack Davis, Superintendent. Grand Canyon National Park <br /> <br />I>. 1~dJt. ~ Jlfac?u! taft (~JQ;'~ i' ""-:;1 <br />v~~ M cPv: vL~~h~ wiA-J- ~) df.L : <br />OJ--' !z.-L- ~I Cf Sc:.I6Yjf,'<;r <br />