Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />Record of Decision - Animas-La Plata Project <br /> <br />.~---.., <br /> <br />The decision is to proce.,d with the recommended plan contained in the <br />September 1979 Definite Plan Report (DFR) pending appropriation of construction <br />funds by the Congress. The final environmental statement (FES 80-18) was filed <br />virh rh~ Environm~ntAl Prot~ction A$Pncy (F.PA) on July 1. 1980. <br /> <br />1. Alternative Plans and Environmental Impacts <br /> <br />The alternatives summari%ed below were examined during <br />at the de~ision to proceed with the recommended plan. <br />and the anvironmantAl i=paets of each are discussed in <br />to H-17 of the final environmental statement. <br /> <br />the process of arriving <br />The alternative plaus <br />d~tail on pas.. H-l <br /> <br />(a) Plan at Authorization <br /> <br />Under this plan. water would have been diverted fr01ll the Animas <br />Rivor noar Silvorton. 25 miles north of Durango. and <br />delivered to project land~e ough 48 miles of canals, <br />siphons, and tunnels, lIec se of extensive adverse environ- <br />mental impacts and ecanom c prob~~, the plan vaG ~cfD~ulatQd <br />in the early 1970's ~itbin the authorizing criteria into the <br />recommended plan. <br /> <br />(b) Taft. Diversion Plml <br /> <br />nu.. was an a~J;entaJ;1ve dur1ng ehe fuall;l.bilJ.LY studies that <br />was a modification of the plan at authorization that eliminated <br />SOllIe of the latter' s eCQDOlII~ and envirotllllental problema. The <br />divers:l.on uortb of Purango and the leJ1gt:by conveyllZlce 'fac:1ll.t1es <br />rema1ued, however. and still would cause s:l.gn1flcant adverse <br />eJl.v:l.J:otIIIlental impacts, <br /> <br />(c) 1I00000d Diversion Plan <br /> <br />UncleI' th1s plan. a dam woulcl have been built on the An1mas <br />River 20 1II11es .oueh of Durango and water would have beeu <br />pumped to the cCIllveyance facUities servUg proj ect l8n1i8 t.o <br />the west. This alteroative did not _t ec:gngmiC criteria <br />because of the enerlD' coats of pumping. The adverse 1IIlpact of <br />a d8lll and tellel'voir on the Animas River alllO reduced the <br />feasibility of the project. <br /> <br />(d) No Action Alternative <br /> <br />Without the project, storage and conveyance facilities <br />probably would be built individually by ana munic1pal:l.Uea <br />for urblll1 water supply neet18 and by the InUm Tribes to <br />~ develop resources au the reservat1oas. The coat of additio~l <br />fac11it.ies solely for irrigation probably would prevent privat.e <br />